How Many Versions of other Religious Texts are there ?

1. Isn't the providence of God amazing?

2. To begin with, isn't it amazing how God used 40 writers over a period of about 1500yrs to reveal his message to us?

3. Isn't it amazing that some were king, shepherds, priests, fishermen, and some no-namers according to the world's standards?

4. Isn't amazing that God has seen it fit to have the autographs destroyed, yet He has preserved His message in MSS?

5. Isn't amazing that while there are differences in the MSS, no essential truth of Scripture has been tampered with?

6. Isn't amazing that the sweet message of the Scripture continues to be communicated in language that a common reader can understand?

7. The Koran, the Writings of Joseph Smith, and other men cannot boast of these amazing facts and variables.

 

Sorry, but your question is based on a false premise. To answer the question in the thread title.




There is more than one version of the Qur'an. I don't know for sure, but I think seven is the most commonly accepted number, and these are not just English translations, but actual different Arabic versions to try and translate from.

And this link lists the several English translations of the Qur'an

http://www.answering-islam.org/Quran/Versions/versioninfo.html

I have listed the translations only by Muslims, leaving off non-Muslim translations into English: (from the link above)

All 90+ versions you mentioned above that have the whole Bible would include English versions of the Torah. There are multiple English translations of the Hebrew Bible as well. See http://judaism.about.com/od/torah/f/bible_translate.htm for a discussion of which translation is best.

Even the Book of Mormon has at least two versions, the original and the Plain English Version with loads of other editions. Apparently there is quite a version debate amongst the LDS:
http://www.jefflindsay.com/LDSFAQ/FQ_changes.shtml

Man's translational efforts can do nothing to affect the message and power of the gospel.

 

There are very few translations of Buddha's writings. Why? Very few people actually read them! First of all, they were written down from oral tradition hundreds of years after Buddha died. Secondly, there is little worthwhile in them. They are the ravings of an arrogant man who considered himself greater than the gods of India (not much challenge there!).

What happens is that each Buddhist sect emphasizes just one saying of Buddha, called a sutra. When our mission director came over to Japan, he wanted to see a Buddhist temple, so I took him. He asked the priest's wife what that piece of paper on the stand was and she said it was the sutra of their sect. So Dr. M. asked what it meant, and she said, "I don't know. It's written in Chinese!" :laugh:

 

I just finished a course in world religions, and found the Hindu and Buddhist writings very difficult to understand. It took some time to study, and am sure we only scratched the surface.

 

I have a version of the koran translated by Nessim Joseph Dawood.

Info on this this person is here. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N._J._Dawood

Tom

 

Right. They are not based of Western logic, which derives from the Bible. So there is no revealed truth as we think of it, and that makes such "scriptures" not just hard but impossible to understand. Each individual does what is right in his own eyes. So for example that is why a Japanese can be both Buddhist and Shinto, and see no contradition. (By the way, Shinto has no "scriptures" to speak of. It is really nothing more than primitive animism with some fancy ceremonies.)

Hindu "scriptures" are a mishmash of their legends and religions from thousands of years all thrown together. Their "gods" are vicious, wicked imitations of us fallen humans. The practice of suttee, the burning of the living widow on the pyre of her husband, is just one example of the viciousness of Hinduism.

Buddhist "scriptures" are based on something more like existentialism, where what matters is not Truth but experience. So a true Buddhist (of which there are few in Japan) will seek "enlightenment" rather than salvation. Some Japanese sects have a "paradise" and a "hell," but there is evidence that those beliefs came from Nestorian Christian missionaries in China. They certainly didn't come from Buddha, who was an atheist!

So the only religion other than Christianity that believes its "scriptures" are truth from God and treats them as revealed truth to live by is Islam. And Islam is a derivative of our Judeo-Christian heritage! (Some even call it a cult of Christianity!) :type:

 

The Quran was originally written in Arabic, and so there is only one version in Arabic, still used all over the world. Conservative Muslims believe that the Quran must never be translated, and only the original Arabic is authoritative. So when the Quran is translated, it is done so more for unbelievers than for true Muslims, who are expected to learn the Quran in Arabic, even if they don't know the language when they convert. Therefore it isn't translated much, though there are several English translations.

Absolutely not. It is not widely recognized in the Bible version debates that the Bible itself teaches that more than one translation of an original statement can be correct. For example, compare how Luke 8:54 and Mark 5:41 translate the original Aramaic (given in Mark) differently.

So, an American can read the word Gospel and be told that it means "good news," and a Japanese or Chinese can read the Chinese characters for "blessed sound" in their Bibles and receive the same truth from God.

 

Somewhat related to this is the aspect of a fixed canon which is unique to Christianity.

From my limited understanding, the sectarian infighting in the Moslem world partially stems from what is considered “scripture”.

Same thing applies to Hinduism and Buddhism with slightly less inhuman results.

But even Christianity has had its moments.
There were fewer versions back when a person risked his life to produce one.
Wyclif, Tyndale, Luther, countless others risked their lives to translate God’s word into the language of the people.

Rob

 

I have accumulated a list of almost 200 complete English New Testaments since 1900 (about half with the OT). I estimate that there were approximately the same number of complete translations (not merely Bibles/NT editions) from Wycliffe through 1899. In other threads on the BB the reasons why so many English versions emerge has been discussed, so I'd suggest that you look into the BB archives. I will offer now that the Gospel has been embraced by many western English-speaking people of recent centuries and God has materially blessed these nations which affords the laboreous undertaking of translation.

"One version" has been shown false by several posts now, so I will mention two overlooked facts: 1) the Qur'an (about 600AD) is much more recent than the NT and 2) the Book of Mormon was originally penned in English (thus avoiding the translation issue completely), and is essentially modern being published in 1830 (thus avoiding the transmission issue completely).

Yes, it provides more access to the message.

 

Muslims do not accept any translated Qur'an as their true scripture (because of recognized translational issues).

 

I have been told...BY A SHIITE MOSLEM...that each branch of Islam has its own Q'ran in Arabic & that there are at least 4 Arabic versions he knows of. Shiite & Sunni are the largest groups, of course, and each uses a slightly-different Q'ran version.

Here's a good site to see the differences in Q'ran versions, to put down virtually any arguments any Moslem might have for only ONE Q'ran version in Arabic:

http://www.answering-islam.org/Green/seven.htm


Joey Smith revised the BOM several times, and after him, the LSD...er...LDS leadership made over 3900 changes in it. They cannot deny this, because there are plentya copies of the original 1830 BOM extant.

Here's a site which has a few of these changes:

http://www.irr.org/mit/changingscrips.html

 

The various translations of the Bible present the same message in different words. I wonder if that's true with the various versions of other religions' sacred writings or if they present differing messages. Does anyone have a clue?

 

I'd rather read the New World Translation (NWT), the worse
translation of the Bible, than the best of Joseph Smith's
books.

 

Gotta agree with you there Brother Ed!

 

The Book of Morman has gone through many changes and additions.