E
eo_chibears
Guest
King James was a political figure of his day, is that correct? How did he get a version of the Bible named after him? Would it be similar to somebody calling a version of the Bible the Ronald Reagan version?
- Status
B
Boulder257
Guest
I believe, and I may be well off here, but the King James version was an official translation commissioned and authorizewd by King James for the Church of England. So, while he was a political figure, he was the one who authorized the new translation. Therefore, he had a very important role in it’s “creation.” King James was concerned with certain factions within the Church of England and their interpretation of the bible; therefore, he authorized a new translation that was supposed to be a version “truer” to the Church of England’s ecclesiology. It was basically accepted by most Protestant groups as the most accurate version of the bible for many centuries after its commission.
I hope this helps.
I hope this helps.
J
Jesus_123
Guest
+The Douai-Rheims [Douay-Rheims] . . . the original Catholic :bible1: Bible in English . . . pre-dated the King James Version (1611). It was translated from the St. Jerome’s . . . (a Doctor of the Church) . . . Latin Vulgate, the Catholic Church’s official Scripture text, by English Catholics in exile on the continent. The New Testament was completed and published in 1582 when the English College (the seminary for English Catholics) was located at Rheims. The Old Testament was published in 1610 when the College was located at Douai.
The translators of the King James Verison devoutly referred to the Douay-Rheims Bishop Challoner Version constantly . . . and the close harmony and beauty of the **Sacred :bible1: Scriptures **retained between the translations is astounding . . .
Father Rutler of the renown Catholic EWTN Christ in the City program often uses the King James Version during his quite marvelous programs . . .* (link below)* . . .
:compcoff: **Link: **ewtn.com/series/ChristintheCity/index.htm
The translators of the King James Verison devoutly referred to the Douay-Rheims Bishop Challoner Version constantly . . . and the close harmony and beauty of the **Sacred :bible1: Scriptures **retained between the translations is astounding . . .
Father Rutler of the renown Catholic EWTN Christ in the City program often uses the King James Version during his quite marvelous programs . . .* (link below)* . . .
:compcoff: **Link: **ewtn.com/series/ChristintheCity/index.htm
. . . all for Jesus+
. . . thank You Sweet Spirit of our Holy God+
. . . thank you Blessed St. Jerome+
. . . holy translator of God’s Holy :bible1: Word+
. . . thank You Sweet Spirit of our Holy God+
. . . thank you Blessed St. Jerome+
. . . holy translator of God’s Holy :bible1: Word+
E
eo_chibears
Guest
Yes it does, thank you.
C
Cloudwalker
Guest
In those days, the King was not just an important political figure, but an important religious figure too. Think Head of the Church of England, divine right to rule of Kings etc. etc.
If my history is correct, King James was pretty miserly with the first publishers of the King James Bible, and left them pretty hard-up in financial terms!
If my history is correct, King James was pretty miserly with the first publishers of the King James Bible, and left them pretty hard-up in financial terms!
P
patrick457
Guest
Because he was the one that commissioned that translation to be made. For the record, the KJV is also known as (especially outside America) the ‘Authorized Version’.
If you’re wondering what the official title was, as per the title page: “The Holy Bible, Conteyning the Old Testament, and the New: Newly Translated out of the Originall tongues: & with the former Translations diligently compared and revised, by his Majesties speciall Comandement. Appointed to be read in Churches.”
O
ora_pro_nobis
Guest
There was an exhibition at Lambeth Palace (the official residence of the Archbishop of Canterbury) marking the 400th anniversary of the King James bible - they had some of the actual working documents that the various bishops involved in the translation used. It was fascinating to see their handwriting as they worked out was was the best translation for each word or phrase. the bit on display was from the letter to the Romans and you could see how they were working on translating the Greek into English.
King James commissioned a number of English bishops to work on the translation, so although he didn’t actually do any of the work himself, he gets his name in lights, as it were.
King James commissioned a number of English bishops to work on the translation, so although he didn’t actually do any of the work himself, he gets his name in lights, as it were.
