influence of Vulgate and Rheims on KJV

Discussion in 'Bible Versions/Translations' started by Logos1560, Nov 6, 2006.

  1. Logos1560

    Logos1560
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Messages:
    3,127
    Likes Received:
    2

    The Catholic Rheims New Testament had some influence on the vocabulary of the KJV in that some of its many Latinisms were adopted (Ancestry of Our English Bible, p. 267). Daniell wrote: "Another, more serious, push toward Latinity came from the influence on the [KJV] panels of the extremely Latinate Roman Catholic translation from Rheims" (Tyndale's N. T., p. xiii). Charles Butterworth noted: "There are instances where the Rheims New Testament reads differently from all the preceding versions and yet has been followed later by similar readings in the King James Bible, indicating that the translators of 1611 by no means ignored the work that was done in 1582" (Literary Lineage of the KJV, p. 195). Wally Beebe's Bus Workers Edition of the Open Bible noted: "The New Testament part of this [Rheims] Bible was extensively used by the King James revisers" (p. 1221).


    J. R. Dore wrote: "A very considerable number of the Rhemish renderings, which they introduced for the first time, were adopted by the revisers of King James's Bible of 1611" (Old Bibles, p. 303). Butterworth observed that the Rheims version "recalled the thought of the [KJV] translators to the Latin structure of the sentences, which they sometimes preferred to the Greek for clarity's sake, thus reverting to the pattern of Wycliffe or the Coverdale Latin-English Testaments, and forsaking the foundation laid by Tyndale" (Literary Lineage of the KJV, p. 237). In an introductory article on "The English Bible" in The Interpeter's Bible, Allen Wikgren also noted that the Rheims "exerted a considerable influence upon the King James revision, in which many of its Latinisms were adopted" (Vol. I, p. 93). Herbert May confirmed that "some of its [the Rheims] phrases were used by the King James Version translators" (Our English Bible in the Making, p. 47). Benson Bobrick also observed; "From the Rheims New Testament, the translators saw fit to borrow a number of Latinate words" (Wide as the Waters, p. 244). Samuel Fisk also acknowledged that the Rheims had "an influence upon the King James Version" (Calvinistic Paths, p. 74). James Carleton noted: "One cannot but be struck by the large number of words which have come into the Authorized Version from the Vulgate through the medium of the Rhemish New Testament" (Part of Rheims in the Making of the English Bible, p. 32). In his book, Carleton gave charts or comparisons in which he gave the rendering of the early Bibles and then the different rendering of the Rheims and KJV.


    It is most likely that the KJV translators obtained their knowledge of the Rheims New Testament from a book by William Fulke which compared the Rheims N. T. side by side with the Bishops'. In his introduction to a 1911 facsimile reprint of the 1611, A. W. Pollard maintained that "probably every reviser of the New Testament for the edition of 1611" possessed a copy of Fulke's book that "was regarded as a standard work on the Protestant side" (p. 23). John Greider observed that “This work [by Fulke] was studied by the translators of the 1611 Bible” (English Bible Translations, p. 316). Peter Thuesen pointed out: “William Fulke’s popular 1589 annotated edition of the Rheims New Testament, though intended as an antidote to popery, in reality had served as the vehicle by which some of the Rhemists’ Latinisms entered the vocabulary of the King James Bible” (In Discordance, p. 62). Even Riplinger confirmed that the KJV translators had Fulke’s book with these verse comparisons, but she seems to have ignored the evidence that they followed some of the renderings of the Rheims (In Awe, p. 536). Instead, she suggested that the translators of the KJV avoided “multi-syllable Latin root-words” (p. 535).


