altering translations too often?

Discussion in '2005 Archive' started by Logos1560, May 15, 2005.

  1. Logos1560

    Logos1560
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Messages:
    3,127
    Likes Received:
    2
    Is altering and revising English Bibles wrong?

    In their preface to the 1611, the KJV translators noted that the Roman Catholics criticized Protestants for "altering and amending our translations so often." Thomas Fuller observed that Catholics asked: "Was their translation good before? Why do they amend it?"
    (CHURCH HISTORY OF BRITAIN, Vol. V, p. 407). In his 1582 book, Gregory Martin, a Roman Catholic, condemned the early English translations with this accusation: "How is it ... that in your later English bibles you change your former translation from better to worse?" (FULKE, A DEFENCE, p. 323). Martin claimed that "books which were so translated by Tyndale and the like, as being not indeed God's book ...or scripture, but the devil's word" (p. 228). Martin argued that present translations must be evaluated or judged by the ancient Latin Vulgate translation that had been used by the Roman Catholic Church for over 1,000 years.

    On the other hand, the KJV translators argued that it was good to revise and to attempt to improve earlier translations of God's Word. They acknowledged that such attempts were often incorrectly viewed with suspicion and jealousy; and that they would be accused of changing and correcting sacred Scripture, but they nevertheless contended that revision was necessary. In their preface, they wrote: "If anything be halting, or superflous, or not so agreeable to the original, the same may be corrected, and the truth set in place."
     
  2. Keith M

    Keith M
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2002
    Messages:
    2,024
    Likes Received:
    0
    They found it necessary to update and modernize way back then, thus the publication of the KJV. However, these days we have those who would rather have the Bible remain as it was published in 1611, with no updating or modernizing. Seems a bit contradictory to the original purpose of the KJV translators, doesn't it?
     
  3. Logos1560

    Logos1560
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Messages:
    3,127
    Likes Received:
    2
    Yes, I agree that the KJV-only view does seem a bit contradictory to the original purpose of the KJV translators.

    In their preface, the KJV translators wrote: "No cause therefore why the word translated should be denied to be the word, or forbidden to be current, notwithstanding that some imperfections and blemishes may be noted in the setting forth of it. For what ever was perfect under the sun, where apostles or apostolike men, that is, men indued with an extraordinary measure of God's spirit, and priviledged with the priviledge of infallibility, had not their hand?"
     
  4. Craigbythesea

    Craigbythesea
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    5,500
    Likes Received:
    20
    The most popular versions of the Bible are being revised frequently because the English language is rapidly changing and because of progress in Biblical scholarship. Here are some examples along with their revision dates:

    Jerusalem Bible, 1966
    New Jerusalem Bible, 1985

    New American Bible, 1970
    New American Bible, with the Revised New Testament, 1986

    Revised Standard Version, 1946, 1952, 1971
    New Revised Standard Version, 1989

    New American Standard Bible, 1960, 1962, 1963, 1968, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1975, 1977
    New American Standard Bible, Updated Version, 1995

    New English Bible, 1961, 1970
    Revised English Bible, 1989

    Exodus 19:18 And mount Sinai was altogether on a smoke, because the Lord descended vpon it in fire: and the smoke thereof ascended as the smoke of a furnace, and the whole mount quaked greatly. KJV, 1611

    Exodus 19:18 Now Mount Sinai was wrapped in smoke because the LORD had descended on it in fire. The smoke of it went up like the smoke of a kiln, and the whole mountain trembled greatly. ESV, 2001

    [​IMG]
     
  5. gb93433

    gb93433
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2003
    Messages:
    15,496
    Likes Received:
    6
    Languages are changing much more rapidly than in any other time in history. So there is a need to make changes so that scripture can be understood well.
     
  6. Logos1560

    Logos1560
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Messages:
    3,127
    Likes Received:
    2
    In the 76 years from the 1535 Coverdale's Bible to the 1611 KJV, many changes and revisions were made in the English Bibles. There may be almost as many changes in those 76 years as there are in the 371 years from the 1611 KJV until the 1982 NKJV. It is even more likely that there may be as many changes in those 76 years than in the 383 years from the 1611 KJV until the 1994 KJ21.

    Those who hold and promote a KJV-only view seem to ignore the large number of changes and revisions that the KJV made in the earlier English Bibles of which it was a revision.
     

Share This Page

Loading...