P
patrick457
Guest
You got it upside-down. The translators of the Authorized Version were influenced by the 1582 Rheims New Testament; Archbishop Challoner in turn drew upon the AKJV when making his ‘revision’ of the Rheims-Douai in 1749-1752, being a convert from Anglicanism and thus familiar with its style.
E
Elvis_Guy
Guest
Hello! Former Episcopal guy here…it’s true and rightful name is the AV Authorised Version…where did it pick up the KJV moniker? Holman one of the United States oldest printers began a version minus the Deutoro/Apocrypha …Protestants wanting to distance it from Anglicanism called the King James… Irony is he was a half hearted Anglican…he was raised Catholic (mother being Mary of Scots of course)…hope my ramble was close to helpful…
J
Jesus_123
Guest
+Oops . . .
. . . so sorry about the confusion . . . the first paragraph’s information came from the EWTN.com website . . . I tucked the phrase . . . “Bishop Challoner’s Version” . . . in the second paragraph without thinking . . . being it is my constant :bible1: Biblical resource on and off line . . . my bad . . . below is a correction/clarification . . . also from the EWTN.com website . . .. . . :coffeeread: . . . **Douay-Rheims Version - Holy Bible **
The translation was extensively revised by Bishop Challoner in the 18th century. The Douay Version both influenced the Protestant Authorized (King James) Version and was influenced by it (in the later revision done by Bishop Challoner).
:compcoff: Link: ewtn.com/vlibrary/search2.asp?pgnu=2&version=TXT&fldlibrary=AllLibraries&afterdate=&author=&keyword=Rheims&code=&search_type=contains&recentadd=
The translation was extensively revised by Bishop Challoner in the 18th century. The Douay Version both influenced the Protestant Authorized (King James) Version and was influenced by it (in the later revision done by Bishop Challoner).
:compcoff: Link: ewtn.com/vlibrary/search2.asp?pgnu=2&version=TXT&fldlibrary=AllLibraries&afterdate=&author=&keyword=Rheims&code=&search_type=contains&recentadd=
Translations Timeline
1582 - The Rheims New Testament was published.
1609 - The Douai Old Testament covering Genesis through Job was published.
1610 - The Douai Old Testament covering Psalms through 2 Macabees plus the Apocrypha was published.
1611 - The King James Bible was completed and subsequently published.
1752 - The Douay Rheims Bible was published by Richard Challoner, a Catholic English Bishop. The English version declared by the Catholic Church as the official English Bible is a subsequent revision of Bishop Challoner’s **1752 **Bible.
1609 - The Douai Old Testament covering Genesis through Job was published.
1610 - The Douai Old Testament covering Psalms through 2 Macabees plus the Apocrypha was published.
1611 - The King James Bible was completed and subsequently published.
1752 - The Douay Rheims Bible was published by Richard Challoner, a Catholic English Bishop. The English version declared by the Catholic Church as the official English Bible is a subsequent revision of Bishop Challoner’s **1752 **Bible.
. . . all for Jesus+
. . . thank You Sweet Spirit of our Holy God+
. . . thank You Sweet Spirit of our Holy God+
T
Trevor_Stamm
Guest
Sometimes, I really wish this would’ve been the translation used in the ordinary form.
P
puzzleannie
Guest
actual the English translation of the Bible first ordered by King James I because of defeciencies in existing bibles has undergone several revisions, and is usually called the Authorized Version in England, but KJV is the name used in the US. He did not translate it, he ordered the Anglican bishops to authorize and supervise a translation.
J
Jesus_123
Guest
+During Holy Mass this morning the priest gave his homily about holy blessed and miraculous St. Martin de Porres . . . and he mentioned St. Martin was baptized when he was 22 years old . . . which brought back to mind the comment above about Bishop Challoner . . . whom I had read was also baptized later in life . . . I’d never heard even a whisper of Bishop Challoner having any background in Anglicanism . . . so I did a little research . . . according to his biographical information . . . (link below) . . . Bishop Challoner’s mother was Catholic . . . and his father (who died when he was just a child) was a winecooper *(made wine barrels) *by trade . . . and a Presbyterian . . . and after his father’s death he was raised by his mother in the Catholic church . . . being baptized at the age of 13 as a Catholic . . . also according to his biographical information . . . in title and ordination he never rose beyond that of Bishop . . .