    W. F. Moulton stated: "The Rhemish Testament was not even named in the instructions furnished to the translators, but it has left its mark on every page of their work" (History of the English Bible, p. 207). Ward Allen maintained that "the Rheims New Testament furnished to the Synoptic Gospels and Epistles in the A. V. as many revised readings as any other version" (Translating the N. T. Epistles, p. xxv). Allen and Jacobs claimed that the KJV translators "in revising the text of the synoptic Gospels in the Bishops' Bible, owe about one-fourth of their revisions, each, to the Genevan and Rheims New Testaments" (Coming of the King James Gospels, p. 29). About 1 Peter 1:20, Allen noted: “The A. V. shows most markedly here the influence of the Rheims Bible, from which it adopts the verb in composition, the reference of the adverbial modifier to the predicate, the verb manifest, and the prepositional phrase for you” (Translating for King James, p. 18). Concerning 1 Peter 4:9, Allen suggested that “this translation in the A. V. joins the first part of the sentence from the Rheims Bible to the final phrase of the Protestant translations” (p. 30). Allen also observed: "At Col. 2:18, he [KJV translator John Bois] explains that the [KJV] translators were relying upon the example of the Rheims Bible" (pp. 10, 62-63). Thus, the first-hand testimony of a KJV translator acknowledged or confirmed that the KJV was influenced by the Rheims. Opfell observed that the Westminster company (Romans through Jude) "borrowed many Latinate words" from the Rheims (KJB Translators, p. 97). Even KJV defender Edward Hills acknowledged that the 1582 Douai Version influenced the KJV “slightly” (Believing Bible Study, p. 64).


    William Norton asserted: “There are many Latin-English words in the Common version [KJV]“ (Translation of the Peshito-Syriac, p. lxxvi). A few examples of the Latin-based renderings from the Rheims in the KJV are the following: clemency [clementia] (Acts 24:4), principal [principalibus] (Acts 25:23), emulation [aemulandum] (Rom. 11:14), malignity [malignitate] (Rom. 1:29), illuminated [illuminati] (Heb. 10:32), sincerity [sinceritate] (2 Cor. 1:12), and incense [incensa] (Rev. 8:3).

    Over 100 examples of where the KJV follows the rendering of the 1582 Rheims N. T. based on the Latin Vulgate could be listed.
     
  2. bound

    bound
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2006
    Messages:
    664
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hi,

    This all looks pretty well documented and I 'personally' find no real reason to challenge it. We have to remember that the powers that be in England at the time were very Liturigical "High Church" Anglicans and would have been enfluenced not only by the recent translations of their day but also not as divorced from "High Church" tradition as we find ourselves today.

    Clearly the Protestant movement of their day was far more catholic/orthodox in practice than we are today. I don't see that as a good or bad thing, just a fact of the time.

    Was there a particular point to the original post?
     
  3. HankD

    HankD
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Messages:
    15,118
    Likes Received:
    319
    If I were to guess it would probably be that we ought not speak too disparagingly of the Vulgate or the Rheims NT seeing that the AV was so powerfully influenced by both (amongst other sources).

    Hence the inclusion of the Apocrypha in the First Edition AV of 1611.

    HankD
     
  4. bound

    bound
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2006
    Messages:
    664
    Likes Received:
    0
    Point taken. :thumbsup:
     
  5. Logos1560

    Logos1560
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Messages:
    3,127
    Likes Received:
    2
    Laurence Vance, a KJV-only author, maintained that 1582 Rheims is "not part of the purified line of English Bibles" (King James, His Bible, p. 84). How does the credible evidence of renderings from the 1582 Roman Catholic Rheims N. T. in the KJV affect KJV-only claims concerning preservation and their line of good Bibles? Even if some or much of the influence of the Rheims on the KJV is considered positive, it still seems to create a problem for typical KJV-only reasoning.

    Below are some examples of where the KJV follows a rendering in the 1582 Rheims instead of the rendering of Tyndale's, Coverdale's, Matthew's, Great, Whittingham's, Geneva, or Bishops'.

