I do wonder why it was dumped by the Crowned King and Head of the Church in England. I believe it was more politics then holiness that shaped the King James version and it's gone down hill from there as far as Bibles in English go.
Oh yes, Wyclif's English Bible was completed somewhere around 1380 and accepted.
2007-03-14 19:13:50 · 9 answers · asked by Terry 7 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Accepted by the aristocracy. The clergy used latin. The rest couldn't read. Are you telling me that this God guided Bible is full of errors and the King James isn't political as well as having errors accidental and otherwise. Y'all have to make up your minds, either all the Bibles are guided by God or it is no longer valid to say any are guided by God.
2007-03-14 19:27:34 · update #1
If I remember correctly, the Roman Catholic Church had been split right in half during the period of Wyclif. I think there was a Pope in France as well as Rome. They couldn't have had a lot of push in England.
2007-03-14 19:35:32 · update #2
One more thing....I've read some of it. Have any of you? Middle English is fairly readable. I read Matthew.....not quite same as the modern KJV Bible.
2007-03-14 19:40:39 · update #3
there were a few English translations before and MANY translations after the King James Authorized version
There were 2 variations of "The King James" Bible, by the same translators, which King James rejected. The first was probably the most accurate of the 3 versions submitted for the king's approval. But he didn't like "Baptizmo" being translated as "immersed" among other things that disagreed with the way the king wanted it.
The King James Authorized version is actually the most inaccurate English language translation from the time of the first English translation until the 20th century.
2007-03-14 19:23:56 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
It really was Roman Catholic papacy system vs. the Protestant movement ... he was against the powerful papacy, order of monasticism, reform beliefs, written works, etc.
Wycliffe believed that the Bible ought to be the common possession of all Christians, and needed to be made available for common use in the language of the people so he got to work translating it.
Just as Luther's version had great influence upon the German language, so Wycliffe's, by reason of its clarity, beauty, and strength, influenced the English language, as the King James Version was later to do.
Wycliffe's Bible, as it came to be known, was widely distributed throughout England. The Church denounced it as an unauthorized translation.
2007-03-14 19:18:37 · answer #2 · answered by Seamless Melody 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I am aware of it and read a little now and then. As you know, including Wycliffe, there are about eight English translations to the time of King James.
The King James version of 1611 has done very nicely for three centuries; serving the spiritual and literary taste of tens of millions in the English speaking world.
2007-03-14 20:59:22 · answer #3 · answered by Tommy 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Wyclif's translation was deemed heretical only by the Catholics, who controlled pretty much everything in those days, and are also, in part, responsible for the KJV being such a slanted and biased translation. Thanks to the many discoveries of more ancient manuscripts than the ones used to translate the KJV, we can finally and honestly see how flawed the KJV is!
2007-03-14 19:25:08 · answer #4 · answered by Anomaly 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Here are some early versions for you to check out:
Wycliffe 1380 version:
http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/index.php?action=getVersionInfo&vid=53#books&version=53;
Geneva bible 1560 version:
http://www.genevabible.org/Geneva.html
William Tyndale version 1527:
http://wesley.nnu.edu/biblical_studies/tyndale/
2007-03-14 19:39:23 · answer #5 · answered by Ms DeeAnn 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think Wycliffe was killed by the Kin because he translated the Bible into English.The Pope order it to happen.King James picked up where Wycliffe left off.
I may be wrong but I think I read this.<><
2007-03-14 19:23:49 · answer #6 · answered by funnana 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
it sounds like john wyclif had a good idea going in order to spread the gospel we need the gospel in our own language for us to read today
beautifully put in your own words i would agree to a certain poin of course.
so many people in the past as in the present tries to prevent us from sharing or receiving the gospel
that is why it is important to us today to seal it upon our hearts and our childrens hearts so that we wont forget it.
for the bible says that if we raise our children in their hearts it will permeate in their hearts and they will never forget it
2007-03-14 19:50:59 · answer #7 · answered by Tracey P 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Wycliff's translation was primitive, filled with errors, and often heretical.
Accepted by whom? And for what purpose?
If it was so good, it would still be around today.
The Catholic Douay-Rheims English Bible is of similar vintage and it is still in wide use. No heresy, either.
2007-03-14 19:18:52 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋
I know. Simply check my past answers.
2007-03-14 19:33:33 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