So i know that King James I had ppl translate the latin bible but why is the catholic bible diferent from KJV?

Question

It doesnt make sense to me because they both came from the bible in latin ao why is the King James Version different from the catholic one? Did the catholics add or take some away?

Answer 1

the translator in the time of Kings James where not neutral in the translations they had an evangelical agenda so their translation did reflect that.

Also the King James Version was translated from Latin, Greek and Hebrew texts but that does not mean that both translation would have the same exact text as sources, since even today we still find older and better preserved manuscript of the Scriptures

the Vulgate Latin (one of the sources) was a really bad translation of the Greek and Hebrew       e.g. in the Vulgate the radiance that Moses had after he descended from his chat with God, is translated as him having horns...

Now if you like the King James style of writing I suggest the New King James Version of the Bible, it is a bit more accurate then the Old Translation.  

Answer 2

What is a Catholic Bible?  Aside from the Apocrypha I would have to compare verses.  As to why they are different.  Same reason other versions differ.  They read the various older texts and translate according to their audience.  

I just went to biblegateway.com and they do not list one as "Catholic."  What is the version the Catholics use?

Answer 3

One cant explain this with out completely knowing the differences. But what i can say is that the catholic church chooses to not teach certain things to the people in order to keep control of the people. If you were to go and research the the history of Rome you will see that one of the leaders called of Rome came to power because of the help of Christianity because Rome allowed you to practice what ever religion that you wanted as long as you paid Roman taxes. So being that Christianity was becoming the biggest religion in the area he made a deal with the priest that if they would help him come to power that he would make Christianity the prefered religion and that was the beginning of catholicism.

Answer 4

The Catholic bible that is used in the United States (The New American Bible published by the Authority of the Confraternity of Christian Doctrine) has roughly seven more books in it than does a KJV.

These books are books from the Old Testament commonly called the Apocrypha. They were removed by the authors of the King James Version because the Jewish canon did not include them due to the fact that they were either written to late or an original manuscript could not be found.

Regards,

Josemaria Rojas, OSB

Answer 5

The King James version is HIS version.  Thus the name.

As the reign of Elizabeth (1558-1603) was coming to a close, we find a draft for an act of Parliament for a new version of the Bible: "An act for the reducing of diversities of bibles now extant in the English tongue to one settled vulgar translated from the original." The Bishop's Bible of 1568, although it may have eclipsed the Great Bible, was still rivaled by the Geneva Bible. Nothing ever became of this draft during the reign of Elizabeth, who died in 1603, and was succeeded by James 1, as the throne passed from the Tudors to the Stuarts. James was at that time James VI of Scotland, and had been for thirty-seven years. He was born during the period between the Geneva and the Bishop's Bible.

One of the first things done by the new king was the calling of the Hampton Court Conference in January of 1604 "for the hearing, and for the determining, things pretended to be amiss in the church." Here were assembled bishops, clergymen, and professors, along with four Puritan divines, to consider the complaints of the Puritans. Although Bible revision was not on the agenda, the Puritan president of Corpus Christi College, John Reynolds, "moved his Majesty, that there might be a new translation of the Bible, because those which were allowed in the reigns of Henry the eighth, and Edward the sixth, were corrupt and not answerable to the truth of the Original."

http://www.av1611.org/kjv/kjvhist.html

Answer 6

When protestants broke off from catholics they took out the latter 7 books of the catholic bible, as the jews had discregaurded thm as well. KJV was created by protestants.

KJV also has many mistranlations from the original texts.

Answer 7

There is no Catholic bible per say, the bible uses the individual books, written in Latin and Greek, which are interpreted by Catholic church scholars, these interpretation become Evangelia, which are used in the catholic mass and also form the basis for dogma. In the Catholic faith, it is not up to the common people to interpret the bible but to the church to interpret it for them. This was one of the main reasons for the Protestant reformation.

Answer 8

In first century Jerusalem there were at least four OT Canons in use by different Jewish Groups. There was the Canon of the Pharisees, the Sadducees, the Ethiopian Jews and the Diaspora/Essene Jews. Jesus and the disciples used the Septuagint which was the Canon of the Diaspora/Essenes. We know this because it is quoted in the New Testament. This Canon continued to be the Canon of Christians until after the Reformation and, in fact until about 200 years ago when the Protestants adopted a condensed version of the Canon eliminating the Deuterocanonicals from their Bibles. Even the AKJ originally contained the complete Christian Canon. It has been said by critics of Christ’s Church that the Deuterocanonicals were never believed to be inspired and just the opposite is true. The decision by Christians as to which books are inspired and useful for teaching was decided at the African Synods in the late fourth and early fifth century. There was never a question about their inspiration.

The OT Canon chosen by the Protestants is actually a Jewish Canon not chosen by the Jews until after the establishment of Christianity as a result of the spread of Christianity to slow the growth of the new group in Jerusalem after the fall of the Temple in 70AD. Until then as I said previously there were many Canons in use. The adoption of the Canon missing the Deuterocanonicals united the Jews against the Christians was decided in the Jewish Council of Jamnia because the Deuterocanonicals referred too strongly to the Messiah fulfilled in Christ.

Some Protestants will claim that only the Jews have the authority to choose Canon but the Church deferred that decision to Christ and the disciples and it is clear through biblical research, that the Septuagint is the Bible used by the first century Church and quoted in the NT Scriptures. The fact that Protestants choose to adopt the Canon that was approved by the same Jews that accused our Lord that resulted in His crucifixion suggests the source of this confusion as from the father of lies who led the Pharisees to accuse Christ and petition for His punishment. It is another way that Satan divides the body of Christ and separates the faithful denying Christ’s prayer that we all be one in Christ through His Church. The Christian Church has always used the Septuagint as Canon and never the truncated version of modernist Protestants.

