if he wanted to change what the previous bible had in it. so wheres the originality in it then? if its not original and altered by this king, why then should we put our faith in him. please enlighten me.
2006-09-09 11:28:09 · 14 answers · asked by Prevent Animal Cruelty 2 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
thanks for the ans. ive never been taught basic christianity, and it'd be nice to know these things
2006-09-09 11:33:38 · update #1
It was a bible that he authorised to be copied. It was translated into the English of that time and allowed to be given to the people. Previous the bible was in Latin or Greek and Hewbrew.
2006-09-09 11:31:26 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
This was as much a political move as a religious one, as the Church of England had formerly broken from the Roman Chatholic Church. The King James Version is not the first english translation, that was the Bishops Bible. Some time later came the Tyndale Bible on which about 80% of the KJV is based. King James wanted a Bible easily understood by the populace and not "corrupted." The king said that he: "Could never yet see a Bible well translated in English."
By the time the King James Version was written, there was already a tradition going back almost a hundred years of Bible translation into English. The English translations made by John Wyclif's followers, and later by William Tyndale, were the opening salvos of the Protestant Reformation in England and Scotland.
2006-09-09 19:16:48 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
He did not write it himself. He was the king of England at the beginning of the 17th century. He was concerned that there were many versions of the bible being used in England and no one knew which was correct when they disagreed. He was requested to appoint a royal commission of bible scholars so that they could make the best possible translation from the original.The book they came up with was the King James Version which not only had royal approval but was considered by church scholars to be the most faithful to the original. It has been the standard ever since in English Speaking countries
2006-09-09 18:42:37 · answer #3 · answered by Rich Z 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
It is the English translation from Hebrew that King James authorized. It is the same Bible as any Bible, just some of the Hebrew words/verses could be interpreted in different ways to give them slightly different meanings. The King James Bible makes these interpretations in such a way that King James found acceptable.
2006-09-09 18:34:56 · answer #4 · answered by Phoenix, Wise Guru 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It was a version of the bible authorized by James and based upon the Greek texts of Erasmus. Unfortunately, the translators did not realize that it was a disasterously bad set of texts. Erasmus didn't even have a complete set of texts and translated Revelations from Latin into Greek!
When it was first revised in 1890 they removed 20,000 major errors. Unfortunately entire denominations came into existence based upon texts that were not actually in the bible. That is why there are denominations that insist upon using the old KJV and that the new one is corrupt.
Currently, there are between 200 and 400 thousand variant passages in the New Testament. Professional translators no longer talk about getting back to an original text. It is simply lost. We do know what the Church approved as text, we do not know what the authors actually wrote anymore. That is one of the problems of sola scriptura, there is a presumption of access to the originals that does not exist.
In fact, when John Stewart Mill published the collection of Greek texts he had in the early 18th century, he found 30,000 variants even then. Protestantism was horrified because it implied there was no way to do sola scriptura. Gradually that fact was just ignored.
James was just the guy who paid the bills for the KJV. The most recent version of the KJV isn't too bad, but I wouldn't base any doctrine on it either. There are better translations.
The KJV is the bible that gave us "peace on Earth goodwill toward men," when all the most ancient texts say "peace on Earth toward men of goodwill."
Lots of big differences in the older KJV and all the other texts.
2006-09-09 18:42:44 · answer #5 · answered by OPM 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
The King James Version of the Bible, first published in 1611, has had a profound impact on English literature. The works of famous authors such as John Bunyan, John Milton, Herman Melville, John Dryden, and William Wordsworth are replete with inspiration derived from the King James Version.
The New Testament of the King James Version was translated from the Received Text (Textus Receptus), called so because most extant texts of the time were in agreement with it. The Old Testament of the King James Version is translated from the Masoretic Hebrew Text.
Modern English Bibles such as the New American Standard Bible and the English Standard Version derive their authority from a completely different set of New Testament manuscripts (earlier Egyptian Minority Texts as opposed to the later Byzantine Majority Texts).
Although it is often referred to as the King James Version, the only active part King James took in the translation was lifting the criminal (death) penalty attached to its translation and setting very reasonable guidelines for the translation process (such as prohibiting partisan scholarship and footnotes.)
The name Authorized Version was particularly used in the United Kingdom, where the name King James Version was known only as "what the Americans call it" until the AV's recent decline in popularity in its homeland.
It has no worldwide copyright, but its reproduction is perpetually restricted in certain parts of the United Kingdom under the Royal Prerogative. The King James Version, despite its age, is largely comprehensible to the average reader today. It is considered to be an instrumental founding block of Early Modern English, and remains one of the most widely-read literary works.
2006-09-09 18:38:10 · answer #6 · answered by novalee 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
King James commissioned a bound bible in 1611!
That was as closely translated to the original text!
He paid to have it done!
It is still one of the best bibles written!
2006-09-09 19:03:39 · answer #7 · answered by Grandreal 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
KJV was authorised by King James. At the time there were many translations into english, some were very poor. King James authorised a group of scholars to translate from Hebrew and Greek.
http://www.bible-researcher.com/ tells the story of the canons and translations.
2006-09-09 18:39:53 · answer #8 · answered by Jay Z 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It's probably the most common version. No, it was not written by King James--it's just one of the versions. There is NIV (New International Version), the Living Bible, New American Standard, Amplified, lots of kinds of study Bible, devotional Bibles, etc. It all depends on whether you want a version that's easy to understand or something that's worded the old-fashioned way.
2006-09-09 18:34:54 · answer #9 · answered by pfsatx 1 · 0⤊ 1⤋
When it was authorized by King James to be copied in the English of that day was because the Catholic Douay
Translation at the same time was coming out. so in a hurry the copyists made a lot of mistakes in the King James Bible. One of these days I will show you all some of them.
2006-09-09 18:46:37 · answer #10 · answered by Donaldsan theGreatone 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Although it is often referred to as the King James Version, the only active part King James took in the translation was lifting the criminal (death) penalty attached to its translation and setting very reasonable guidelines for the translation process (such as prohibiting partisan scholarship and footnotes.)
2006-09-09 18:34:06 · answer #11 · answered by NickofTyme 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