I would suggest a quick google search on KJV only Bible. I would try to find some links for you but most of those sites that support this view are pretty anti-Catholic and I do not desire to draw attention to them. I know that John Ankerburg (very anti-Catholic) has done shows on this and brought in so called “experts” but again it would be Catholci beware.
The English language has moved on very much from the thees and thous. And you really have to be a Hebrew and Greek scholar AND have all the original documents AND be able to decipher the different qualities and styles of writing to be in a position to say this or that is the most accurate translation.
Yes, I always thought that St. Jerome did the most authentic and accurate translation from the original languages when he did the Latin Vulgate. He also probably had access to much more material that is now lost in time than Bible scholars even have now, considering how long ago he lived. Another reason I wish to learn Latin.
Wouldn’t it be marvelous if the original documents had survived? They have disappeared. Instead, we are left with copies of copies of copies of Hebrew and Greek documents. Translating the Hebrew into Greek was the project resulting in the Septuagint version of the Old Testament. Then we have the work of St. Jerome who gathered all the documents at his disposal, many of which were already copies of copies of copies, and produced the first Latin Vulgate Version. St. Jerome used the Hebrew and Septuagint versions for various portions of his translation. In addition there was an Old Latin translation that he had to incorporate. This Vulgate version was copied over and over again by scribes most of whom were monks, each time making slight changes here and there, either on purpose or inadvertently. So, through the centuries before the printing press was invented, copies of the scriptures were available, but nobody knew for sure which ones were the most accurate. Even Erasmus was in a quandary when he wrote his version of the Bible. His problem was trying to make sense of the Latin Vulgate versions in light of the Greek versions. He tried to integrate these two versions and produced what is today regarded as a poor document on which to base further translations. Yet that is a chief source for the King James Version.
So the question is why did the Church insist on preserving scripture in Latin?
Without getting into history or detail, a simple question that might get them to research the matter in more depth: “Have you ever considered why a 17th century king from England should be revising the Bible?” or “Would you feel confident using a Bible that was revised by a political leader nearly 2000 years after Jesus died?.. maybe the President Carter Version Bible?”
The common formal language among intellectuals in Western Europe before and during the Renaissance was Latin. The Pope who commissioned St. Jerome to write the Latin Vulgate Bible did so because when bishops in Western Europe gathered together for conferences, they spoke Latin to each other. Indeed intellectual, religious, historical, and philosophical literature was universally written in Latin.
From what I understand,the reason the 7 books are missing is because they are too Catholic…Protestants don’t like Catholics and they wanted to create their own bible so they can distance themselves from Catholics and they did it in such a way to confuse people into believing that the KJV was the correct bible and nobody elses…
The reason books are missing is that Luther made egregious errors when translating Scripture into German. Holy Scripture does not contradict itself, but Luther’s mis-translations were quite obviously contradicted by verses in these books. Thus he excised the books from the Lutheran bible.
Please research again. The Jewish bible then and now does not have the seven books in it. The Jews of Greek descent had the Septuagint with the seven books in it. It has never been adopted by the Jewish believers, to my knowledge.
That too.
King James is NOT the only accurate bible because it was first published in 1600s, 1300 years after the Council of Hippo approved the books in the bible. A friend of mine who is a protestant owned an early 1900 King James Bible that has the seven deuterocanonical books between the Old and the NT sections.
The KJV is, from a literary perspective, by far the most beautiful and most influential English version - The scholars who did this work had a limited access to original documents other than the “Textus Receptus” and the Vulgate - the errors in Jerome are minor, and due to misunderstandings of similar words - which is why Michelangelo carved Moses with “Horns” on his head - whereas the correct translation would be 'rays of light" or commonly, “shining” -You can start with the fact that Jesus grew up a Middle Eastern Jew but the KJV reads like something from the Dark Ages.
A group of Jews in Jamnia (Javneh) reviewed the canon and then decided to remove those books (deuterocanonicals) for which they did not find the Hebrew originals. Subsequently copies of the Hebrew deuterocanonicals were found among the Dead Sea Scrolls.
) people in non-English speaking countries?Okay, out of curiosity, why?
