Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

King James Bible anniversary marked by Queen
The Christian Science Monitor ^ | November 17, 2011 | By Associated Press

Posted on 11/17/2011 7:03:02 AM PST by US Navy Vet

Queen Elizabeth II attended a ceremony at London's Westminster Abbey Wednesday to mark the 400th anniversary of the King James Bible, often considered the most influential book ever printed in the English language.

It came about when King James I summoned a conference at Hampton Court Palace near London in 1604, hoping to thrash out differences between Church of England bishops and Puritans. Failing to make progress on other issues, Puritan leader John Reynolds proposed a new translation which emerged in 1611

(Excerpt) Read more at csmonitor.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Philosophy; United Kingdom
KEYWORDS: 1604; 1611; 1611av; anniversary; av1611; bible; genevabible; kingjamesversion; kjv; kjvbible; royals; uk
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-29 last
To: GrandJediMasterYoda

I hope you are being sarcastic.


21 posted on 11/17/2011 11:50:36 AM PST by the scotsman (I)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Ruy Dias de Bivar

I believe the KJV is currently in the public domain. Therefore, it’s the cheapest English language translation of the Bible to print.


22 posted on 11/17/2011 12:58:18 PM PST by ReformationFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Vanders9

That is SO not true! I was touring England last year and to me it seemed like it was 80% Muslim. Every place I went I was stopped by Muslims asking if I were a Jew and when my wife talked they told me to shut up my dog and to keep her “properly covered” as it is the law. When is the last time YOU were in England? Or should I say “Musland”?


23 posted on 11/17/2011 1:25:09 PM PST by GrandJediMasterYoda (Nancy Pelosi - The #1 reason why we need a Constitutional amendment for Congressional drug testing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: GrandJediMasterYoda

Where did you go, out of interest?


24 posted on 11/17/2011 1:52:39 PM PST by Mitch86
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: GrandJediMasterYoda

I’m in England two or three times a year, most recently at the time of the Royal Wedding. The fact is, the vast majority of England is a mostly white, at least nominally Christian nation.

There are some areas of London (Tower Hamlets, Hackney, and Bradford, for example) and a few other cities (Birmingham or Blackburn, again, as two examples) where there are a lot of Muslims but those places are not typical. Judging England as being an Islamic nation based on them would make about as much sense as deciding America was a Jewish nation by observing what you saw if wandering around parts of Brooklyn or Manhattan in New York.

Tourists often stick to London and a few other cities, especially on tours, when they just drive through England between cities as fast as they can. They don’t get to see most of England. Unfortunately.


25 posted on 11/17/2011 10:38:30 PM PST by naturalman1975 ("America was under attack. Australia was immediately there to help." - John Winston Howard)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: GrandJediMasterYoda
I AM English, England has been my home all my life, so I think I know it very well.

The muslim population tends to be concentrated in certain areas. Often the more touristy bits too. If you go to those places, then obviously you will see them. If I did a touring holiday of Pennsylvania I might very well conclude that 80% of Americans were Amish. If I visited salt lake city I might conclude 80% were mormon. If I visited Atlanta Georgia (which I have) I might think 80% were black.

Rest assured, the vast majority of the population of England is very much white anglo-saxon.

26 posted on 11/18/2011 5:04:00 AM PST by Vanders9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: US Navy Vet

Reads like it was written by Shakespeare—a work of pure stand alone literary art regardless of the subject.

Old English was the language of conversion when true believers broke the Catholic yoke—it still conveys best the original feelings of our Christian ancestors.


27 posted on 11/18/2011 5:14:39 AM PST by Happy Rain ( "Many of the most useful idiots of the Left are on the Right.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: elpadre
If (Joseph Smith) re-wrote the KJV, then the resultant is no longer the KJV it is the Morman Bible.

Oddly enough, even tho the KJV I got from the Mormons was recently published, it was NOT altered. I went to a comparative website that mentioned a big list of scripture changes that Joseph Smith, Jr. made, and NONE of them are in the version I got from them. So, they evidently didn't change my version, but I understand that they do have their own version available.

28 posted on 11/18/2011 11:15:20 AM PST by laweeks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Happy Rain

A lot of the language and terms they used in the KJV Bible were already archaic when it was written. They (the translators) wanted to make it sound like it was full of ancient wisdom.

Personally, though, I can see the flaws in translating something from latin and/or greek that had already been translated from the original hebrew/aramaic...


29 posted on 11/18/2011 1:11:20 PM PST by sinsofsolarempirefan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-29 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson