What do you think of the King James Version of the Bible?

Question

Do you think it is the only correct transalation?

Or do you think the modern English translations are better?

Please explain why you would or would not think so

Answer 1

The Languages Of The Bible


1. Were all the books of the Bible originally written in one language?
No, besides Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic were used.

2. What books were written in Hebrew?
Almost all the books of the Old Testament.

3. What books were written in Greek?
In the Old Testament, the Second Book of Machabees and the Book of Wisdom; in the New Testament, all books except the Gospel of St. Matthew.

4. What books were written in Aramaic?
The Gospel of St. Matthew.

5. When were the books of the Old Testament, that were originally written in Hebrew, translated into Greek?
About 220 years before Christ.

6. Why was the translation from Hebrew into Greek made?
Because the Jewish people was dispersed into countries where the Greek tongue predominated, and so it gradually forgot the mother tongue, speaking only Greek. Hence the wish to have the Bible in the Greek tongue.

The Septuagint Version

1. Who were the translators of the Old Testament?
The translators of the Old Testament were Jewish scholars well acquainted with both the Hebrew and the Greek languages.

2. By what name is this translation known?
It is known as the Septuagint Version.

3. Why is it called by that name?
It is called by that name because it was commonly supposed that seventy scholars were employed in the work of translating.

4. Was it known by any other name besides that of the Septuagint?
It was known as the Alexandrian Version to distinguish it from the Hebrew or Palestinian Version.

5. Why was it known as the "Alexandrian Bible?"
Because this translation was made in Alexandria, Egypt, which had the biggest and most vibrant Jewish community outside of Israel.

6. Is there any other difference between the Septuagint and the Palestinian version, besides their language?
Several; The Septuagint contains more books than the Palestinian version and is about three hundred years older. The Palestinian Version originated approximately around 106 A.D. and is different from the Hebrew texts that were the basis for the Septuagint translation.

7. Why does the Septuagint have more books than the Palestinian version?
The translators had a well-founded belief that these books were inspired.

8. Were these added books accepted by the Hebrews?
Yes, but only up until 106 A.D., when the Palestinian, known also as the pharisaic version, became the norm.

9. Was the Septuagint Version much in use in Our Lord's time?
It was used not only by the Greek-speaking Jews but also by the Palestinian Jews; Our Lord and the Apostles frequently quoted it.

10. Did this Greek translation of the Bible help to spread Christianity?
It helped very much, because Gentiles, particularly the Greek philosophers, had read it, and had knowledge of the prophecies referring to the Messiah, with the result that when St. Paul preached to them, many converts were made.


The Vulgate

1. Name again the languages of the Old Testament before the time of Christ.
Hebrew and Greek.

2. In what languages did the Apostles write their Gospels and Epistles?
They wrote their Gospels and Epistles in Greek, except St. Matthew, who wrote his Gospel in Aramaic.

3. How did translations in languages other than Hebrew and Greek come into existence?
As Catholicism spread among peoples of different languages, the demand for the Bible in their various languages grew.

4. Name some of the earlier languages into which the Bible was translated.
Armenian, Syrian, Coptic, Arabic, and Ethiopian.

5. Was the Bible translated into Latin?
Many translations into Latin were made during the early Catholic centuries.

6. Were these Latin translations satisfactory?
No; many inaccuracies existed, due to errors of the copyists, or errors of translation caused by a poor understanding of the original language.

7. Which of the Latin translations was the best known?
The best known Latin translation was either the "Old African" or the "Old Italian" (Vetus Itala).

8. What was the result of the general dissatisfaction with these Latin translations?
Pope Damasus (Pope from 366 to 384) commissioned St. Jerome to make a new and accurate translation.

9. How did St Jerome go about this work?
He studied carefully the Hebrew and Greek versions, and from these made his new translation.

10. By what name is the Latin translation of St. Jerome known?
It is known as the Vulgate Version. Vulgate means common or vulgar in Latin and it was called so because Latin was the common tongue of the Western Roman Empire.

