Replies

Praise God Almighty...and thanks to King James for this wonderfull translation made by the KJV Bible translators...who, in fact, were all experts in the Greek and Hebrew, etc, and most importantly, were experts in the target languages in which the King James Bible was translated into seven KJV Bible languages. Knowing the target language IS PARAMOUNT for succeeding in an accurate translation. I love the KJV Bible and own two 18th century KJV Bibles which I purchased for a steal at $50 each. If you want to verify the accuracy of the KJV Bible, acquire Crabbs synonyms and you will learn the nuances of the accurate choice of word synonyms utilized by the translators. Secondly, Greek words were simply NOT homogenized into a single word meaning, ie, translated word used exactly wherever the same Greek word occurs. This modern approach completely disregards the context. Context is PARAMOUNT for an accurate translation. Of which, sadly, modern scholarship disdains.

I agree with you. My Grandfather attended Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville in the early 1900’s.

He could translate both Greek and Latin tho not Aramaic.

I never discussed it at length, but remember him telling Daddy that the King James version was an extremely accurate translation. He went on at some length about how much effort they put into it, sort of what you were saying.

I personally like “The Living Bible” which is a paraphrase but very readable and I think it does get the meaning right.

Secondly, Greek words were simply NOT homogenized into a single word meaning, ie, translated word used exactly wherever the same Greek word occurs. This modern approach completely disregards the context. Context is PARAMOUNT for an accurate translation. Of which, sadly, modern scholarship disdains.

This statement is out of touch with linguistic reality in almost every possible way. It's true that context is important. It's utterly false that translating the same word using exactly the same English word each time it is found makes for an accurate translation. In Greek a single noun and its article can convey relationship, gender, number, and active or passive voice. To translate the single word into English can require many more words than an English noun and article. For example: τοις σωζομενοις = to the ones who are being saved. The meaning of a passage is greater than the sum of its words and it's not discovered by maintaining the same word order between the source and destination languages. Having a translator who is expert in two languages reproduce in an idiomatically accurate fashion in the second language what the passage in the first language says is the proper way to translate.

Do you see in Hebrew "he that pisseth against the wall" and translate it as "he that pisseth against the wall" or as "man"? If you choose the first, you're wrong. How about "turning aside" versus "urinating" or, more prosaically, "off taking a piss"? In the case of Elijah taunting the prophets of Ba'al, it would be the last. How about David hiding in the cave where Saul went to "cover his feet"? Did Saul go into the cave "to cover his feet" or "to take a dump"? If you say the first, you're wrong. Everyone reading the ancient Hebrew knew what the euphemisms meant. Translating them by their word meaning only and not by the corresponding English euphemism is just a bad translation.