    James 1:5 casteth no man in the teeth (Tyndale’s, Coverdale’s, Matthew’s, Great, Bishops’)
    reproacheth no man (Geneva) upbraideth not (Rheims, KJV)
    James 2:2 company (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) assembly (Rheims, KJV)
    James 3:2 we sin all (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) we offend all (Rheims, KJV)
    James 3:2 sin not (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) offend not (Rheims, KJV)
    James 5:16 (ac)knowledge (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) confess (Rheims, KJV)
    James 5:20 going astray (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) error (Rheims, KJV)
    1 Pet. 1:20 declared (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) manifested (Rheims) manifest (KJV)
    1 Pet. 2:11 fight (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) war (Rheims, KJV)
    1 Pet. 3:3 broided (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) plaiting (Rheims, KJV)
    1 Pet. 3:5 tire (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) adorned (Rheims, KJV)
    1 Pet. 4:9 Be ye harberous (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) Using hospitality (Rheims) Use hospitality (KJV)
    2 Pet. 1:3 godly power (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) divine power (Rheims, KJV)
    2 Pet. 2:18 beguile (Tyndale’s, Matthew’s, Whittingham’s, Geneva)
    entice (Coverdale’s, Great, Bishops’) allure (Rheims, KJV)
    2 Pet. 3:5 know not (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) ignorant (Rheims, KJV)
    1 John 1:9 (ac)knowledge (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) confess (Rheims, KJV)
    1 John 2:20 ointment (Tyndale’s, Matthew’s, Great, Whittingham’s, Geneva, Bishops’) anointing (Coverdale’s) unction (Rheims, KJV)
    1 John 2:26 deceive you (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) seduce you (Rheims, KJV)
    Jude 1:19 fleshly (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) sensual (Rheims, KJV)
    Jude 1:20 edify (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) building (Rheims, KJV)
    Rev. 2:2 examined(st) (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) tried (Rheims, KJV)
    Rev. 2:20 deceive (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) seduce (Rheims, KJV)
    Rev. 2:24 learning (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) doctrine (Rheims, KJV)
    Rev. 2:24 deepness (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) depth (Rheims) depths (KJV)
    Rev. 8:3 odors (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) incenses (Rheims) incense (KJV)
    Rev. 9:13 blew (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) sounded (Rheims, KJV)
    Rev. 9:20 remnant (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) rest (Rheims, KJV)
    Rev. 11:1 mete (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) measure (Rheims, KJV)
    Rev. 11:2 mete (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) measure (Rheims, KJV)
    Rev. 17:6 marvel (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) admiration (Rheims, KJV)
    Rev. 18:3 pleasures (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) delicacies (Rheims, KJV)
    Rev. 18:12 ware (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) merchandise (Rheims, KJV)
    Rev. 18:13 bodies (Tyndale’s, Coverdale’s, Matthew’s, Great, Bishops’)
    servants (Whittingham’s, Geneva) slaves (Rheims, KJV)
    Rev. 21:21 every gate (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) every several gate (Rheims, KJV)
    Rev. 22:15 enchanters (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) sorcerers (Rheims, KJV)


     
  6. Logos1560

    Logos1560
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Messages:
    3,127
    Likes Received:
    2
    In another thread, one poster had claimed that the earlier pre-1611 English Bibles (Tyndale's to Bishops') had been corrupted through influence of the Latin Vulgate. William Tyndale translated from the Greek in his New Testament and from the Hebrew in the books of the Old Testament that he translated before his death. The 1560 Geneva Bible was translated from the preserved Scriptures in the original languages. In those parts of the Old Testament (Joshua to Malachi) that he did not use Tyndale's translated, Miles Coverdale translated from the German and Latin so he was influenced by the Latin Vulgate at times.

    Because of its use of the 1582 Rheims N. T., the KJV could be said to have been influenced more by the Latin Vulgate than the 1560 Geneva Bible was. The documented evidence would counter the other poster's implied and undocumented claim that all the pre-1611 English Bibles were corrupted by the Latin Vulgate.
     
  7. bound

    bound
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2006
    Messages:
    664
    Likes Received:
    0
    I would say that complete and utter
    Well, ignorance of the facts is always a violent slap in the face for those who are too comfortable to recognize such a state within themselves. For some change is painful.

