2007-10-09 09:51:17 · 16 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
King James didn't do any of the translating. He didn't know the Koine Greek of the New Testament or the ancient languages of the Old Testament.
He hired a bevy of translators to do it for him. Were THEY inspired?
They were inspired not to come up with anything that King James didn't want to hear, since he was paying their salaries.
There are a multitude of translational mistakes in the KJV, even though it gives fundamentalists apoplexy to hear you say that.
Today we have a lot more knowledge about those languages and we have bible translations that are a lot clearer to read and more inspired by the Holy Spirit. My favorite is The Jerusalem Bible; it has cool footnotes and some good cross references and the translation mistakes were fixed to the best of our current abilities.
2007-10-09 09:54:15 · answer #1 · answered by Acorn 7 · 5⤊ 1⤋
King James just had the power to have it done. I don't believe he was inspired whatsoever. I think it's crazy how some people think it's the only true translation. You can compare it to the greek/older transcripts to see how accurate he was. It's just a translation, nothing more or less special then others.
2007-10-09 16:55:10 · answer #2 · answered by L 3 · 4⤊ 0⤋
I thought he just 'authorised' that particular translation? I mean, you don't see a king sitting down on his throne in his palace to read through the Greek and Hebrew scrolls, do you? I can't, not with all those stories from the times of the Inquisition!
P.S: None of the translators of any translation were inspired- only the original Bible writers were!
P.P.S: Are Sam and Jon M the same person? Their answers are exactly the same.
2007-10-09 17:09:23 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Do these countless persons who use the King James Version know why, despite objections from churchmen, modern translations keep rolling off the presses? Do they know why the King James Version itself was once opposed by the people? Do they know why, despite vigorous protest and opspeaking world use and accept the King James or Authorized Version more than any other single Bible translation. In fact, so highly esteemed is this translation that many persons venerate it as the only true Bible. This raises some questions.
the King James Version entered into the very blood and marrow of English thought and speech? Do they know what illuminating document is probably missing from their own copies? In short, do they really know the King James Version?
The purpose of Bible translation, then, is to take these thoughts of God, originally written in Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek, and put them into the common languages of today. Bible translation makes God’s Book a living Book. So true Christians read the Bible, not to be entertained by clever turns of expression, unusual words, excellency of style, striking rhetorical devices or felicities of rhythm, but to learn the will of God. It was for this reason that the King James Version came into existence. That was in 1611.
From almost every quarter the King James Bible met opposition. Criticism was often severe. Broughton, a Hebrew scholar of the day, wrote to King James that he “should rather be torn asunder by wild horses than allow such a version to be imposed on the church.”
The translators, not unaware that people preferred to keep what had grown familiar, knew that their work had unleashed a storm. They tried to calm the people down. They wrote a “Preface of the Translators” to explain why the King James Version was made. This preface is called by the Encyclopedia Americana “a most illuminating preface describing the aims of the translators which unhappily is omitted from the usual printings of the Bible.” Thus most Authorized Versions today, though they contain a lengthy dedication to King James, omit the preface. Its presence would clear up many misunderstandings about the purpose of the revision. The reader would learn that strong opposition was expected.
The reader would learn that the King James Version was a revision of earlier works made with a modest hope of improvement and no thought of finality, In time the clamor died down, and the King James Version prevailed over the Geneva Bible. For more than two and a half centuries no other so-called authorized translation of the Bible into English was made. Little wonder that many people began to feel that the King James Bible was the only true Bible. Like many people who once objected to any change in the Geneva Bible, many persons today object to any change in the King James Bible. They oppose modern translations perhaps as vigorously as the King James Version itself was once opposed.
King James Bible has been changed; today no one reads the King James Version in its original form. Explaining why this is so the book The Bible in Its Ancient and English Versions says: “Almost every edition, from the very beginning, introduced corrections and unauthorized changes and additions, often adding new errors in the process. The edition of 1613 shows over three hundred differences from 1611, It was in the eighteenth century, however, that the main changes were made, The marginal references were checked and verified, over 30,000 new marginal references were added, the chapter summaries and running headnotes were thoroughly revised, the punctuation was altered and made uniform in accordance with modern practice, textual errors were removed, the use of capitals was considerably modified and reduced, and a thorough revision made in the form of certain kinds of words.”
So many changes have been made, many of them in the readings of passages, that the Committee on Versions (1851-56) of the American Bible Society found 24,000 variations in six different editions of the King James Version!
What, then, of the objections raised by persons who say they do not want the King James Bible changed? Since the King James Version has already been changed, they lie on a crumbled foundation. If these persons do not want it changed, then why do they use, instead of a copy of an edition of 1611, an edition that has been changed?
They appreciate, perhaps unknowingly, the improvements the later editions have made. They do not like the odd spelling and punctuation of the 1611 edition; they do not want to read “fet” for “fetched,” “sith” for “since” or “moe” for “more,” as the edition of 1611 had it. Thus improvement, when needed, is appreciated, even by those who say they object to any changing of the King James translation.
One of the major reasons the Authorized Version is so widely accepted is its kingly authority. There seems little doubt that, had not a king authorized this version, it would not today be venerated as though it had come direct from God
2007-10-09 20:29:57 · answer #4 · answered by BJ 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
NO! I don't believe King James was inspired in writing his version of the Bible. If he was truly inspired he would not have left out five books.
2007-10-09 16:57:42 · answer #5 · answered by Mary Anne C 2 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I have no idea about King James. But the part about believing. I think you just have to allow yourself to realize that these people did live, they were here and these things did happen. I am a late in life learner and while i am still learning, I do believe. I'm also coming at it from a history point and not a church point. I have no interest in a person up on stage screaming at me to accept jesus chirst as my savior.. i can't learn like that, so i am listening to professors talk, a few reverands, not in a church setting and scholars. It has helped me put things into perspective. so to speak.
2007-10-09 16:59:30 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
The fact that scholars go over copy after copy of the Holy Bible, the King James Bible, and the NIV Bible tells me that no mistakes have been found. Yes, the words are different, but the meaning is the same.
2007-10-09 16:55:05 · answer #7 · answered by nita5267 6 · 0⤊ 3⤋
King James just had it done. Interesting that his version would be considered inspired, considering King James was a homosexual.
2007-10-09 16:55:46 · answer #8 · answered by The Doctor 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋
king james added so much stuff to try to prove the trenity.
most of that has been removed today. their are over 700 mistakes in the king james bible.
would you alow george bush to translate the bible.
kings have agendas.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=QfZItov1BUo&mode=related&search=
2007-10-09 16:55:53 · answer #9 · answered by dumaguetejoe 3 · 4⤊ 0⤋
Why believe a King when you can listen to an Emperor?
Roman Emperor Constantine commissioned the first Bible.
2007-10-09 16:56:01 · answer #10 · answered by Honest Opinion 5 · 0⤊ 3⤋