How does the catholic bible differ from the Christian NKJ Bible?
603936
They include the books in the Apocrypha
1040872
There are many differences\n\nSome are that Catholics believe in:\nPraying to Saints\nConfessing to Man\n\nCatholics have a different bible, than every other "Christian"religion, \nBaptist, \nPentacost \nApostolic\nEven Jehova's Witnesses
847022
Catholicism is a branch of Christianity.  Not believing in the Bible defeats the purpose of Christianity.  You can't claim to be a Christian yet not believe in the one book that Christianity is all about.
799661
The biggest difference is that catholics believe in the virgin mary as a god. because Jesus is God, catholics believe Mary must have been a god as well, thus Jesus would be 100% God. however, the Bible makes no claims for mary being a god. Jesus was 100% God and 100% man.
248937
Catholics are Christians.  \n\nChristianity has many different 'branches' called denominations, which all have slightly different beleifs on the interpretation of the Bible and slightly different practices.  Catholics are just one denomination.  Other denominations include Methodist, Baptist, Mormons, Evangelicals and so on and so forth.  \n\nHope this was some help!
1153810
The New Testament canons of the Catholic Bible and the Protestant Bible are the same.\n\nThe 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.\n\nThe Jews in Egypt translated their choices of the Hebrew Scriptures into Greek in the second century before Christ. This translation, 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.\n\nThe 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.\n\nAfter 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.\n\nThe Christian Church did not follow suit but kept all the books in the Septuagint.\n\n1500 years later, Protestants decided to change its Old Testament from the Catholic canon to the Jewish canon. \n\nWith love in Christ.
85773
I've studied both Hebrew and Greek (the original languages of the Bible), and I've seen that most translations are correct. Yes, there are "different" Bibles, but most say basically the same thing. Minor differences in word style occur any time you translate a document. \n\nThis doesn't include translations that are done with a particular slant, like the New World Translation, for example. But the King James, New King James, New International Version, New American Standard, Revised Standard Version, English Standard Version, etc are all good.
1154454
Different versions?  Are you referring to the Scriptural text itself, or to explanations of it?  I'm assuming the latter.\n\nThe Bible's view is discussed & backed up w/ several Scripture references in both of these articles\n(Catholic Douay is referred to also):\n\nHow Should We Pray to God? ("The Lord's Prayer")\nhttp://www.watchtower.org/library/w/1996/7/15/how_should_we_pray.htm\n\nSearch for God With Your Heart and Mind : \n... [Scroll down to]: Understanding the Lord's Prayer\nhttp://www.watchtower.org/library/w/2002/4/1/article_02.htm\n\n"Make Sure of All things; Hold Fast to what is Fine!" 1 Th 5:21
675894
Catholic tradition and services are soaked in the Bible, so Catholics know alot of verses etc, but they don't reference them--like John 3:16.  Catholics know lots of Bible stories, but not like other Christians.  Wish I knew it better myself.  Something to remember is that the 1960s brought lots of change to Cathoics and then people didn't know what to teach at all.  The non-practicing Catholics are everybody who basically wasn't taught anything in the time of change. I love all the Christians out there who spread the love & law of Christ!
194071
Catholics do a lot of things not in the bible.  They live by their own little set of rules and ideas they consider "truths".  Most cannot give a reason for their actions/beliefs, etc beyond "because that's what the catholic church says" and they just blindly follow it.
1060910
If you don't get it, perhaps you should give your Catholic husband the benefit of the doubt and get him a Catholic Bible. If he's not going to be happy with anything other than a Catholic Bible, just get him a Catholic Bible.\n\nThe Catholic Bible contains seven more books than non-Catholic Bibles do. These are books that he apparently wants to read. Why deny him that?\n\nPersonally, I recommend the Revised Standard Version - Catholic Edition, the Douey Rheims, or the New American Bible.
818939
your right it's not in the bible. the catholic church incorporated into their system, because it would be easier for pagan worshippers who sacrificed babies to come into the church.
1120340
The Bible was put together at the Council of Rome a few hundred years after Christ.  It had already been translated into Latin by St Ireneus.  Catholics still use this Bible -- though there have been translations into many languages.\n\nIn the 1500s, Martin Luther decided that several books of the Bible were not the inspired word of God, and eliminated them.  Most Protestant religions use this edited version of the Bible.\n\nNewer translations of the Bible attempt to stay true to the original Greek/Hebrew.  This is not true of The King James Version which uses a lot of 17th century literary constructs.  Poor translations in the KJV have led to some differences between Catholic beliefs and Protestant beliefs (particularly fundamentalists who only hold to the Bible).  For example, many Protestant religions that were founded using the KJV have the belief that Mary did not remain a virgin after the birth of Jesus and had other children.  Catholics, who used a better translation, do not hold these beliefs.