    I believe it is best for all of us to listen to the Apostle Paul when he states "I know nothing but Christ Crucified."

    Such is ultimately more humbling but also void of all the theological baggage which so often causes us to stumble.
     
  8. Logos1560

    Logos1560
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Messages:
    3,127
    Likes Received:
    2
    Deacon, jd; in this thread "influence of Vulgate and Rheims on KJV" you can find some of the documented evidence that confirms that the KJV was influenced by Jerome's Latin Vulgate thru means of the 1582 Rheims.
     
  9. AntennaFarmer

    AntennaFarmer
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2005
    Messages:
    606
    Likes Received:
    0

    That is all?

    The Vulgate isn't so different from the Greek. Why would we expect to find no correlation between the Greek and Latin derived translations? We should have expected to find hundreds of the same renderings even if the KJV translators had never heard of the Vulgate or the Rheims.


    I would hope so. There are many Latin derived words in the English language. The quoted list seems rather short. It would have been virtually impossible to avoid using Latin derived words in the KJV.

    The words in Norton's list are commonly used today.
    A.F.
     
  10. MNJacob

    MNJacob
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2003
    Messages:
    288
    Likes Received:
    2
    If you look at the recieved text, which is based on Erasmus' Greek New Testament, there were a few places where Erasmus translated into Greek from the Vulgate. And the story regarding the inclusion of the Trinitarian reference in I John 5:7 is just too rich not to be acknowledged.
     
  11. Logos1560

    Logos1560
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Messages:
    3,127
    Likes Received:
    2
    Here are more examples of the influence of the 1582 Rheims on the KJV:

    Matt. 1:18 betrothed (Tyndale’s, Matthew’s, Whittingham’s, Geneva, Bishops’)
    married (Coverdale’s, Great) spoused (Rheims) espoused (KJV)
    Matt. 2:6 govern (Tyndale’s, Coverdale’s, Matthew’s, Great, Whittingham’s, Bishops’)
    feed (Geneva) rule (Rheims, KJV)
    Matt. 3:7 vengeance (Tyndale’s, Coverdale’s, Matthew’s, Great, Whittingham‘s)
    anger (Geneva, Bishops’) wrath (Rheims, KJV)
    Matt. 4:24 gripings (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) torments (Rheims, KJV)
    Matt. 8:6 pained (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) tormented (Rheims, KJV)
    Matt. 8:20 to rest his head (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) to lay his head (Rheims, KJV)
    Matt. 11:22 be easier (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) be more tolerable (Rheims, KJV)
    Matt. 11:23 lift up (Tyndale’s, Coverdale’s, Matthew’s, Great)
    lifted up (Whittingham’s, Geneva, Bishops’) exalted (Rheims, KJV)
    Matt. 11:24 be easier (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) be more tolerable (Rheims, KJV)
    Matt. 15:19 whoredoms (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) fornications (Rheims, KJV)
    Matt. 16:9 perceive (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) understand (Rheims, KJV)
    Matt. 17:18 healed (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) cured (Rheims, KJV)
    Matt. 19:12 chaste (Tyndale’s, Matthew’s, Great, Whittingham’s, Geneva, Bishops’)
    gelded (Coverdale’s) eunuchs (Rheims, KJV)
    Mark 4:12 turn (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) converted (Rheims, KJV)
    Mark 6:31 wilderness (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) desert place (Rheims, KJV)
    Mark 10:41 disdain (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) displeased (Rheims, KJV)
    Mark 12:44 superfluity (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) abundance (Rheims, KJV)
    Mark 13:22 deceive (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) seduce (Rheims, KJV)
    Mark 14:20 platter (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) dish (Rheims, KJV)
    Luke 1:80 wilderness (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) deserts (Rheims, KJV)
    Luke 6:49 fall of that house (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) ruin of that house (Rheims, KJV)
    Luke 9:1 heal (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) cure (Rheims, KJV)
    Luke 10:14 be easier (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) be more tolerable (Rheims, KJV)
    Luke 12:26 remnant (Tyndale’s, Matthew’s, Great, Whittingham’s, Geneva, Bishops’)
    other (Coverdale’s) rest (Rheims, KJV)
    Luke 12:27 royalty (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) glory (Rheims, KJV)
    Luke 12:27 clothed (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) arrayed (Rheims, KJV)
    Luke 12:29 ask (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) seek (Rheims, KJV)
    Luke 14:28 perform (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) finish (Rheims, KJV)
    Luke 15:14 dearth (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) famine (Rheims, KJV)
    Luke 19:4 wild fig (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) sycomore (Rheims, KJV)
    Luke 19:21 strait (Tyndale’s, Matthew’s, Great, Whittingham’s, Geneva, Bishops’)
    hard (Coverdale’s) austere (Rheims, KJV)
    Luke 19:22 strait (Tyndale’s, Matthew’s, Great, Whittingham’s, Geneva, Bishops’)
    hard (Coverdale’s) austere (Rheims, KJV)
    Luke 19:23 vantage (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) usury (Rheims, KJV)
    Luke 21:4 superfluity (Tyndale’s, Matthew’s, Great, Whittingham’s, Geneva, Bishops’)
    excess (Coverdale’s) abundance (Rheims, KJV)
    Luke 21:5 garnished (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) adorned (Rheims, KJV)
    Luke 21:20 besieged (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) compassed (Rheims, KJV)
    Luke 21:20 host (Tyndale’s, Coverdale’s, Matthew’s, Great, Bishops’)
    soldiers (Whittingham’s, Geneva) army (Rheims) armies (KJV)
    Luke 21:34 overcome (Tyndale’s, Matthew’s, Great, Whittingham’s, Bishops’)
    overlade (Coverdale’s) oppressed (Geneva) overcharged (Rheims, KJV)



