If the bible is the word of god, why King James II need to change it?

Question

To primoa197,most accurate that we have? compared to the earliest manuscripts?. well you are "allmost "a christian

The original printing of the King James Version included the Apocrypha, so named in the text. It contained all the books and sections of books present in the Latin Vulgate's Old Testament but missing in the Hebrew. Under the Thirty-Nine Articles, the doctrinal confession of the Church of England established in 1563, these books were considered non-canonical but were to be "read for example of life and instruction of manners".[3] This section also includes apocrypha from the Vulgate's appendix. The original printing also included a number of variant readings and alternative translations of some passages; most current printings omit these. (One American edition that does still print these notes is the Cornerstone UltraThin Reference Bible, published by Broadman and Holman.) The original printing also included some marginal references to indicate where one passage of Scripture quoted or directly related to another. Most current printings omit these.

Answer 1

The bible was written by men....it is some history and some myth. Every ancient civilization created myths and fables about creation and life and death. So it does not matter who changes it.

Answer 2

The bible is not the word of God per se. The manuscripts that make it are the recorded word of God. We, under what we believe to be divine direction, have gathered and translated these manuscripts into one book.

These manuscripts have not changed, and as new versions of the bible in English are generated, scholars go back to what manuscripts we have.

As to King James, there were lots of translations starting to come out. Warfare was breaking out even in the british realm over which one was right - so with the funding available only to a king, James commissioned a version that could settle the disputes and be used as the English bible.

King James bible is not, I repeat not, the authorized (only) version of the bible for English readers. The issue of the KJV seems to be a North American issue. Talk with christians in England and they don't see what we're fussing over.... go figure.

Answer 3

Unlike most languages, English is left to drift with the times. The language is in constant change. Chauser's works that date from the late thirteen hundreds can't be understood today except for tons of footnotes.
Go back another couple hundred years, and English is like a foreign language.
King James did not change the meaning of the bible. He simply translated it into the language of his time. Since we no longer use the "thee", "thou","thine", etc maybe it's time to change it again.
Usually it's Muslims who ask this question, adding that the Koran has never been changed. What they're saying is that they're stuck back in the six hundreds, and have never advanced.

Answer 4

The New Testament was originally written in the Ancient Geek Language, not Latin or even Proper English.

Answer 5

If the bible is the word of god, why King James II need to change it? one word: POLITICS

It had nothing to do with being more accurate (whatever that means), it had everything to do with Papal Power versus Kingly Power. Make no mistake, the changes he made and there were many, were for the benefit of the Kingdom and had nothing to do with faith. That's why is called the King James VERSION, to all EE's note the word: VERSION.

Edit: I have to say this. Having read both Latin and Hebrew texts, I hate to burst of few bubbles of delusion, but King James made several changes not just literal translation.

Answer 6

the king James bible is the result of a political compromise between the puritans and the established church of England supported by the king. it was written in such a way as to leave out any criticism of the institution of the Divine right of kings which could be read into previous bibles.

Answer 7

Before the King James version was written the Bible was in Latin,
Greek, and a couple of other languages. He had it written into English. And he had a falling out with the church and that is where the Anglican church started. The church would not allow him to get divorced. And I do not believe that he changed anything at that time, only translated it.

Answer 8

The word of God is undisputable and unrefutable...
translational differences doesnt change a thing except for the words used, in terms of relavence to the culture to a certain extent. NASB and KJV are considered literal transations of the Hebrew,Aramic and greek texts.

Answer 9

The 1611 King James version is probably the most accurate that we have as compared to the earliest manuscripts.

What change are you talking about?

If you mean 'why so many versions?'......well...

The NIV and the NASB are in lamens terms so that people like us don't have to deal with the 'thees' and 'thous'

Edit:
I'm not understanding you.....why would you say I'm almost a Christian? I became a Christian the moment I got saved buddy...how about you?

Answer 10

the bible is the word of God. and king james is just a version. he created like the dvd bible. so we would be able to read the bible much better and understand it more.