Comparing the KJV and the Geneva

All this talk about the Latin Vulgate ignores the fact that the Septuaguint has been in use for a couple of milennia and is still preferred in some circles:

"But if the texts coincide so on all the important points, why do the Greek and Aramaic translations hold greater authority for Orthodox Christians than the Hebrew original? Because the Greek and Aramaic translations have been preserved free of corruption in the Church of Christ by the grace of God and the struggles of grace-bearing men whereas the Hebrew text in the Jewish community was saved by technical means.

When the verses of the Bible were copied by Christian scribes, the scribe himself, being a child of the Church, a participant in the Church's divine life, knowing the Truth, did not make grave errors in the transcribed text; those who listened to that text, to whom he presented his transcribed book, would not have overlooked any distortion of the meaning of the holy words to which the Church is so attentive. In the Hebrew community, the text was transcribed by Jews who did not know the fullness of the Truth. Many of the verses of the Bible which speak of the coming of Christ or of the other mysteries of the Christian Faith were not understood by them. They themselves, working with mistakes of transcription, were not able to arrive at a correct understanding of the text, nor were the Jews who listened to them able to correct them. Having lost its grace, the Jewish community did not have a built-in, living corrective for correcting its entrusted text — as had the Church of Christ. Therefore, in the work of preserving the holy texts, the Jews relied only upon natural human means which are prone to error."

— Bishop Nathanael of Vienna and Austria

 

You're probably right. Can't say I've heard of one.

Ancient/historic versions began with the Greek/Hebrew, Latin, Syriac, etc.

A number of modern versions have been translated since the English language evolved.
Tyndale
Geneva
AV
RSV
ASV
NIV
NKJV
NASB
and hundreds more

There may be churches that use or prefer or even recommend one of them.

Only the KJV only sect smear and discredit the other modern versions and claim only theirs is the perfect and "only" Word of God.

Never met a Geneva-only or NASB-only.

 

Hank said:

"Where have we heard this before!?"


Thought you would enjoy that, Hank.

The Geneva is still in print and available online, which means someone has an interest in it.

 

Bishop Nathaniel was a Russian Orthodox priest.

http://gnisios.narod.ru/nathanaelbible.html

The Septuaguint is still the preferred OT for the Greek Church, which, BTW, is the repository of the the Byzantine NT. Go figure.

 

The examples chosen are obviously in favor of the Geneva reading. So I would opt for them.

But am sure there are others where the AV's choice of words would be better than the Geneva.

And many of the AV will "sound" better to us, since we were raised on the AV sound.

 

"me'od" is a "superlative" (in English we would add "most" or simply an "est" ending) so we would say "purest" if we were using the "purest" translation technique . .