I remember when I first came across a copy of the New World Translation (NWT) in a used bookstore in Bloomington, IL. I had read about this version, which was translated by a committee from the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, better known to most people as Jehovah’s Witnesses. The first thing I found strange about this version was its bright green cover (and the edges of the pages are green, too). Then, of course, there was the NWT’s famous (infamous?) reading of John 1:1, “…and the word was a god.” Say what? As I explored the NWT further, I also found that the pronoun “you” was often printed as YOU. I discovered that this was an attempt to distinguish plural “you” from its identical singular counterpart (much as the KJV uses the archaic pronoun “ye”). Not a bad idea, just a little weird on the page. You can experience some of the oddities of the NWT at the official JW website.

Then there’s the Ferrar Fenton version, entitled The Bible in Modern English. I recently blogged about this version on my Bible Bookshelf Blog. In a nutshell, Fenton was a businessman who, in 1853, decided he was going to do his own translation of the Bible from the original languages. And it was going to be the greatest, most accurate English translation of all time! Well, that didn’t end up being the case. Not that it’s all bad. The first thing the reader might notice is that Fenton has rejected the traditional Protestant ordering of the books. I think this is a good way to break the reader out of this idea that some Bible readers may assume: that the order of the books is ordained by God. But when you actually begin to read this translation, it quickly becomes apparent that it’s actually not the greatest, most accurate English translation of all time. His handling of Hebrew and Greek tenses is bizarre, and leads to almost unreadable English, such as “Your Name must be being Hallowed.” Read my blog linked above to get some more examples. The Ferrar Fenton Bible is available online here.

I’ve also got the Joseph Smith “Translation” of the Bible, done by the founder of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. I put “Translation” in quotes because this is essentially a KJV with some of Joseph Smith’s “inspired” additions. So, right off the bat, at the beginning of Genesis, we read:

1 And it came to pass, that the Lord spake unto Moses, saying, Behold, I reveal unto you concerning this heaven and this earth; write the words which I speak.

2 I am the Beginning and the End; the Almighty God. By mine Only Begotten I created these things.

What?!? Apparently, God inspired Smith to add little bits like this to the Bible, without a shred of textual evidence anywhere. (Who needs evidence when you’ve got inspiration?) Mormons disagree as to how inspired the Joseph Smith version is, and the Bible that is distributed by the LDS church is essentially a KJV, with Smith’s notes relegated to some notes at the end. You can read the “Inspired Version” here.

Then there’s The Inclusive Bible: The First Egalitarian Translation. This one was done by a progressive movement within the Catholic clergy called Priests for Equality. Now I am in favor of gender-inclusive language for the most part, as long as it doesn’t disfigure the flow of the text. The Inclusive Bible doesn’t really succeed in this regard. Consider the Prologue to John: “Though the Word came to its own realm, the Word’s own people didn’t accept it.” Since “the Word” in John’s Prologue is clearly identified with Jesus, it’s pretty bizarre to refer to the Word as “it.” And to avoid gender-oriented pronouns (he or she), “the Word” is repeated over and over. This goes beyond simple inclusivity: it actually disfigures the text. You can read most of the Inclusive Bible here at Google Books.

The above are a few of the strangest Bibles in my collection. But I love having odd Bibles in my collection. Whenever I read a version that strikes me as strange or different, it’s an opportunity to dig deeper into the text to determine what it is that strikes me as odd. Some of the answers are quite obvious, while others challenge my preconceptions of the text.