Skip to comments.The king of the bibles
Posted on 11/18/2011 9:49:29 PM PST by hiho hiho
For centuries, people of all walks of life have carried around with them echoes of the King James Version. So to throw it out as the church hierarchy has done amounts to a savage act of deprivation and, as this deprivation is of the Word of God in English, it is vicious iconoclasm. Sidelining the King James Version especially deprives our children and is therefore a notable case of child abuse.
There is no such thing as noble truth expressed in ignoble words. The choice of words determines what is being said. Therefore, we should choose the best.
Strips of cloth is no substitute for swaddling clothes. And Mary was with child we think of the Madonna and Child and she had not fallen pregnant as it says in one of the modern versions. You cannot satisfactorily replace through a glass darkly with the crass literalism puzzling reflections in a mirror or sounding brass and tinkling cymbal with noisy gong and clanging cymbal. The King James Bible was designed to be read aloud in churches. All the modern versions sound as if they have been written by tone-deaf people with tin ears and no rhythm.
(Excerpt) Read more at telegraph.co.uk ...
"How hypocritical and sordid of the church authorities relentlessly to suppress the KJV, only to take it out and gawp at it in an anniversary year, as if it were a museum piece and we were all blundering tourists. The proper place for the KJV is on the lectern in every parish church to be read, marked, learnt and inwardly digested, week in, week out."
Thank you for posting!
The KJV is what many people were raised on, then they switched to modern versions. When many people pray, they revert to the 16th century English language as it is considered a religious language.
I pointed out in another thread that in the movie THE BIBLE, filmed in ROME, they speak KJV English, and in LAWRENCE OF ARABIA an imman quotes koranic verses in 16th century English.
And you have Strong’s and Young’s Hebrew and Greek concordances to clear up any KJV language issues.
The King James Bible is one of the greatest accomplishments of the British empire.
The Kings English - 100 phrases in 3 Minutes
The King James Bible - The History of English
Save for later.
This is an interesting website that supports the KJV Bible:
I Was saved by the words of John as interpreted by the NIV... But as I have grown in faith, it is the KJV which shows me more meat than milk.
I presume the author is aware the bible was originally in Hebrew, Greek, with a little in Aramaic....but the tone of his article implies he thought it written in the Kings English (or Latin at least).
Yes, it’s seen as more formal, which is by nature more respectful. In other languages, you sometimes have formalized speech as an integral part of the language, while in English we don’t really have that, so I think that is why many prefer to revert to the antiquated speech as a substitute.
By the way I learned the other day how the verses and chapters in the King James version got numbered. They are numbered the same way in the KJV and the JPS translations, so you don't even notice as you go from one to the other. It was the Christians who long ago went through the King James translation and numbered the verses and divided it into chapters and the Jews numbered their copies the same way so they could refer to the verses by number in their discussions. There sre no punctuation marks in Hebrew so they had to add them to the english.
I think we will keep using the King James translation for a long time and these ridiculous new translations will die out.
The Catholics have other translation like the Vulgate in Latin but I'm not familiar with them.
What is the NIV? I favor the NIV
Peter Mullen: THANK YOU!
I couldn’t get the article to come up at first and just read the entire article. Excellent. Many good examples of foolish translation.
Mullen needs to tip a pint and cool his fevered mind.