1028373
No.  The Bible is a compilation of stories written by different authors.  Consider it more of an anthology put together by the Catholic Church around 324 AD (the New Testament... the Old Testament is the Jewish Holy Book, which is also a compilation of stories written by different authors).
175599
Catholic Bible has 73 books in all.  46 in the Old and 27 in the new.  Protestants, however, have 39 books in the Old Testament, whereas the New is the same.  Since most of you are busy playing at apologist instead of answering this question here are the 6 apocryphal ("Hidden")/deuterocanonical (twice approved) books:\n\nJudith (story of Judith, a figure like the judges, who slew Holofernes by sneaking into his camp under the pretenses that a good-looking woman would be allowed in a war camp)\n\nTobit (Story of Tobias, kind of like Job.  The memorable part of this book is the appearance of the Archangel Raphael, who cures Tobias by rubbing the gall of a fish on his eyes)\n\n1 & 2 Maccabees (Story of the Maccabees, Orthodox Jewish rebels, old man Maccabeus refused to eat unclean meat, even if it only appeared to be unclean meat, for fear of giving scandal.  His descendants along with many other Jews take up the fight against the Romans.  Judas Maccabeus is the hero of the Books and I believe Maccabeus eans "the Hammer."  Luther and many following Protestants disliked this book, because it has a prayer for those slain in battle, giving the indication that the Communion of Saints [i.e. we can pray for the dead] exists.)\n\nSirach (Also called Ecclesiasticus, it is a book that was used by the Early Church as a sort of Catechism, and is still used extensively by the Catholic Church in its liturgy)\n\nWisdom (Kind of like Proverbs)\n\nBaruch (A bit like the Book of the Prophet Jeremiah and Lamentations, very short)\n\nIn addition, Luther wanted to take out some other books including the Gospel of John, the Book of Revelations, the Letter of James, and the Letter of Paul to the Hebrews.\nThe division, in the end, comes from the source.  The Catholic Church maintains to this day that the earliest Apostles and Jesus Himself viewed these books as inspired, thus when the Council of Trent, in the 1500's, declared these books to be part of the inspired canon of the Bible,  and, believing them to be always inspired (an earlier council around the 300's had declared these books inspired), they called them deuterocanonical (twice approved).  Also, St. Jerome, who was charged with the task of translating the Bible into Latin (the Latin Vulgate ["Common Latin"], which was completed around 400 AD), included all of the 46 books as Catholics know them today.  Luther, however, felt that some of these texts did not fit in with his view of Christianity, so he turned to the JEWISH Council of Jamnia (90 AD) in which the Jewish Elders met and declared a set of 39 books (excluding the Deuterocanonical books) as inspired, which is how the Protestant OT came to be.  Notice, though, that the Jews did not "close" their canon, so to speak, until Christ is believed to have died.  Therefore, it is quite reasonable to believe that Jesus, his disciples, and many other upright Jews of the time read and studied these texts.  The reason the Jews did not want to accept these books as valid is the fact that these books were thought, at the time, to be written by Jewish scholars in the Greek language at Alexandria, Egypt.  Jewish scholars in Egypt were given the task of translating the Hebrew Scripture into Greek, for its wider dissemination, and for its preservation in the Great Library at Alexandria around the year 250 BC.  This edition of the Old Testament is referred to today as the Greek Septuagint (for it is reputed to have been translated in 70 days by 72 Hebrew Scholars [septem in Latin is seven]), and it is more than highly probable the the earliest apostles made use of this wonderful evangelization tool in preaching to other parts of the world, since, even in Rome, Greek was widely known and used.  Sirach did exist in an earlier Hebrew text (most of it has been found, discoveries began in the late 1800's), but most of the other books were written (at least apparently), by Jewish scholars in Greek at Alexandri
629893
I completely agree.  The Quran is God's word revealed to Muhammad (PBUH).  Only one version exists.  You can get it in any language, and it they all say the same thing.  The Bible, however, has been changed over time.  Catholics and Protestants believe in different things.  They believe in a different version of the Bible.  The original Bible was also God's word and sent with a Messenger.  The original Bible was not corrupt.  Assalam Alaikum!
581443
The KJV Bible was modernised as it was written in old English and too hard for most people to understand.  I personally love this version, so there's no need to stop using it.\n\nThe term Jesus saves is true, but He saves through the repenting of sins.