Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The king of the bibles
The Telegraph ^ | November 14, 2011 | Peter Mullen

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 ...


TOPICS: General Discusssion; History; Worship
KEYWORDS: bible; bibles; bibletranslation; bibletranslations; britain; britishempire; christianity; kingjames; kingjamesversion; kjv; kjvbible; kjvbibletranslation; kjvtranslation; kjvversion; mullen; petermullen; uk; unitedkingdom
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-110 next last
An excellent article -- unfortunately highly excerpted per list rules -- read the entire article at the link.

"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."

1 posted on 11/18/2011 9:49:31 PM PST by hiho hiho
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: hiho hiho

Thank you for posting!


2 posted on 11/18/2011 9:56:08 PM PST by fortheDeclaration (All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. Burke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hiho hiho

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.


3 posted on 11/18/2011 9:57:43 PM PST by Ruy Dias de Bivar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hiho hiho

And you have Strong’s and Young’s Hebrew and Greek concordances to clear up any KJV language issues.


4 posted on 11/18/2011 10:00:13 PM PST by UnbelievingScumOnTheOtherSide (REPEAL WASHINGTON! -- Islam Delenda Est! -- I Want Constantinople Back. -- Rumble thee forth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hiho hiho

The King James Bible is one of the greatest accomplishments of the British empire.


5 posted on 11/18/2011 10:01:40 PM PST by NEWwoman (God Bless America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ruy Dias de Bivar
When many people pray, they revert to the 16th century English language as it is considered a respectful language.
6 posted on 11/18/2011 10:07:13 PM PST by hiho hiho
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: NEWwoman

The Kings English - 100 phrases in 3 Minutes
http://youtu.be/xQVbBjgBS6A


7 posted on 11/18/2011 10:12:16 PM PST by hiho hiho
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: NEWwoman

The King James Bible - The History of English
http://youtu.be/kN7-EvgKAsk


8 posted on 11/18/2011 10:15:49 PM PST by hiho hiho
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: hiho hiho

Save for later.


9 posted on 11/18/2011 10:17:36 PM PST by Lauren BaRecall (Boehner, you deal making THUG B@st@rd!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hiho hiho

This is an interesting website that supports the KJV Bible:

http://www.trinitarianbiblesociety.org/


10 posted on 11/18/2011 10:29:07 PM PST by ReformationFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hiho hiho

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.


11 posted on 11/18/2011 10:39:25 PM PST by roamer_1 (Globalism is just socialism in a business suit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hiho hiho
Have to disagree with his ire. Although I do keep a KJV so that I can cross reference the scripture with my Strong's Concordance, I favor the NIV (conspicuously not mentioned in his comparisons). It is a very good translation done by excellent scholarship with the advantage of more manuscripts, better textual criticism, and a better understanding of the original language than was available when the KJV was translated.

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).

12 posted on 11/18/2011 10:54:25 PM PST by AndyTheBear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #13 Removed by Moderator

To: hiho hiho

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.


14 posted on 11/18/2011 11:03:35 PM PST by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: UnbelievingScumOnTheOtherSide
I'm not familiar with Strong’s and Young’s Hebrew and Greek concordances but in the synagogue we use the Jewish Publication Society 1917 english translation which is very similar to the King James version and of course we constantly study and refer back to the Hebrew Tanach. I agree, the King James version is quite superior to any of the modern translations and it is kind of insulting to the reader to assume he is too stupid to understand the beautiful language of the King James translation. I understand there is a more recent JPS translation than the 1917 translation but it too is quite close to the King James translation. I don't think the Jewish Publication Society will ever be so foolish as to publish a translation similar to these ridiculous modern PC translations. They know we aren't stupid.

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.

15 posted on 11/18/2011 11:08:29 PM PST by tommix2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: AndyTheBear

What is the NIV? I favor the NIV


16 posted on 11/18/2011 11:13:52 PM PST by tommix2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: hiho hiho

Peter Mullen: THANK YOU!


17 posted on 11/18/2011 11:38:46 PM PST by John Leland 1789
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hiho hiho

I couldn’t get the article to come up at first and just read the entire article. Excellent. Many good examples of foolish translation.


18 posted on 11/18/2011 11:40:01 PM PST by tommix2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hiho hiho

bookmark


19 posted on 11/18/2011 11:48:31 PM PST by GOP Poet (Obama is an OLYMPIC failure.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hiho hiho

Mullen needs to tip a pint and cool his fevered mind.


20 posted on 11/19/2011 12:10:59 AM PST by count-your-change (You don't have to be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-110 next 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
Religion
Topics · Post Article

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