The Bible has had so many translations, how anyone be sure that any of them are true to the meaning of the original text? Also, I wonder if a lot of Christians who are fans of the King James Version would be interested to know that James I of England was either gay or bisexual.
2006-10-26 06:32:22 · 14 answers · asked by tangerine 7 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
I bring up James' sexual preference, because a lot of the Christians who insist that his version is infallible are the ones railing against gay rights.
2006-10-26 06:39:40 · update #1
wisdom: I thought that the notion of the Divine Right of Kings died out a long time ago. Apparently, I was wrong.
2006-10-26 06:43:36 · update #2
King James was married to Anne of Denmark, but that doesn't mean anything. There is still evidence that he had male lovers. Also, even in this day and age, there are still plenty of gay and bi men who have wives.
2006-10-26 06:45:58 · update #3
By the way, how do any of you know that the KJV is the most accurate? Is it just because that's what your preacher told you?
2006-10-26 06:48:16 · update #4
The KJV is considered by many to be the most accurate English translation. If one is truly concerned about the accuracy, one could learn Greek and Hebrew and read it in the original languages, though I'm told that the translations are good enough to get the general point across in most cases.
Regarding James I's alleged sexual preference....I'm not sure what that has to do with the translation of the Bible....?
2006-10-26 06:38:07 · answer #1 · answered by Open Heart Searchery 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
First of all, King James didn't write the King James Version himself; it was the result of a joint effort on the part of a committee appointed by the King to write a translation accessible by the Englishmen of the day. It's admired today because of its use of the language, and I guess because it seems doctrinally correct.
Personally, I've always found the King James Version impossible to understand, and was glad to find other more legible versions such as the new English Standard version I use now, which is a word-for-word rendering of the King James Version in modern English.
Also, Constantine did not compile or edit the biblical canon; this had already been agreed to for at least a century prior to the Council of Nicaea. His conversion to Christianity basically amounted to an endorsement which ended official persecution of Christians. The Council of Nicaea primarily dealt with the biggest of various heresies of the time, Arianism. (Dan Brown is an idiot, by the way.)
2006-10-26 06:45:06 · answer #2 · answered by nacmanpriscasellers 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The church I am a member of uses the KJV. I think I heard, that according to the Brethren, the KJV is the most correct of all the versions of the Bible. None of them are 100% accurate.
Also, the KJV isn't named the KJV because King James translated it himself, he had it translated by the most learned men of the day. So what does him being "either gay or bisexual" have to do with him hiring it out? And I'm not up on my History of English Royalty, but your last sentence sounds iffy at best. And it sounds like you're slamming the KJV. It's still a Bible, and I don't see anyone slamming any other version of the Bible.
Personally, I prefer it because it sounds more reverent, and I trust what the Brethren have said.
2006-10-26 06:43:34 · answer #3 · answered by Tonya in TX - Duck 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I study the King James Version bible because my grandfather died at age 85 and left me 4 well used bibles.
It matters very little about a Pharoah, a king of Assyria, a king of Babylon, the kings of Persia or Medes, the rulers of Greece, or Rome, or Britain or rulers of the Americas as
these are of this world that Jesus is no part of, but no matter what they are.
THANKS TO GOD USING THEM ALL DOWN THE LINE TO BRING HIS PEOPLE THROUGH THAT WAS MAKING IT POSSIBLE FOR US TO HAVE THE WORD OF GOD FOR THE LAST DAYS OF THIS WORLD THAT JESUS IS NO PART OF AND IT WILL END Matt.24:3-36;
KJV Bible published 1611 + 303 = 1914 CE an excepted translation for end times in this world, this world has the word of God Dan.12:1-13; Rev.12:6-11.12 when Satan has a short time after the full seven ends Rev.17:10-14 and Jesus will come in the 8th
again as he was here and crucified and ascended in the sixth.
Eph.2:7; 3:21 the world with Jesus is without end, He comes to make all as perfect as it was before Eden, as the end of Day seven will come to be as Day six and say,"God saw that it was good." Because from Eden it has not been good.
The King James Version bible is now my favorite because of long time study and a desire to learn it, it is familiar to me and takes less time for me to find a scripture I want or one that some one else would want, I have studied seven King James Versions bibles since 1999 and read it over 20 times all the way through.
One study of the Amplified bible, one study of the The Living Bible and several times study of The New World Translation and there is very little difference in them or others that I have looked through.
2006-10-26 07:03:47 · answer #4 · answered by jeni 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Somehow you are right. The Bible has changed a lot. But definitely, not the Catholic Bible.
I know a lot of you will disagree.
The original bible....the "Catholic" bible was actually "compiled" between the 3rd or 4th century. The "Catholic" bishops then selected the books that are "inspired", and excluded the books that weren't.
The KJV, on the other hand, was "re-done". I guess some time in the 17th century.....and removed some parts that are "Catholic in Nature".
So, do you want the true Holy Bible....get the Catholic one!
2006-10-26 08:00:49 · answer #5 · answered by co_mediatrix 1 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Many Christians believe that it is the best because it was translated fromt the original languages of Hebrew and Greek. The problem with it is that it the English language itself has changed, therefore much of the meaning of certain passages is lost to us today because we are not familiar with 17th century English, which was the English of Shakespeare.
I have heard the rumor that James I was homosexual, but he was not. He was a happily married man. And anyhow, why would he want to translate a book that condemned homosexuality if he was a homosexual?
2006-10-26 06:44:30 · answer #6 · answered by . 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Probably because they have been taught that the KJV is the 'inherent, infallible, unchanging word of God'. Which is silly at best considering the many times the KJV has been corrected and changed, translated and interpreted.
2006-10-26 06:45:39 · answer #7 · answered by Rayjo Gifol 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Kings and the powers that be are given that authority by God, and therefore since the king james version was authorized by the king it is authorized by God. Most of the modern translations leave out the power scriptures about the blood and fasting etc. which would be what satan wants so he can strip us of our knowledge that we have authority over him.
2006-10-26 06:42:35 · answer #8 · answered by wisdom 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
there is no way to prove king James 1 was gay. it is just a vicious rumor told by people who are trying to discredit the bible. it is easy to tell whether a bible is correct cross reference it with the Strong's concordance. that is how i know KJV is accurate
2006-10-26 07:57:05 · answer #9 · answered by Thumbs down me now 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Why do you wonder about what other Christians are doing? Are you having difficulty finding a bible that suits your needs? Do some research or ask around, to find an older version of the bible. Worry about what you are reading. When you die and if you go to heaven God is not going to ask you which bible you read, but what did you do for my name's sake. Chose any verse in any bible and live it to its fullest. that should keep us busy till the rapture! Occupy yourself with your salvation!
2006-10-26 06:47:52 · answer #10 · answered by St. Mike 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