who is King James? why is there a King James' version of the bible?

Question

why do evangelists/bible-fundamentalists believe it to be the "original" bible? who declared it to be?

this may sound like a silly question, but it really makes me wonder, that's why i'm asking.

Answer 1

these guys got only bits and pieces right, mostly they are wrong, before the kjv was the bishops bible, geneva bible, tyndale's new testament, and i believe the wycliffe translation. . if you wanna learn about the kjv, and the history of the english bible i'd reccomend reading the books available for online reading at the following links
the answer book by dr. sam gipp -th.d. you can jump around and don't gotta read it through to learn something. just find a question and he'll answer it for you..
http://samgipp.com/answer/gipp_answer_index.html

an understandable history of the bible by dr. sam gipp th.d.
http://samgipp.com/history/Gipp_history_index.html

sam gipp shows why the kjv is the ONLY true TRANSLATION of the scripture into english

Answer 2

In the early 1500s, there was a split in the Catholic church known as the Protestant Reformation. Most of the non-Catholic churches (Baptist, Luthern, Methodist, etc) all trace their origin back to this movement.

At the time of the split, the only Bible most people had access to was the a Latin version, made in the 4th century, called the Vulgate (meaning "common") version. As part of the Protestant Reformation, new translations of the Bible began to appear in other languages.

Several appeared in the England (the best known being the Great Bible, the Geneva Bible, the Catholic Douay-Rheims and the Bishop's Bible). Each contained not only the text of the Bible, but also that commentaries and notes to help with the understanding of the book. Often these notes were very anti-Catholic, and anti-other Protestant groups. This was causing a lot of disputes and fight between the churches.

In the early 1600's, King James of England ordered the Church of England to produce a single, standard, English Bible which would have no notes or commentaries. making it usuable by any of the English churches. That version was completed in 1611, and is technically known as The Authorized Version of the Bible. Because it is dedicated to King James (who provided the finances to make it), it has come to known as the King James Bible.

Between 1611 when it was first printed, and the early 1900's, it was "the" Bible used the majority of English people speaking. It underwent a revision in the late 1600's to correct some of the printing errors in the first edition. It also underwent a revision in the late 1700s to undate the spelling and alphabet. It had changed a lot during those 200 years. (For example, here is John 3:16 from the 1611 version: John 3:16 "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.")

In the early 1900's a new Revised Standard Version of the Bible appeared. The translator who made this version looked over the more than 5300 early manuscripts of the Bible. Amoung those, they found 5 manuscripts which read differently from the other 5300. The translated decided to follow everyone of those "different" readings in their translation, rather then follwoing the overwhelming majority of the text.

The results was that many people rejected the translation as being inaccurate (which it was). They continued to use the King James Bible, saying it was the correct and accurate translation.

Since then, many other versions have appeared which are do follow the majority manuscripts (but may have a footnote to the minority text). Most are excellent and reliable translations of the scripture. But because of "bad experiences" with the RSV, and the natural tendency of people to dislike change, the King James still remains the most commonly used English Bible today.

Answer 3

King James was a king in England in the early 1600's. He brought together the Bible scholars of that day and ordered an English translation of the Bible (the original texts are in Hebrew, Greek, and Aramaic). It wasn't the first English translation, and older copies of the texts have been found since its introduction (it's actually a translation of a translation - not direct from the original languages). However, it was directed by an English king and has withstood centuries of use.

I use the English Standard Version, which is much easier to understand, and is a word for word translation - awesome!! I highly recommend it.

Answer 4

The King James version was written just a few years before Shakespeare died so the language is similar to Shakespeare's. King James I was the son of Mary Queen of Scots and suceeded Elizabeth I. There are many translation errors in the King James version which have been corrected in modern translations but the fundies still love the text of the old version.

Answer 5

He was the King of England. In 1611 he commissioned an English language translation of the Holy Bible. I do not know why fundamentalists consider it the original Bible because the Church and the Bible were around a long time before 1611. My guess is that it is simply because it is the oldest English language translation still in common use.

Answer 6

King James I of England and VI of Scotland was a member of the Royal House of Stuart who ruled England, Ireland and Scotland in the early 17th century. He ordered a translation of the Bible which became known as the Authorized Version. In America, it is usually called the "King James Version". It was based on previous English translations, but with a review of the Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek originals. In its day, it was one of the best translations available and it is quite literalistic. Many modern translations are more interpretative and less literal in their translation.

Answer 7

><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><>
Prince James, King of Great Britain, France and Ireland; Defender of the Faith.

Commissioned the work, translation of the holy scriptures into the English tongue.

Is it a perfect translation, no?
is it the best translation, yes?
Has it stood the test of time, yes?

Many resources to check out the translation.
All english speaking, Bible Scholars and students, declare it to be the best.

Why is it the best? Because it contains the Spirit of God.
><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><>

Answer 8

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_translations_of_the_Bible

The "King James" wasn't the first translation into English, but it did become the official Bible of the English church. Most American Protestants are ultimately descendants of members of the English church (Baptists, Congregationalists, Methodists, Episcopalians, etc.), and they just kept using their traditional translation. The fundamentalists now hold on to it as if it were divinely inspired... when in fact, it's riddled with translation errors and in many places virtually incomprehensible to a speaker of modern English.

A literature student should read it because it's a great piece of English prose. A student of the Bible should read a good modern translation, such as the RSV, which is based on the KJV but corrects its mistakes and updates its language.

Answer 9

King James was the King of England in the year 1611, he ordered scribes and translators to translate into English the Bible.
When you see words like thou, and thee and all those elagant words, those are old english words from 1611, it is simply the way people back in 1611 spoke back then.
Many of your questions can be answered on this site:

http://www.ibs.org/bibles/about/index.php

Answer 10

King James was a degenerate man who lived about 600 years ago. (among other things, he was a pedophile) He wanted to make a legacy, so he decided to order a translation of the Scriptures. (It was probably better than invading Iraq) They used the "textus receptus" (Erasmus' poor translation into Greek of the various writings) and banged out an English copy. (That is why "Jacob" is written "James" in that translation. The translators thought James would like to see his name in print.) Since it has been around 600 years, and was in pretty good English, it has the advantage of familiarity, even though it was rather a poor translation of rather a poor translation. It was an early version after printing was developed, and was pushed hard by the state church, so many copies were made, and it was widely received.

Answer 11

you now have the answer above he was an English king who wonted the bible in English. but it was translated from Latin so is not all that accurate although quite poetic some churches seem to feel it was the best ever translation there is Now a new king James but I think the English is so out dated few would understand it. the NIV is better.