    31

    Luke 22:30 seats (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) thrones (Rheims, KJV)
    Luke 23:19 insurrection (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) sedition (Rheims, KJV)
    Luke 23:32 evil doers (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) malefactors (Rheims, KJV)
    Luke 23:39 evil doers (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) malefactors (Rheims, KJV)
    Luke 24:8 remnant (Tyndale’s, Matthew’s, Great, Whittingham’s, Geneva, Bishops’)
    other (Coverdale’s) rest (Rheims, KJV)
    John 1:31 declared (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) manifested (Rheims) made manifest (KJV)
    John 2:11 shewed (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) manifested (Rheims, KJV)
    John 6:12 broken meat (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) fragments (Rheims, KJV)
    John 9:28 rated (Tyndale’s, Coverdale’s, Matthew’s, Great, Bishops’)
    checked (Whittingham’s, Geneva) reviled (Rheims, KJV)
    John 11:47 high priests (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) chief priests (Rheims, KJV)
    John 12:6 that which was given (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) that were put in (Rheims)
    what was put therein (KJV)
    John 14:22 shew thyself (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) manifest thyself (Rheims, KJV)
    John 17:6 declared (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) manifested (Rheims, KJV)
    John 18:30 evil doer (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) malefactor (Rheims, KJV)
    John 18:35 high priests (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) chief priests (Rheims, KJV)
    John 19:6 high priests (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) chief priests (Rheims, KJV)
    John 19:24 coat (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) vesture (Rheims, KJV)
    Acts 1:26 counted (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) numbered (Rheims, KJV)
    Acts 2:7 wondered all (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) were all amazed (Rheims, KJV)
    Acts 5:2 being of counsel (Tyndale’s, Matthew’s, Great, Whittingham’s, Geneva, Bishops’)
    knowing of it (Coverdale’s) being privy (Rheims, KJV)
    Acts 6:2 meet (Tyndale’s to Geneva) good (Bishops’) reason (Rheims, KJV)
    Acts 8:21 fellowship (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) lot (Rheims, KJV)
    Acts 10:1 captain (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) centurion (Rheims, KJV)
    Acts 10:22 captain (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) centurion (Rheims, KJV)
    Acts 13:26 generation (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) stock (Rheims, KJV)
    Acts 14:23 by election (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) [these 2 words omitted by Rheims, KJV]
    Acts 17:16 given to worshipping of images (Tyndale’s, Coverdale’s, Matthew’s, Great)
    subject to worship idols (Whittingham’s) subject to idolatry (Geneva)
    given to worshipping of idols (Bishops’) given to idolatry (Rheims, KJV)
    Acts 17:19 Mars street (Tyndale’s, Matthew’s, Great, Whittingham’s, Geneva)
    street of Mars (Bishops’) Areopagus (Rheims, KJV)
    Acts 19:29 common hall (Tyndale’s, Matthew’s, Great, Bishops’) open place (Coverdale’s)
    common place (Geneva) theatre (Rheims, KJV)
    Acts 19:35 ceased (Tyndale’s, Matthew’s, Great) stilled (Coverdale’s) pacified (Bishops’)
    stayed (Whittingham’s, Geneva) appeased (Rheims, KJV)
    Acts 19:40 jeopardy (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) danger (Rheims, KJV)
    Acts 23:27 soldiers (Tyndale’s, Coverdale’s, Matthew’s, Great, Whittingham’s)
    garrison (Geneva) army (Bishops’, Rheims, KJV)
    Acts 24:4 courtesy (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) clemency (Rheims, KJV)
    Acts 25:23 chief men (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) principal men (Rheims, KJV)
    Acts 27:39 haven (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) creek (Rheims, KJV)
    Acts 28:15 waxed bold (Tyndale’s to Bishops’) took courage (Rheims, KJV)
     
