2007-03-14 15:42:24 · 20 answers · asked by Rose 1 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
a damn hard translation to get acquainted with.
2007-03-14 15:44:48 · answer #1 · answered by Tribble Macher 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
The translators made the greatest effort to use the nearest english word or phrase to match the text they were translating from... they were however constrained by the moral standards of the day so had to tone down some more graphic parts... I use the King James because it believe it is closest to what was intended... There is s significance to the use of certain words that is lost in "modern" translations because "modern" american english dose not use as many words as were used in the KJV...so, I believe, there is a loss of strength of some wording... also the formality of the KJV is closer to the text they translated from... the old languages used up to 11- 12,000 individual words... the KJV used over 6000...some "modern ones use less... The The's and thou"s and other words have specific meanigs which are lost in "modern" translations... the subject of
Textual Critisizm is filled with debate and hostility concerning word usage... unless you are really into frustration stay away from it...
Personaly, I do not feel that many of the "modern" translators are even of The True Christian Faith...and some, from the 1800's, are clearly not Christian... I personaly believe that some from the last couple hundred years have deliberatly tried to corrupt The Bible translations......
I know for certain that God led me to The King James after my Salvation.... so I stick with it.... I do tell others who have dificulty with the KJV that they can try The New American Standard(updated in 1995)... because I believe the translators did strive hard and used prayer effectivly in their work...
2007-03-14 15:58:27 · answer #2 · answered by idahomike2 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
THE PEOPLE WERE SCREAMING FOR THE BIBLE IN THOSE DAYS
KJV Bible 1611 published, at 303 years is 1914 at WW1.
Dan.8:12-14 [ 2300 years after Babylon Empire #3 ends Judah kings, THERE WILL BE NO KING UNTIL KING JESUS AT HIS SECOND COMING, in the last days or the end time, the word of truth is to be circulating in the world, at 300 years is 2600 after and here in 2007 CE, we are 2613 years after Babylon Empire #3, Rev.18:1-6; When we got it, there must not have been much choice but to be in the spirit of Babylon, as Rome was also Called Babylon ].
THANK GOD FOR WHAT EVER WE COULD GET IN A BIBLE TRANSLATION
2007-03-14 16:44:45 · answer #3 · answered by jeni 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
A translation into English done by a group of scholars, in the reign (and under the orders) of King James the first (sixth of Scotland). He did it in order to try to bring agreement between the different factions in England. He did not like the Puritan version which is called the Geneva Bible.
It was generally translated directly from the Greek and Hebrew manuscripts, as most modern translations are also done.
Because it was done in the early 1600's, it is a bit difficult to read today, unless you were brought up on it as a child.
2007-03-14 15:48:08 · answer #4 · answered by Mr Ed 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I believe this version came out during that era, and is a modern translation into the English Language so ordinary people can understand it. It was first published in 1611, you can check with Wikpedia. Type in King James version of the Bible.
2007-03-14 15:50:10 · answer #5 · answered by two_stars2 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I think that all bibles are the inspired word of God. However man has made some changes.
The biggest one to me with regards to the king James translation is how the new one that just came out has removed Gods name from the whole bible. The old one used to have Jehovah's name in it. Ps. 83:18 but it now has replaced Jehovah with the "title" LORD.
2007-03-14 15:49:03 · answer #6 · answered by mrs.mom 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
It was "authorized" to be translated from the Latin Vulgate manuscripts into English - the first time a translation was "made official" in the vernacular of the Church of England. There were other English Bibles, (Tyndale and Coverdale) - but the "Authorized Version" received the stamp of approval of the King of England.
2007-03-14 15:47:15 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
First version of the Bible printed in the language of the common people; so the Bible became a book that the common man could read, so he wouldn't have to rely soley on what priests/ministers said that it said.
2007-03-14 15:46:20 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Next to the Catholic and Greek Orthodox it is one of the oldest.
Its is refined with King James' edicts, not the Popes'
2007-03-14 16:03:13 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
My understanding is, it was the first full translation into English. There was earlier versions however not complete.
2007-03-14 15:47:23 · answer #10 · answered by MoPleasure4U 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It is the most accurate of any of the modern translations.
2007-03-14 15:45:44 · answer #11 · answered by watcherd 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