**. . . :coffeeread: . . . **
****The Right Reverend
Richard Challoner ****
Vicar Apostolic of the London District
**Church **Roman Catholic Church
Appointed 22 September 1758
Reign ended 12 January 1781
**Predecessor **Benjamin Petre
Successor James Robert Talbot
**Other posts **Titular Bishop of Doberus
Orders
Ordination 28 March 1716
**Consecration **29 January 1741
by Benjamin Petre
Personal details
Born 29 September 1691
Lewes, Suffolk
**Died **12 January 1781 (age 89)
Gloucester Street, off Queen Square, London
Buried (1) Milton, Berkshire
(2) Westminster Cathedral
Nationality English
Denomination Roman Catholic
Previous post Coadjutor to the Vicar Apostolic of the London District
:compcoff: ** Link: ** en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bishop_Challoner
. . . all for Jesus+
I
inkaneer
Guest
In 1605 King James ordered a new Bible translation for use in the Church of England. The reasons were simple. The protestant Bible in use at the time was the Geneva Bible which had marginal notes, some of which were seen to be contradictory to the then established political doctrine known as the Divine Right of Kings. King James saw this as a potential threat and thus ordered the new translation. When it was done King James ordered that it was to be the only version of the Bible authorized to be used in England. Some COE people who did not wish to part with their Geneva Bible left England for Holland which was much more liberal in accepting disadent groups. However, in Holland the COE group came under the influence of other religious groups one of which were the anabaptists. The COE group split with one part returning to England while the other remained and became the first Baptists. The portion that returned to England found that they still could not use their Geneva Bibles so they made plans to leave England again. So in 1620 they booked passage on a ship called the Mayflower and settled in a new land where they founded a settlement that they named Plymouth after the town in England from which they came.
But isn’t it interesting that the earliest protestants rejected the KJV but today it is lauded by many protestants.
But isn’t it interesting that the earliest protestants rejected the KJV but today it is lauded by many protestants.
B
Bob_Crowley
Guest
It would be more correct to say that "some of the earliest protestants rejected the KJV’.
And some of them are still fighting over the only true version.
The way I heard it about old King James was that he was sick and tired of all the bunfights regarding translations. To nip this in the bud, he banged a few heads together, collared a bunch of bishops and told them to come up with a translation which would henceforth be the only version used in Britain. Hence the KJV.
Since educated Englishmen of that time spoke like Shakespeare, it had an almost poetic ring about it. I don’t like it all that much myself, as the language is archaic to me.
P
patrick457
Guest
Actually the language of the KJV was if I remember right already quite old-fashioned by the time of publication.
P
patrick457
Guest
Thanks for the correction.
J
Jesus_123
Guest
+Your welcome . . .
*God bless . . . *
*God bless . . . *
. . . all for Jesus+
. . . thank You Blessed Lord+
. . . thank You Blessed Lord+
J
jenkiedad
Guest
Has anyone seen the article in the December 2011 issue of the “National Geographic Magazine” about the King James Bible? It’s an interesting read, particularly about how many common expressions in use today have their origin with the KJV.
ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2011/12/king-james-bible/nicolson-text
There’s also an interesting chart that shows the different versions of the Bible leading up to the KJV and which prior versions influenced the others. No other translations of the Bible are shown after the KJV.
ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2011/12/king-james-bible/nicolson-text
There’s also an interesting chart that shows the different versions of the Bible leading up to the KJV and which prior versions influenced the others. No other translations of the Bible are shown after the KJV.
P
paperwight66
Guest
Hmmm - curious. There is no ‘Lewes, Suffolk’. Lewes is in East Sussex. I hope the rest of the information is more accurate.
- Status