11. Does the Vulgate have the Church's special approval?
The Council of Trent (Italy) in 1546 declared it to be the only authentic and official version for the Latin Rite: " The same Sacred and Holy Synod ... hereby declares and enacts that the same well-known Old Latin Vulgate edition ... is to be held authentic in public readings, disputations,sermons, and expositions, and that no one shall dare or presume to reject it under any pretense whatsoever." (DZ. 785). It is still the official Catholic Bible today.


The Douay Bible

1. Is there a Catholic translation of the Bible in English?
Yes, it is the translation known as the Douay-Rheims Version. It was translated from the Latin Vulgate.

2. Why is it called "Douay-Rheims"?
Because it was begun at Rheims and finished at Douay in 1582-1609 by a group of English priests exiled in France.

3. What happened in the sixteenth century to cause the publication of a reliable and accurate translation?
During the Protestant "Deformation" in England many false translations had been made, hence there was great necessity of placing in the hands of Catholics a reliable and accurate translation.

4. Is it true that the Bible was never translated into vernacular languages before the Protestant Deformation?
It is not true; the first translation known in England was the translation into Anglo-Saxon made by Venerable Bede in the eighth century. There is a Gothic translation, made by a certain bishop Ulfilas around 380. The first German translation predates Luther by a good fifty years.

5. Why do Protestants assert that the Bible was never translated before the Deformation?
Through a mixture of ignorance and bad faith.

6. What is the most well known of the false English Protestant translations?
It is the version called the "King James," named after the King who commissioned it in 1604. It was finished in 1611. It is still the most popular of the Protestant Bibles in the English speaking world.

7. What is wrong with the "King James" version?
Like all the Protestant Bibles, it is incomplete and poorly translated. It is a "Pick and choose" version. Such is the real lack of respect of the "Reformers" for the word of God!

Differences Between Catholic And Protestant Versions

1. Does the Catholic version of the Bible differ from Protestant versions?
Yes, in many ways.

2. What is the most noticeable difference?
The most noticeable difference is the absence of seven whole books and parts of two others from the Protestant versions.

3. What books are not contained in the Protestant version?
The Deutero-Canonical Books (See lesson 6).

4. Why are the Deutero-Canonical Books Omitted by Protestants?
Because the Protestant versions of the Bible follow the late Palestinian version of the Bible, which also omits these books (See lesson 8).

5. Name another difference between the Catholic and Protestant versions.
Many important arbitrary changes are found in the texts of the Protestant Bible. According to some scholars, the most popular Protestant Bibles have literally hundreds of mistranslations, additions and omissions.

6. To what do such changes of text lead?
They lead to an entirely different interpretation from the one intended by the Sacred Writer.

7. Give an example of this change of text.
St Paul says, "... Being therefore justified by Faith ..." (Rom. V, 1), and Luther inserted the word "alone" so that the text reads, "Being therefore justified by faith alone."

8. Why were the Reformers so anxious to change texts?
They were anxious to change texts to give force to the particular doctrine of their choice.

9. Should that behavior of the Reformers raise some questions in our mind?
Yes, what did they believe exactly concerning the Bible? Either they did not believe it was the Word of God, and therefore felt free to change it any which way; or if they did believe it was the Word of God, it took a lot of pride and presumption to correct God's word. In either case, they should be called "Deformers" rather than Reformers.

10. Name other differences between the King James version and the Douay version.
The King James version has a preference for words of Anglo-Saxon origin whereas the Douay version freely uses words of Latin origin. The Douay version latinizes the name of some books while the King James gives what they thought at the time to be the Hebrew name. Many Protestant versions other than King James omit the Epistle of St. James.