  12. Keith M

    Keith M
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2002
    Messages:
    2,024
    Likes Received:
    0
    You have shown a good quantity of evidence to show the 1611 KJV was influenced by the Vulgate and the Rheims, Logos1560. But then isn't the CofE primarily Catholic in their beliefs? Wasn't the CofE created primarily so that the English monarchy could control the church without having to answer to the Pope?
     
  13. HankD

    HankD
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Messages:
    15,118
    Likes Received:
    319
    In 1611, yes. Hence the inclusion of the Apocrypha. They slowly shed the RCC graveclothes but even to this day, especially among the "high" churchmen, they have a strong affection for Rome and her dogma.

    HankD
     
  14. Logos1560

    Logos1560
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Messages:
    3,127
    Likes Received:
    2
    Were the early English translators influenced by the Latin Vulgate at Esther 1:6? Moldenke pointed out: "The Hebrew word for 'cotton' is karpas. This word appears in the original of the passage cited above [Esther 1:5-6], but was mistranslated as 'green' in the King James, Leeser, and Douay versions" (Plants of the Bible, p. 109). Moldenke added: "The Vulgate rendered the 'carpas' of the Esther reference as 'carbasini coloris,' implying that a color, not a material was intended. This is doubtless the basis of the Authorized and Douay versions' translation of 'green'" (p. 110).
     
  15. franklinmonroe

    franklinmonroe
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2006
    Messages:
    2,872
    Likes Received:
    3
    In my experience this line of reasoning is impertinent to predisposed KJVO advocates (since underlining documentation seems to be irrelevant with them), as they basically assert that a wholly new revelation from God in English supernaturally materialized at some point just prior to 1611AD.
     
  16. Logos1560

    Logos1560
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Messages:
    3,127
    Likes Received:
    2
    James D. Price observed that KJV defender Edward F. "Hills presumed that God guided Erasmus, and the editors and printers, to correct the errors in the Greek Traditional Text by means of the Roman Catholic Latin Vulgate" (King James Onlyism, p. 269).

    Do other KJV-only advocates consider the Latin Vulgate of Jerome to be a valid standard for making changes in the Greek Traditional Text?
     

Share This Page

Loading...