Real disagreements between the KJV and the KJV

Discussion in 'Bible Versions/Translations' started by Logos1560, May 21, 2013.

  1. Logos1560

    Logos1560
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Messages:
    3,127
    Likes Received:
    2
    There have been real disagreements between one edition of the KJV and another edition of the KJV.

    In a verse in the book of Leviticus, one KJV edition printed in 1769 has "leavened bread" while another KJV edition printed in 1769 has "unleavened bread."

    At a verse in the New Testament, one KJV edition printed in 1769 has "ascend" while another KJV edition printed in 1769 has "descend."

    Such real disagreements and differences can been settled by comparison to the greater authority of the preserved Scriptures in the original languages.

    If all editions of the KJV were supposedly self-authenicating," there would be no way for such disagreements or conflicts between KJV editions to be resolved.

    The 1602 edition of the Bishops' Bible was used as the starting English text for the making of the KJV. The first rule for the making of the KJV stated: “The ordinary Bible read in the church, commonly called the Bishops’ Bible, to be followed, and as little altered as the original will permit.”

    Are some real errors in the English text of the 1602 Bishops' Bible found in the 1611 edition of the KJV?

    Did the KJV translators keep or borrow some renderings from the 1602 Bishops' Bible instead of using the original language words of preserved Scriptures to determine the proper or correct English renderings?

    David Norton observed: “The KJB of 1611 reproduces peculiarities of the Bishops’ Bible, some of which are found only in the 1602 printings” (Textual History of the KJB, p. 35). David Norton also asserted: “That the KJB was printed from an annotated Bishops’ Bible--possibly from Bod1602--is almost certain from the presence of the peculiarities and errors that come directly from the printed 1602 text” (KJB: a Short History, p. 106).

    David Norton claimed: "Small mistakes can go unnoticed for nearly a couple of centuries in spite of the best efforts of translators and editors" (p. 130).

    How is it possible that those real errors in the 1602 Bishops' Bible were not noticed by the KJV translators and evidently were not corrected since they are also found in the 1611 edition of the KJV?

    Examples of those uncorrected errors from the Bishops' Bible that are found in the 1611 edition of the KJV are given below. These examples also are cases of real disagreements between KJV editions. Are the real errors found in the 1611 edition of the KJV supposedly self-authenticating?

    1 Kings 11:5 [Ammonites--1560 Geneva, 1568 Bishops; Amorites--1602 Bishops]
    Amorites {1611, 1613, 1614, 1616, 1617, 1634, 1640, 1644 London}
    Ammonites (1769 Oxford, SRB) [1629, 1769 Cambridge, DKJB]

    The Hebrew word at 1 Kings 11:5 is the Hebrew word translated "Ammorities" in the KJV in all other places, and it is not the same Hebrew word that is translated "Amorites" in the KJV in other verses.

    2 Kings 11:10 [house of the Lord--1560 Geneva; the temple--1602 Bishops]
    the Temple {1611, 1613, 1614, 1616, 1617 London} (1843 AFBS)
    the temple (1675 Oxford) [1629, 1637, 1677, 1817, 2005, 2011 Cambridge] {1640, 1644, 1650, 1672 London} (1638 Edinburgh) (1816 Albany) (1818 Holbrook) (1827 Smith) (1828 MH) (1832 PSE) (1854 Harding) (2006 PENG)
    the temple of the Lord {1795 London} (1897 Mackail)
    the temple of the LORD (1769 Oxford, SRB) [1638, 1769 Cambridge, DKJB]
    At 2 Kings 11:10, the preserved Scriptures in the original languages have the Hebrew word that is translated "Jehovah" or "LORD" at other places in the KJV. That name is omitted in the 1602 Bishops' Bible and the 1611 edition of the KJV.

    2 Kings 24:19 [Jehoiakim--1560 Geneva; Joachin--1602 Bishops]
    Jehoiachin [1817 Cambridge] {1611, 1613, 1614, 1616, 1634, 1640, 1644, 1650 London} (1816 Albany) (1818 Holbrook) (1827 Smith) (1832 PSE) (1843 AFBS) (1854 Harding)
    Jehoiakim (1769 Oxford, SRB) [1629, 1769 Cambridge, DKJB]

    The Hebrew name at 2 Kings 24:19 translated "Jehoiachin" in the 1602 Bishops' and the 1611 KJV is not the Hebrew name translated "Jehoiachin" in other verses in the KJV. The Hebrew name at 2 Kings 24:19 is the same Hebrew name translated "Jehoiakim" at other verses in the KJV.

    1 Kings 4:10 [Hesed--1560 Geneva, 1568 Bishops; Heseb--1602 Bishops]
    Heseb {1611, 1613, 1614, 1616, 1617, 1634, 1640, 1644, 1650 London}
    Hesod [1773 Cambridge]
    Hesed (1769 Oxford, SRB) [1629, 1769 Cambridge, DKJB]

    1 Kings 8:61 [Lord our God--1560 Geneva, 1568 Bishops; Lord your God--1602 Bishops] [see 1 Kings 8:59]
    LORD your God {1611, 1613, 1614, 1616, 1617, 1634, 1640, 1644, 1650 London} (1843 AFBS)
    LORD our God (1769 Oxford, SRB) [1629, 1769 Cambridge, DKJB]

    Genesis 47:6 [men--1560 Geneva; man--1602 Bishops]
    any man (1675, 1679, 1709, 1715, 1720, 1728, 1747, 1754, 1765 Oxford) [1629, 1637, 1638, 1677, 1683 Cambridge] {1611, 1613, 1614, 1616, 1617, 1634, 1640, 1644, 1650, 1660, 1672, 1684, 1705, 1711, 1735, 1741, 1747, 1750, 1772 London} (1755 Oxon) (1638, 1722, 1756, 1760, 1764, 1766 Edinburgh) (1762 Dublin) (1700 MP) (1782 Aitken) (1843 AFBS)
    any man [1873 Cambridge] (2000, 2002 ZOND) (TPB) (HPB) (2008, 2010, 2011 HEND) (NHPB)
    any men (1768, 1968 Oxford) [1762, 1763B, 2005, 2011 Cambridge] {1759, 1760, 1763, 1764, 1767, 1795 London} (1769 Edinburgh) (1810, 1835 Scott) (EB) (2006 PENG) (2011 PJB) (NCE)
    any men (1769 Oxford, SRB) [1743, 1747, 1768, 1769 Cambridge, DKJB]
     
  2. Yeshua1

    Yeshua1
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    17,132
    Likes Received:
    52
    How much of their translation work was unique to their hroup? Didn't they just takes as "gospel" a high percentage of the renderings in prior versions?

    So the HS must have missed His proof texting editing?
     
  3. Eliyahu

    Eliyahu
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2005
    Messages:
    4,762
    Likes Received:
    0

    Thanks for this useful Info by endeavor as you provided many times before!
     
    #3 Eliyahu, May 29, 2013
    Last edited: May 29, 2013
  4. Rippon

    Rippon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    17,410
    Likes Received:
    328
    Why is it that you guys feel the need (or is it laziness) to post the entirety of a given post? Even if a post is good,it is a big waste of bandwidth.
     

Share This Page

Loading...