Source(s):
Latin Vulgate
Douay-Rheims Bible
A Catechism Of The Bible

Answer 2

On the Jeopardy TV Program approximately two weeks in the past, within the Category "Bible" the query used to be: "What is probably the most correct translation of all Bibles?" The proper reply used to be "NEW WORLD TRANSLATION" that Jehovah Witnesses use. King James Version got here into life. That used to be in 1611. From close to each quarter the King James Bible met competition. Criticism used to be traditionally extreme. Broughton, a Hebrew pupil of the day, wrote to King James that he “must alternatively be torn asunder by way of wild horses than permit this sort of variation to be imposed at the church.” King James Bible has been converted; in these days nobody reads the King James Version in its fashioned kind. Explaining why that is so the publication The Bible in Its Ancient and English Versions says: “Almost each version, from the very opening, announced corrections and unauthorized alterations and additions, traditionally including new mistakes within the approach. The version of 1613 indicates over 3 hundred variations from 1611, It used to be within the eighteenth century, nevertheless, that the foremost alterations had been made, The marginal references had been checked and validated, over 30,000 new marginal references had been further, the bankruptcy summaries and going for walks headnotes had been entirely revised, the punctuation used to be altered and made uniform in keeping with contemporary train, textual mistakes had been eliminated, using capitals used to be radically converted and decreased, and an intensive revision made within the kind of specified varieties of phrases.” So many alterations had been made, a lot of them within the readings of passages, that the Committee on Versions (1851-fifty six) of the American Bible Society observed 24,000 editions in six specific variants of the King James Version! What, then, of the objections raised by way of humans who say they don't wish the King James Bible converted? Since the King James Version has already been converted, they lie on a crumbled basis. If those humans don't wish it converted, then why do they use, as an alternative of a duplicate of an version of 1611, an version that has been converted? One of the principal causes the Authorized Version is so extensively approved is its kingly authority. There turns out little question that, had now not a king legal this variation, it could now not in these days be commemorated as although it had come direct from God

Answer 3

The newer modern versions of the bible were published after the false teachings of the rapture and the seven year tribulation had been accepted and the ecumenical movement had begun. A generation raised on false doctrine was taught to distrust the King James bible as the one authorized version for the English speaking people, and to publish versions that would be used to tear down the foundational beliefs of Christianity, all at the hands of multi-national antichrist bankers. There is another very noteworthy sign of the authenticity of the King James bible. When witches and Freemasons, among others, ceremonially desecrate the bible they will only use the King James version.

Answer 4

I was hung up on this some time ago. All though it is hard to read the King James 1611 version seems to be the most accurate because it took the text of both Egypt and Jewish. If you want a good King James Bible look for The Companion Bible. It is the 1611 version and is full of great features. The translation that I like is the Amplified which has taken key words of the text and given part of a definition in the verse to expand the readers understanding of the scripture.

Answer 5

I prefer the King James Version over all other versions.
There are some other wonderful versions such as the New American Standard, The Revised Version, The American Standard from 1901, and the New King James Version.
I do not care too much for the modern English translations because they seem to have taken liberties with the text to make the Bible say things not intended. The worst translation out there would have to be The Message because it is one mans interpretation of what he thinks the Bible is saying. We are told in Rev. 22 not to add too or detract from the words in the Bible.

Answer 6

King James was the king that followed Queen Elizabeth, the First. After she died he became king, but did not live very long. The one thing that King James of England did was to have the Bible translated into ENGLISH. It was either in Greek or Latin, depending on which book you had. King James wanted the English people to have access to the Bible and to be able to read it, if they had the education of being able to read. Not many could read, but since King Henry the Vlll assumed the head of the English Catholic religion, he begin to change some of the rituals. It was Elizabeth who ordered all liturgies to be verbalized in English instead of Latin, and it was King James who decided to follow up and have the Bible translated from the Latin/Greek into English. It took many years and many learned men to accomplish this task, but they did it and that is what we have today as the King James Bible, KJB... I like this Bible and not the new re translated versions. It allows me the opportunity to STUDY what I read, and to really learn what is written... instead of reading it like a fictional novel. The King James version cannot be beat... I've read them all... the Catholic version, the King James version, and the American version... Hope this helps. Good Luck!

