Inspired?

[Randb]

My Baptist friend tells me there were 40 inspired scholars who 'wrote ’ the Bible. Several took so many readings & then got together & compared their readings , if they all agreed that was what was put together for the Bible!!! I told her you don’t have to be inspired to TRANSLATE!! I’m thinking she’s confusing the King James bible translating with the original Bible in 397AD Watcha think???

 

[mercygate]

My Baptist friend tells me there were 40 inspired scholars who 'wrote ’ the Bible. Several took so many readings & then got together & compared their readings , if they all agreed that was what was put together for the Bible!!! I told her you don’t have to be inspired to TRANSLATE!! I’m thinking she’s confusing the King James bible translating with the original Bible in 397AD Watcha think???

I think she is mis-remembering the story of how the Septuagint was translated – by 70 rabbis. The Bible was not written in 397 A.D. The OT was compiled over about 700 years beginning in the 8th century B.C. The NT was written from about 55 AD to around 120 AD at the latest.

 

[zerocrossing]

I think she is mis-remembering the story of how the Septuagint was translated – by 70 rabbis. The Bible was not written in 397 A.D. The OT was compiled over about 700 years beginning in the 8th century B.C. The NT was written from about 55 AD to around 120 AD at the latest.

She might be thinking of one of the early Councils. But of course, they didn’t WRITE the Bible at the Councils.

 

[mercygate]

She might be thinking of one of the early Councils. But of course, they didn’t WRITE the Bible at the Councils.

Nah. A Baptist with this kind of fuzzy idea of how the Bible was written probably never even HEARD of a council!

 

[zerocrossing]

Nah. A Baptist with this kind of fuzzy idea of how the Bible was written probably never even HEARD of a council!

Lots of people in evangelical traditions have heard some vague discussion of how the canon of scripture was developed. Whether or not she’s heard of a Council, it seems plausible to me that she could be confusing the development of the canon with the actual writing of scripture.

 

[Zooey]

There exists a “pious legend” about the translation of the King James Bible, which your friend may have confused with reality.
According to this myth (which has, by the bye, fueled the KJV-Only movement), all the 40-some translators of the KJV were supposed to have translated the whole Bible on his own.
At the end, they met together, and found that each one had written exactly the same thing as each of the others, with no variations between them.

Now, its a nice bedtime story for the yeans, but its fiction…
In the first place,each of the translators were each assigned his own section of Scripture; there were no “40 copies” much less any 40 identical copies.
Also, there are, in most any Bible, including the KJV, “alternate readings”-- variations of the text as observed by translators. There are variations, too, based on taste in words…people’s idea of what the Bible should say, can sometimes (often!) overwhelm their honesty about what it does say.
Then, too, there are slips of the pen. (I find myself writing “myslef” more than “myslef”-- I mean, “myself” on a regular basis).
And, as I say: Nobody ever sat down & translated the Bible into King James English, from cover to cover, whilst 39 other guys did the same thing. (And if they had, they wouldn’t have come up with 40 identical copies. Translation isn’t like that, you know).

So, its a case of confusing the writing with the translating; the translation with the collation; and the forming of the canon of Scriptures…Not to mention the wild-eyed Ruckmanites, claiming that there is no other Bible in any other language as perfect as the KJV. By which they mean: Even the originals, as inspired by God, are not as “good” as the King James…Yes there are people who believe that…One particular fellow recently opined that :bigyikes: “God holds the King James Version of the Bible higher in importance than the Name of Jesus Christ”.:crying: :nope: :crying:
Yes. That is indeed blasphemous. I’m just reporting it…(I couldn’t make all these things up…)

 

[zerocrossing]

There exists a “pious legend” about the translation of the King James Bible, which your friend may have confused with reality.

So, its a case of confusing the writing with the translating; the translation with the collation; and the forming of the canon of Scriptures…Not to mention the wild-eyed Ruckmanites, claiming that there is no other Bible in any other language as perfect as the KJV. By which they mean: Even the originals, as inspired by God, are not as “good” as the King James…Yes there are people who believe that…One particular fellow recently opined that :bigyikes: “God holds the King James Version of the Bible higher in importance than the Name of Jesus Christ”.:crying: :nope: :crying:
Yes. That is indeed blasphemous. I’m just reporting it…(I couldn’t make all these things up…)

Wow. That’s great information. Thanks! And yeah, the KJV-only crowd has been known to get a little freaky.

 

[mercygate]

There exists a “pious legend” about the translation of the King James Bible, which your friend may have confused with reality.
According to this myth (which has, by the bye, fueled the KJV-Only movement), all the 40-some translators of the KJV were supposed to have translated the whole Bible on his own.
At the end, they met together, and found that each one had written exactly the same thing as each of the others, with no variations between them.

