Up For a Bit of a Challenge? Geneva Bible vs. King James?

Question

This is a bit of a read, but I was wondering if there are any 'scholars' of this period that can shed additional light on this matter of the King James Bible.

Is it true that the GENEVA BIBLE in use, prior to the King James, was eliminated by King James because he didn't like the sidenotes that contradicted his philosophy of the "Divine right of kings?" (That right being that kings were appointed by God and the king had only to answer to God and never his people). An evil king would be a sign of God's punishment where as a good king would be a sign of God's blessings.

There are a lot more details claimed here as to the origins and motives behind the making of the King James Bible, but I wondered what you all thought.

You can read the details at this link:
http://www.reformedreader.org/gbn/igb.htm

Williamzo: Thank you. I am eager to read additional writings because as I continue through this material that I linked, the paper seems to be somewhat poorly written. This is one of the reasons why I was beginning to doubt some of the "facts" being put forth. Thank you for your contribution.

Answer 1

I think there may be more to the Geneva vs. King James controversy that simply the side notes. This is an interesting resource that describes the other issues:

http://www.pathlights.com/onlinebooks/KJV-HB/KJV-Bible.htm

I find the Geneva Bible to be very easy to read, other than the "f" for "s" ye olde Englishe spelling! Anyone interesting in reading it can go to:

http://www.thedcl.org/bible/gb/index.html

Peace.

Answer 2

As the reign of Elizabeth (1558-1603) was coming to a close, we find a draft for an act of Parliament for a new version of the Bible: "An act for the reducing of diversities of bibles now extant in the English tongue to one settled vulgar translated from the original." The Bishop's Bible of 1568, although it may have eclipsed the Great Bible, was still rivaled by the Geneva Bible. Nothing ever became of this draft during the reign of Elizabeth, who died in 1603, and was succeeded by James 1, as the throne passed from the Tudors to the Stuarts. James was at that time James VI of Scotland, and had been for thirty-seven years. He was born during the period between the Geneva and the Bishop's Bible.


One of the first things done by the new king was the calling of the Hampton Court Conference in January of 1604 "for the hearing, and for the determining, things pretended to be amiss in the church." Here were assembled bishops, clergymen, and professors, along with four Puritan divines, to consider the complaints of the Puritans. Although Bible revision was not on the agenda, the Puritan president of Corpus Christi College, John Reynolds, "moved his Majesty, that there might be a new translation of the Bible, because those which were allowed in the reigns of Henry the eighth, and Edward the sixth, were corrupt and not answerable to the truth of the Original."


The king rejoined that he:


"Could never yet see a Bible well translated in English; but I think that, of all, that of Geneva is the worst. I wish some special pains were taken for an uniform translation, which should be done by he best learned men in both Universities, then reviewed by the Bishops, presented to the Privy Council, lastly ratified by the Royal authority, to be read in the whole Church, and none other."
Accordingly, a resolution came forth:


"That a translation be made of the whole Bible, as consonant as can be to the original Hebrew and Greek; and this to be set out and printed, without any marginal notes, and only to be used in all churches of England in time of divine service."

Answer 3

I grew up analyzing the King James version and that i've got the recent King James version (alongside with 20 different variations) in my library. My known assertion on most of the recent Bible variations that attempt to revise the King James version -- the recent King James version, the recent Revised version, the recent American standard version, the Revised English Bible, and so on. -- is that their chief characteristic is removing God's very own call from his very own e book. i've got not rather chanced on various magnitude interior the variations stated above, aside from that: the removing of God's call. after which I might desire to ask, If God placed it there, by potential of what authority does guy get rid of it? fortuitously, no longer all Bibles are growing to be to be rid of the call. yet you will be able to desire to pass previous the standard ones, or a minimum of those pushed by potential of non secular bookstores, to locate an extremely stable Bible.

Answer 4

The 1560 Geneva Bible was the
First English Bible to enumerate verses (to give verses numbers),
First Bible to use Roman style typeface
First Bible to add commentary notes to the side margins of the pages
First Bible taken across the Atlantic to America,
and the Bible of The Puritans and The Pilgrims.

51 Years later, in 1611, King James called for a printing of the Bible
(now called "The King James Version") to try to replace the popular
Geneva Version. He did not like the Geneva Bible because of its
commentary notes, which he found to be "too Protestant" and not
diplomatic enough, due to the Geneva Bible's harsh treatment of
Roman Catholicism, particularly in it claiming that the Pope was
an antiChrist in the Geneva Bible's marginal side notes.

A facsimile reproduction of the 1560 Geneva Bible First edition is available
at GREATSITE.COM
if you click on "Facsimile Reproductions"
and then select the "1560 Geneva Bible".

Answer 5

Will help you to confirm the truths you have printed

http://www.reformed.org/documents/index.html?mainframe=http://www.reformed.org/documents/geneva/Geneva.html