The Bishops’ Bible (of which the KJV is a revision)

Discussion in '2005 Archive' started by Craigbythesea, Mar 7, 2005.

  1. Craigbythesea

    Craigbythesea
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    5,500
    Likes Received:
    20
    The Bishops’ Bible (of which the KJV is a revision) is now available as a free download at E-Sword.net. An additional edition of the Geneva Bible, the 1587 edition, is now also available as a free download at e-sword.net.

    Joh 1:1 In the begynnyng was the worde, & the worde was with God: and that worde was God.
    Joh 1:2 The same was in the begynnyng with God.
    Joh 1:3 All thynges were made by it: and without it, was made nothyng that was made.
    Joh 1:4 In it was lyfe, and the lyfe was the lyght of men,
    Joh 1:5 And the lyght shyneth in darkenesse: and the darknesse comprehended it not.
    Joh 1:6 There was a man sent from God, whose name was Iohn:
    Joh 1:7 The same came for a witnesse, to beare witnesse of the lyght, that all men through hym myght beleue.
    Joh 1:8 He was not that lyght: but was sent to beare witnesse of the lyght.
    Joh 1:9 That [lyght] was the true lyght, which lyghteth euery man that commeth into the worlde.
    Joh 1:10 He was in the worlde, and the worlde was made by hym, and the worlde knewe hym not.
    Joh 1:11 He came among his owne, and his owne receaued hym not.
    Joh 1:12 But as many as receaued hym, to them gaue he power to be the sonnes of God, euen them that beleued on his name.
    Joh 1:13 Which were borne, not of blood, nor of the wyll of the fleshe, nor yet of the wyll of man, but of God.
    Joh 1:14 And the same word became fleshe, and dwelt among vs ( and we sawe the glory of it, as the glory of the only begotten sonne of the father) full of grace and trueth.
    Joh 1:15 Iohn beareth witnesse of hym, and cryeth, saying: This was he of whom I spake, he that commeth after me, is preferred before me, for he was before me.
    Joh 1:16 And of his fulnesse haue all we receaued, and grace for grace.
    (The Bishops’ Bible)

    [​IMG]
     
  2. rsr

    rsr
    Expand Collapse
    <b> 7,000 posts club</b>
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2001
    Messages:
    10,075
    Likes Received:
    102
    Cool.
     
  3. Spoudazo

    Spoudazo
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2005
    Messages:
    500
    Likes Received:
    0
    {Gail Riplinger voice}
    See, the Bishop's Bible is trying to take away from the person of Christ by using "it" for the Word! [​IMG]
    j/k
    [​IMG]
     
  4. av1611jim

    av1611jim
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2002
    Messages:
    3,511
    Likes Received:
    0
    If "it" is correct then the "it" being referred to is the Bible. Only the Bible as the word of God can be referred to as an "it". OTOH, if "it" is Jesus then it is proper to translate as "HIM" or "HE". :D

    In HIS service;
    Jim
     
  5. Glory2God

    Glory2God
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2004
    Messages:
    132
    Likes Received:
    0
    [​IMG] Thanks for the info Craig, I love FREE stuff!! [​IMG]
     
  6. Logos1560

    Logos1560
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Messages:
    3,127
    Likes Received:
    2
    Gail Riplinger wrote: "The previous Bishops' Bible (c1568-1611) was no less perfect, pure, and true than the KJV" (IN AWE OF THY WORD, p. 17).

    Riplinger claimed that "the Bishops' Bible is the textual twin of the KJV" (IN AWE, p. 164).
     
  7. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    29,402
    Likes Received:
    12
    We do we need another translation if we have the "twin" already.

    What is different is not the same.
     
  8. Logos1560

    Logos1560
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Messages:
    3,127
    Likes Received:
    2
    Is it proper to refer to the Holy Spirit as
    "it" instead of "Him" or "He?"
     
  9. icthus

    icthus
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2005
    Messages:
    1,114
    Likes Received:
    0
    Is it proper to refer to the Holy Spirit as
    "it" instead of "Him" or "He?"
    </font>[/QUOTE]The Holy Spirit is the "Third" Person in the Holy Trinity, and, like the Father and the Son, is also a "Person".

    In Greek, pneuma hagion" (Holy Spirit) is in the "neuter gender", which would naturally have the pronoun also in the neuter, like "ho" (which), or "auto" (itself). It is true that the "neuter" is used for the Holy Spirit, like in Romans 8:26, where the litearl translation is, "but the Spirit itself..." This is beacuse of the grammar, and not because the Holy Spirit is not a Personal Bening.

