Posted on 11/18/2011 9:49:29 PM PST by hiho hiho
"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
http://youtu.be/xQVbBjgBS6A
The King James Bible - The History of English
http://youtu.be/kN7-EvgKAsk
Save for later.
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.
bookmark
Mullen needs to tip a pint and cool his fevered mind.
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.