Have you read a biography of King James 1? This is the person who was responciable for the King James Verson of The Bible. If you have not read, do so and tell me what you think. If you have tell me what you think.
2006-09-13 15:15:53 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
It seems as though you would expect a person who ordered the transcription of the bible to be perfect?
The bible is full of imperfect people that God chose to do his will and his way. In fact there is not a perfect human in the entire bible.
Jesus, being fully God and fully human was perfect, but alas we are not God and are full of sinful flesh and sin nature.
God is not asking us to be perfect, he is telling us to strive toward perfection, and we will fail, but we must continue to strive.
King James was not perfect, neither am I, but I strive to walk closer and closer to God all the time, even when I fail.
And remember it is a biography, not an autobiography. That makes the author opinionated one way or the other and therefore has to be taken with a bit of salt. You could find another biography that might just forget to mention anything derogatory and then it might seem that he was quite pious and the fact is, that the truth is probably in the middle somewhere.
God is more powerful than anyone that is in the bible, or that ordered a translation of it. God will make sure his words, and his will and his way will come through.
2006-09-13 15:24:46 · answer #1 · answered by cindy 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
While the King James version of the Bible has come to bare his name, it was originally (and correctly) referred to as the Authorized Version. The church of England was fighting over two different "translations" of the Bible, the Geneva Bible and the Bishop's Bible. The issue was not so much over the text of the Bible itself, but over the fact that each version including commentaries in a column along side the Bible text. It was a debate over these COMMENTARIES that was the issue. So to avoid a fight, the church asked to the two sides to get together and produce a version that did not include any commentary. that version was the Authorized Version. Once completed, the bishops wrote a dedication page, presenting the new Bible to the current king, James 1, for his consideration. It is from that dedication page that the name "King James" has come to be associated with the translation. But King James himself had nothing to do with the translation, nor did he order or authorize it.
Here is John 3:16 from the 1611 printing: For God so loued ye world, that he gaue his only begotten Sonne: that whosoeuer beleeueth in him, should not perish, but haue euerlasting life.
The spelling of the Authorized Bible was updated in the 1790s to help keep it readable (languages change in 200 years). It is the 1790 version sold today as the "King James" Bible.
2006-09-13 15:34:16 · answer #2 · answered by dewcoons 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
His life has virtually nothing to do with anything. He was a secular king. He didn't translate it personally, he commissioned the people who did. The fact is, his commissioning the translation of the scriptures is the greatest thing he ever did, and I'm sure he didn't view it that way at all. But the result is the same. The KJV is the most widely distributed version of the Holy Bible. The english speaking world has been forever influenced by that volume of text.
2006-09-13 15:26:12 · answer #3 · answered by firebyknight 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I've only been able to read about King James I in passing, mostly from encyclopedia references, including the allegations of his improprieties, his potential links to satanic activities, and such...
Regardless, I think it is possible to separate the life of the monarch and the work of translating into a version that would bear his name; for one, James I merely authorized such a work (as in, to provide official support only).
As far as I can tell, James I merely attached his name to the works of William Tyndale, an English reformer whose work in translation (he translated the entirety of the New Testament and part of the Old Testament in 1525 before his demise) and writing style affects the King James Versions (both 1611 Authorized and the New Version) and the Revised Standard Version to this day, as well as other reformer-translators such as Miles Coverdale (whose work is known as the Great Bible or the Bishops' Bible).
2006-09-13 15:29:04 · answer #4 · answered by Shepherd 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
i know that the king James version was published in 1611
and is probably the most read Blble in the world i will look at his biography thank you
2006-09-13 15:20:49 · answer #5 · answered by jamnjims 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
For those that have not, here is some info:
http://www.jesus-is-lord.com/kinginde.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_I_of_England
Interesting facts about him; he was rather obsessed with witchcraft. He had a lot of people burned to death for being witches. Usually for crimes such as starting storms and the usual things that witches like to do I guess. These witches tended to be of Scottish origin. He had ignorance typical of his time and the power to do terrible things with it, which he did.
2006-09-13 15:18:58 · answer #6 · answered by tenaciousd 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Not that great is it.
He authorized the new Bible for political reasons.
2006-09-13 15:44:56 · answer #7 · answered by rangedog 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I've read it. I don't know what you want me to tell you, though. It says the same thing as all the other versions, just in flowery archaic English.
2006-09-13 15:18:04 · answer #8 · answered by AuroraDawn 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
You can read the whole original introduction on my website under "ebooks" but it is so long you will probably get eye strain:
http://www.mechanicsburgnewchurch.org
2006-09-13 15:33:30 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
if i was the king, the bible would say what i said it would say....isn't that the basis of your question?
2006-09-13 15:19:29 · answer #10 · answered by wrenchbenderottis 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