Answer 7

I like the authorized KJV.
I find it to be correct. Some argue,but the Holy Ghost will confirm God's word. If I have confirmation that the KJV was correct,why would I go to another version.
So I can not say any thing about other versions,except the Jehovah witness bible is not of God but of man. I tried to read from it,and it has not the blessings of the Holy Ghost.
I went to their Kingdom Hall. No Holy ghost there,indeed it was more like a funeral home than the living God's home. No music,no one happy or full of the Lord. They say all Christianity is Babalon the great spoken by John in the book of rev. Indeed they shall have their reward.Yet they cry out so loud We Have an accurate knowledge of the Lord, They say they see,yet are they blind.
So the Holy Ghost will let you know what is of God and what is not. Trust in the Holy Ghost .

Answer 8

The King James Bible is not a " version ". All other bibles are versions of The King James Bible . Modern " versions " have left out words and phrases that delute the true meaning from the original translation . The King James Bible makes you study the verses until you understand the true meaning of its` message !! The new versions have been made " easy to read " because man wants the easy way out on most everything and is lazy when it comes to the dedication it takes to truly study the Bible !! The real answer is in The Book of Revelation , Chapter 22 , Verses 18 & 19 ..... For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book , If any man shall add unto these things , God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book ... And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy , God shall take away his part out of the book of life , and out of the holy city , and from the things which are written in this book . Seems GOD is very clear about how HE feels about changing HIS Word !!

Answer 9

I like the King James Bible. I used to read it more than the others. But now I use the NIV ( New International Version). I also use the NLT ( New Living Translation) . Once in a while, I'll pick up an Oxford Bible, mainly because it's got an Apocrypha in it like the old KJV had.

I think that they all bring something to the table. It depends on where you look as to the accuracy of them. My Concordance is handy in case a question as to the literal wording is brought up. That along with an Expositionary Dictionary.

The reality is; English is often proved to be a poor language for the literal words used, especially when compared to the Semitic languages.

Answer 10

The translation is filled with errors. If you do your research you will see this is true. I can read Hebrew. The Old Testament Bible was translated from the Hebrew Torah and the translation is incorrect. Many people will say in the defense of the King James Version that there were words that could not be translated so they did it the best that could be translated. That I am positive is untrue. The people that say this do not learn to read Hebrew and the other ancient languages to confirm this. They trust whatever their pastor or what they were taught growing up. I think it is terrible that the translations are not at all accurate. The King James Version is written for control of the people. People that are in fear are easily controlled.
I am not Pagan but I agree with Chris above where he says that Gods word should stay exactly as it was sent. Changing the language is possible...and necessary. But it should be done word for word.

Answer 11

yes ,, and there is one mistake John 1:1 and the word was god???

below is a list of all the corrections to date,,,,,,,,,,,,,
1808: "and the word was a god." The New Testament in an Improved Version, Upon the Basis of Archbishop Newcome's New Translation: With a Corrected Text.

1864: "and a god was the word." The Emphatic Diaglott, interlinear reading, by Benjamin Wilson.

1928: "and the Word was a divine being." La Bible du Centenaire, L'Evangile selon Jean, by Maurice Goguel.

1935: "and the Word was divine." The Bible—An American Translation, by J. M. P. Smith and E. J. Goodspeed.

1946: "and of a divine kind was the Word." Das Neue Testament, by Ludwig Thimme.

1950: "and the Word was a god." New World Translation of the Christian Greek Scriptures.

1958: "and the Word was a God." The New Testament, by James L. Tomanek.

1975: "and a god (or, of a divine kind) was the Word." Das Evangelium nach Johannes, by Siegfried Schulz.

1978: "and godlike kind was the Logos." Das Evangelium nach Johannes, by Johannes Schneider.

ke made at