Now, its a nice bedtime story for the yeans, but its fiction…
In the first place,each of the translators were each assigned his own section of Scripture; there were no “40 copies” much less any 40 identical copies.
Also, there are, in most any Bible, including the KJV, “alternate readings”-- variations of the text as observed by translators. There are variations, too, based on taste in words…people’s idea of what the Bible should say, can sometimes (often!) overwhelm their honesty about what it does say.
Then, too, there are slips of the pen. (I find myself writing “myslef” more than “myslef”-- I mean, “myself” on a regular basis).
And, as I say: Nobody ever sat down & translated the Bible into King James English, from cover to cover, whilst 39 other guys did the same thing. (And if they had, they wouldn’t have come up with 40 identical copies. Translation isn’t like that, you know).

So, its a case of confusing the writing with the translating; the translation with the collation; and the forming of the canon of Scriptures…Not to mention the wild-eyed Ruckmanites, claiming that there is no other Bible in any other language as perfect as the KJV. By which they mean: Even the originals, as inspired by God, are not as “good” as the King James…Yes there are people who believe that…One particular fellow recently opined that :bigyikes: “God holds the King James Version of the Bible higher in importance than the Name of Jesus Christ”.:crying: :nope: :crying:
Yes. That is indeed blasphemous. I’m just reporting it…(I couldn’t make all these things up…)

I never heard the “40 translators” story before but it EXACTLY parallels the story of how the Septuagint came about: only it was 70 rabbis. Word-for-word identical translations. It’s probably as creditable as the KJV version.

And FWIW, THIS convert still runs quotations of the KJV through her head. It really is a GREAT translation, given the limitations of the resources available at the time.

 

[zerocrossing]

I never heard the “40 translators” story before but it EXACTLY parallels the story of how the Septuagint came about: only it was 70 rabbis. Word-for-word identical translations. It’s probably as creditable as the KJV version.

And FWIW, THIS convert still runs quotations of the KJV through her head. It really is a GREAT translation, given the limitations of the resources available at the time.

It IS a great translation - and has had a huge impact on English language literature. But some people go a little overboard in their adulation of it. Not you, of course. But the KJV only crowd.

 

[MrStain]

It IS a great translation - and has had a huge impact on English language literature. But some people go a little overboard in their adulation of it. Not you, of course. But the KJV only crowd.

Hey to you up in Falls Church from down here in Fredericksburg!

I love the KJV and I’m Catholic. Of course, I was once a Southern Baptist and it’s been hard to give up my KJV. What can I say… it is beautiful English. Another beautiful english translation is of course the Douay-Rheims.

Oh ya, I read Tobit for the first time today and I really enjoyed it. Now if the Protestants could just get that book back in there Bibles.

 

[MrStain]

She might be thinking of one of the early Councils. But of course, they didn’t WRITE the Bible at the Councils.

The Council of Carthage in 397AD issued a canon of the Bible. It sounds like several things are getting mixed up here.

 

[zerocrossing]

Hey to you up in Falls Church from down here in Fredericksburg!

I love the KJV and I’m Catholic. Of course, I was once a Southern Baptist and it’s been hard to give up my KJV. What can I say… it is beautiful English. Another beautiful english translation is of course the Douay-Rheims.

Oh ya, I read Tobit for the first time today and I really enjoyed it. Now if the Protestants could just get that book back in there Bibles.

Hey. A shout out to Fredericksburg! One of my co-workers commutes from your neck of the lush Virginia woods.

Oh, the KJV is filled with gorgeous language. The cadence of much English poetry is inspired by the KJV - and particularly by the Psalms.

I’ve never heard the Douay-Rheims. (Heard OF it, yes. But not heard its language). Now I’ll have to read it too.

Don’t know if I’ve read Tobit. But it is sad that the Protestants use the “abridged version” of the Bible.

 

[mercygate]

Hey. A shout out to Fredericksburg! One of my co-workers commutes from your neck of the lush Virginia woods.

Oh, the KJV is filled with gorgeous language. The cadence of much English poetry is inspired by the KJV - and particularly by the Psalms.

I’ve never heard the Douay-Rheims. (Heard OF it, yes. But not heard its language). Now I’ll have to read it too.

Don’t know if I’ve read Tobit. But it is sad that the Protestants use the “abridged version” of the Bible.

Actually, the Challoner revision of the Douay-Rheims translation, done in 1752 borrowed heavily from the KJV – largely, I believe, because Challoner recognized that the KJV was taken from “the original tongues” while the Douay-Rheims was based on the Vulgate.

 

[Publisher]

She is probablly thinking of a comment she may have read in her study Bible…that the scriptures were written over a period of 1000 years by 40 different authors.

I have a KJV study Bible from the 50’s that says something to that effect.