Not to mention they lived and worked in the era of William Shakespeare. :)
The KJV Translators Superior Language Skills
Discussion in 'Bible Versions & Translations' started by Jordan Kurecki, Aug 12, 2018.
Page 4 of 5
-
-
There's that. But it's not clear to me that the translators owed much to the language of Shakespeare. The Bard's English was a boisterous cacophony of experimentation and double and triple entendres. The translators were more Tyndale and Rogers than Shakespeare, IMO. And if you read Helwys' A Short Declaration of the Mystery of Iniquity you will see the same plain, muscular English of Tyndale and Francis Bacon.
-
Do you claim that it is a glaring problem that several of the pre-1611 English Bibles of which the KJV is a revision did not have verses which are found in the 1611 KJV?
Perhaps it is a glaring problem that you subjectively assume that one English translation is the standard for trying other English Bibles -
The common people of the English-speaking world accepted the 1560 Geneva Bible as the word of God in English for over 50 years [several KJV-only authors acknowledge that it was accepted for around 100 years]. The makers of the KJV even acknowledged that the pre-1611 English Bibles such as the Geneva Bible were the word of God. It was the Geneva Bible that is usually quoted as the word of God in English in the preface to the 1611 KJV. Several of the KJV translators continued to preach from the Geneva Bible for years after 1611.
The makers of the KJV made many changes, including some significant ones and doctrinal ones, to the 1560 Geneva Bible, this previous accepted standard for the word of God in English. Renderings in the 1560 Geneva Bible that were understood to teach Presbyterian church government or congregational church government were changed in the 1611 KJV to be more favorable to the Church of England's episcopal church government views.
Would a consistent application of your stated reasoning suggest that the Church of England makers of the KJV were wrong to make significant changes to the pre-1611 word of God in English? -
The so-called Cranmer Bible was best known as The Great Bible. There were not two separate translations.The Great Bible was first published in 1539 and prepared by Myles Coverdale.
The Geneva Bible was first published in 1560 --21 years after the Great Bible. The last edition of the Geneva Bible was made in 1644. -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Quite-likely, most of those man had never seen a real lion either, but had no reason to doubt their existence.
I'm not faulting the AV men for believing in the nexistence of horse-like unicorns, satyrs, or cockatrices, as the had no intel otherwise, but I'm just reminding us that their knowledge was quite sparse compared to ours. The wisest of them would've been astounded by an everyday flashlight. -
-
-
Oh, the irony!:
-
-
-
At least one edition of the Great Bible was printed with a preface by Archbishop Cranmer, and that edition is sometimes called the Cranmer Bible. -
Of all peoples of the earth, English speakers have been overly and richly blest with an abundance of English Bibles.
Of any given passage of Scripture I can align over 20 English renderings on my screen (even more if I so chose).
To whom much is given... ?
Ya, ya ya I'm a white supremacist, white privileged, white Anglo Israeli, white whatever blah, blah ad naseum ...
mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa... oh wait thats Latin!
Page 4 of 5