- Nov 26, 2019
- 16,152
- 8,568
- 51
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Generic Orthodox Christian
- Marital Status
- Celibate
I don't understand your comment since the King James version was the first translation taken from Tyndale's original work and the Geneva Bible, among other versions combined that made it possible for the work done to produce the King James Bible in the 1600s.
If other translations should not be compared to the King James version, then where are these other translations coming from?
Actually, the King James Version was intended to bridge the gap between Puritans and the Calvinist Church of Scotland, who used the Geneva Bible, and the Church of England (Anglican, most closely akin to Scandinavian Lutheran), which used the Bishop’s Bible (although the Puritans were engaging in schisms because they disliked that translation immensely). The other influential Bible at the time was the Coverdale - the Anglicans still use the Coverdale Psalter in the traditional versions of the Book of Common Prayer, such as the 1662 English book, the 1962 Canadian Book, the 1928 American Book, the 1929 Scottish Book, and Rite I in the 1979 American Book, because it is easier to chant than the KJV Psalter.
Now, of the three Bibles criticized, the old NIV, from 1984, is a perfectly good translation. The new one, in its zeal for gender-neutral language, is problematic. The NASB is also a decent Bible.
The New World Translation however is a joke; it was published by the Jehovah’s Witnesses, a non Christian cult, and is notorious for altering the text to reflect its heretical doctrines. Compare their alleged “translation” of John 1:1 with every other translation.
But the NIV and NASB are based on the Minority Text, three older manuscripts from the fourth century, known as the Alexandrian text type, which lack certain elements common to later manuscripts in the so called Byzantine text type. However, many feel the Byzantine text type the KJV is translated from is superior, because we see it reflected in the Vulgate and Peshitta translations from the fourth century, and because of doctrinal reasons. I am of this opinion, but I find the one modern Bible to exclusively use the Byzantine text type, the NKJV, disappointing in terms of literary style compared to the 1984 NIV, which along with the 1979 BCP, has particularly elegant prose for modern language Bibles and service books.
This does not bother me too much, as I greatly prefer the traditional language Bibles, specifically the KJV, the Challoner Douai-Rheims, the Murdoch translation of the New Testament from the West Syriac version of the Peshitta, which is exceptionally beautiful and elegant, and the Revised Standard Version, and last, but not least, the Lancelot Brenton translation of the Septuagint, the Greek Old Testament from 200 BC used exclusively by the Church from the late first century until the fourth century, when St. Jerome translated the Old Testament in the Latin Vulgate from the Hebrew and Aramaic tests.
Other good modern Bibles are the NRSV, the ESV, and the NET Bible.
However, I am deeply frustrated that most King James Versions are incomplete - all KJV Bibles, or “the Authorized Version” as it was then called, before the turn of the 19th century featured the Deuterocanonical Books, also called the Apocrypha, because the Bible was intended for both of the churches in lands ruled by King James, who was King of Scotland, King of England and King of Ireland (this was a personal union however; Scotland and Ireland were not yet united with England), and while the Church of Scotland had no use for the Apocrypha, they could just not read them; the largest population ruled by King James was that of England, and the Church of England does use the Apocrypha, or Deuterocanonical Books, like the Lutherans, the Eastern and Oriental Orthodox, the Old Catholic Churches, the Roman Catholic Church, and the Assyrian Church of the East. To me, selling a KJV without a notice on it stating it is abridged, because it lacks the Apocrypha included in the original, is false advertising. I happen to believe the Deuterocanonical Books of the Old Testament are Divinely Inspired, and challenge anyone who doubts this to read Chapter 2 of Wisdom, which is as clear a prophecy of the Passion of our Lord as you will find. Indeed, read all of them. You might disagree with some, but every Christian should prefer the longer version of Esther, because Martin Luther was quite right to argue the shorter version was pointless; the longer version has a deep theological element as it contains prayers to our God, which are absent from the version in the New Testament.
I am also amazed that some hardcore KJV-only adherents demand the KJV with the original antiquated, non-standard spelling and the original punctuation, but object to the inclusion of the Apocrypha, which were in all the original editions.
*The Jehovah’s Witnesses are a non-Christian cult that exploits the poorest people in America (a survey of the different religions showed that the Jehovah’s Witnesses had the least wealth or income of any religious group, per Capita; another cult, the Unitarian Universalists, had the most, per capital but that was unsurprising as the Unitarian Universalists are dominated by wealthy “Old Money” Yankee families from Boston and other places in New England, whose roots in this country go back to the 1600s, and elsewhere in the US appeal primarily to very wealthy elites), and then the Jehovahs Witness force these impoverished people - their members are not only dirt poor but below the poverty line, to give massive amounts of money to the cult. Their cult has also caused many deaths with their horrible eisegesis of Acts 15, believing it prohibits blood transfusions. In this respect, the only cult that is deadlier is Christian Science, which demands members refrain from medical care and instead use the services of “Christian Science Practitioners” who you have to pay to pray for you, which is blasphemous, but so are all of the doctrines of Mary Baker Eddy. Her status as a great fraud was documented by Samuel Clemens (Mark Twain) around 1900, and the real tragedy is it took this long for the cult to finally begin to fail. Only now, 120 years later, are the Christian Science Reading Rooms closing, the Christian Science Monitor failing, and more and more Christian Science parishes close every year, and many become authentic Christian churches. I am looking forward to when they have to sell their Mother Church in Boston, which is a beautiful building in a Neo Byzantine style; with repainting, would make a splendid Orthodox or Anglican church, as @GreekOrthodox and @Athanasius377 might agree.
Upvote
0