Some Protestants erroneously believe that Catholics added to the Bible with the Deuterocanonicals but this shows an ignorance of their own history and the history of Christianity as witnessed by Christ’s Church. The facts are that the Protestants removed the Deuterocanonicals and even considered strongly to remove some of the NT books currently in use by Protestants and Catholics. Fr. Martin Luther was in favor of removing the book of James because it conflicted with His heretical man made doctrines of the “Solas”, Sola Scriptura and Sola Fide. The heretic Ulrich Zwingli wanted to remove the Gospel of John because of its teaching of the commandment to Eat Christ’s Body and drink His Blood which contradicted his view of a real absence of Christ instead of a real presence in the Eucharist. Even Fr. Martin Luther could not endorse such a departure from Scriptures and deny that Christ is truly and really present in the Eucharist in Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity.

In Christ

Fr. Joseph

Answer 9

If you think the bible was originally written in Latin, you are not ready for the details.

The OT is in Hebrew, with a few passages in Aramaic. The NT is in Greek - a dialect called patristic Greek.

The KJV was translated from documents in the original languages. Catholics were personae non gratae in England at the time, and they would not have accepted a Prot bible anyhow.

The Catholic version was written by a committee in exile in Douai, which is now in Belgium. That's why it's called the Douay bible

Answer 10

the KJV is missing important parts and entire books of the Holy Bible. The Catholic Bible was the first Bible to be translated and the Protestants didn't like a lot of what was in it so they removed them during the Protestant Reformation.

Answer 11

If you would like more answers, consider asking around this site as well...

http://christianforums.com/forumdisplay....

Answer 12

Protestants have fully accepted each and every one of the 27 books that the Catholics selected for the New Testament over 1,500 years ago.

The difference in the Old Testaments actually goes back to the time before and during Christ’s life. At this time, there was no official Jewish canon of scripture.

The Jews in Egypt translated their choices of the Hebrew Scriptures into Greek in the second century before Christ. This translation of 46 books, called the Septuagint, had wide use in the Roman world because most Jews lived far from Palestine in Greek cities. Many of these Jews spoke only Greek.

The early Christian Church was born into this world. The Church, with its bilingual Jews and more and more Greek-speaking Gentiles, used the books of the Septuagint as its Bible. Remember the early Christians were just writing the documents what would become the New Testament.

After the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem, with increasing persecution from the Romans and competition from the fledgling Christian Church, the Jewish leaders came together and declared its official canon of Scripture, eliminating seven books from the Septuagint.

The books removed were Tobit, Judith, 1 Maccabees, 2 Maccabees, Wisdom (of Solomon), Sirach, and Baruch. Parts of existing books were also removed including Psalm 151 (from Psalms), parts of the Book of Esther, Susanna (from Daniel as chapter 13), and Bel and the Dragon (from Daniel as chapter 14).

The Christian Church filled with the Holy Spirit did not follow suit but kept all the books in the Septuagint. 46 + 27 = 73 Books total.

1500 years later, Protestants decided to keep the Catholic New Testament but change its Old Testament from the Catholic canon to the Jewish canon.

The books that were removed supported such things as

• Prayers for the dead (Tobit 12:12; 2 Maccabees 12:39-45)

• Purgatory (Wisdom 3:1-7)

• Intercession of saints in heaven (2 Maccabees 15:14)

• Intercession of angels (Tobit 12:12-15)

The books they dropped are sometimes called the Apocrypha.

Here is a Catholic Bible website: http://www.nccbuscc.org/nab/bible/

With love in Christ.

Answer 13

I think they used the Vulgate as a guide.

Latin was getting to be a dead language, and no longer the "language of the people" which is why the Vulgate was made up in the first place.  ("Vulgar", the root word, means "common")

I think there were pretty good reasons to make up the KJV, and there were pretty good reasons to make up any other version as well, since the English language alone loses 10% of its words every 1000 years.

Hope this helps.

Answer 14

because the catholic's are doing them, and are not following the true kjv

Answer 15

They're different because around 1500, during the Protestant Reformation, Martin Luther switched out the Christian (Catholic) Old Testament for the Jewish OT of 90 AD (council of Jamnia).  It's why Protestant bibles have seven fewer books than Catholic bibles.

God bless.

Answer 16

You tell me HOW it is different, and then maybe I can take a shot at explaining WHY it is different.

Answer 17

The King James version came through the true line of scriptures the Textus Receptus manuscripts where the Catholic bible came from the Alexandrian  perversions called the Codex Vaticanus and Sinaiticus.

Answer 18

Its more like Protestants tampered with the Bible Martin Luther tossed 7 books(and tried to veto, among others, Gospel of John, Book of James and Revelation). All of them conflicted with his own personal view(and unbiblical views).

Another big thing is how it is translated. Now, Jesus did not speak in the "haths" and "thou art's", he spoke aramaic, and a lot of liberties were used in translation to fit the protestant views. And like most things, the mroe translations based off the already bad translation...well...it gets worse and worse.

Answer 19

Actually, your KJV is missing 7 OT books.  The original 1611 KJV did include these books but they were removed later (1613) for political reasons.  They are referenced a huge amount in the NT.  The link I have below lists many of these references.  The Catholic editions predate the protestant by over a thousand years.  

Wikipedia has a nice general introduction to the deuterocanonical books.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deuterocano...

That being said, I think the important thing is that we have the same New Testemant, so the words of Christ are at least the same.