    In John's Gospel, we have Jesus refer to the Holy Spirit as "He", where He uses the masculine pronoun, "ekeinos" (see, 16:13, etc). Because the sentence contains, "to pneuma" (the Spirit), we would have expected Jesus to have used "ekeino", which is the neuter. But the masculine is clearly used here. Likewise, in Ephesians 1:14, according to the best textual evidence, the Holy Spirit is referred to as "hos" (masculine), as in " Who is the earnest of our inheritance..." It it noteworthy, that this reading has been corrupted to "ho" (neuter).

    It has been argued wrongly, that the Holy Spirit is not a "Personal Being", but, rather an "impersonal force", from God, and that the language used in the "masculine" for "it", is only done so to "Personify" the Holy Spirit. This of course is demonic teaching. The Bible clearly ascribes Personal attributes to the Holy Spirit. "He will guide...He will speak" (John 16:13); "He will teach you all things" (John 14:26); "grieve no the Holy Spirit" (Ephesians 4:30); "the mind of the Spirit" (Romans 8:27). None of this could be said of "a thing", but only of a "Personal Being". Further, we read in Acts 5:3-4, that we are told that the Holy Spirt is also "God" (toi theoi)
     
  10. Keith M

    Keith M
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2002
    Messages:
    2,024
    Likes Received:
    0
    "All thynges were made by it: and without it, was made nothyng that was made." (John 1:3 Bishops' Bible)

    So now the Bible created the world? :eek:

    I don't think so. Try again.
     
  11. av1611jim

    av1611jim
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2002
    Messages:
    3,511
    Likes Received:
    0
    Keith;
    Did you even read (with comprehension) what I said?
    Your knee jerk reaction is untenable in light of the words I used.
    There are TWO sentences in the comments of mine which you quoted. Try reading both of them.

    In HIS service;
    Jim
     
  12. Keith M

    Keith M
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2002
    Messages:
    2,024
    Likes Received:
    0
    Are you now a Bible corrector, Jim? In light of what Gail Riplinger said about the Bishops' Bible (thanks Logos1560), you apparently want to correct a "perfect" Bible. So now is the Bishops' Bible no longer a "good" pre-KJV Bible? How is it that the Bishops' Bible can be different than the KJV and yet both are still "perfect, pure and true?" Has another KJVO claim been disproven?
     
  13. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    Verified.
     
  14. av1611jim

    av1611jim
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2002
    Messages:
    3,511
    Likes Received:
    0
    Keith;
    Care to show all of us where I even hinted at what you have falsely accused me of?
    If not, the quit yer lying.

    In HIS service;
    Jim
     
  15. TC

    TC
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2003
    Messages:
    2,225
    Likes Received:
    10
    I downloaded the Bishop's Bible but haven't read much of it yet. Are there any major differences between it and the KJV?
     
  16. Keith M

    Keith M
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2002
    Messages:
    2,024
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gladly, Jim!

    To refresh your memory, you said: "If "it" is correct then the "it" being referred to is the Bible. Only the Bible as the word of God can be referred to as an "it". OTOH, if "it" is Jesus then it is proper to translate as "HIM" or "HE"."

    Now that you made the statement, are you denying it is your statement? When you say "it is proper to translate as "HIM" or "HE"." you are saying that the translation used in the Bishops' Bible is not proper. So don't accuse me of lying, when it is you who are telling the lies. Why don't you just come out and say that you didn't make the statement when we can all plainly read that you did make the statement? Trying to weasel your way out of the corner you painted yourself into, Jim?
     
  17. Logos1560

    Logos1560
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Messages:
    3,127
    Likes Received:
    2
    Concerning the Bishops' Bible, Charles Butterworth observed: "Among its peculiaries is the frequent use of 'God' where other versions have 'the Lord'" (LITERARY LINEAGE, p. 180).

    I checked out this claim about the Bishops' Bible. The Bishops' Bible does have "God" at some verses [examples Ps. 18:1, 23:1, 25:1, 30:1, 35:1, 71:1, 74:18, etc.] where the KJV has "LORD."

    Thus, the Bishops' Bible was the very likely if not certain source of the 1611 edition's rendering "God" at Genesis 6:5, 2 Samuel 12:22, 2 Chronicles 8:16, 2 Chronicles 28:11, and Isaiah 49:13. Later editors of the KJV changed the first two of these to "GOD" and corrected the last three of these to "LORD."

    Since the KJV translators themselves kept these renderings from the Bishops' Bible in their 1611 edition, can they accurately be considered printing errors?
     

Share This Page

Loading...