BUT
I do appreciate your (name removed by moderator)ut, and concern, however, as someone did point out in that particular phrase, "both “bishop” and “overseer” are valid translations of the Greek word “episkopos”, which literally means “someone who over (epi) - sees (skopos)”.
Yes. And not only that, but the KJV does translate “episkopos” as “bishop” in several places.
In the Bottom Right hand corner of the Title page we see a prisons, containing Catholics, portrayed them as; Criminals, traders and un-loyal to the King.JohnR77;12923386A [COLOR=red said:
Thanks Patrick! That’s very interesting, and it comes as no surprise that words change meaning over 500 years. Some words even acquire the opposite of their original meaning. I am thinking of something in the KJV, but can’t remember it right now. It’ll probably come to mind later
Good ol’ days of English. ‘Suffer’ meant ‘let’ (“Suffer the little children …”), ‘let’ meant ‘prevent’ (“He who now letteth will let …”), ‘nice’ meant ‘stupid’ then ‘coy’ then ‘fastidious’ or ‘subtle’, ‘doubt’ meant ‘fear’ (so the line “'Tis to be doubted” in King Lear actually means, ‘It’s something to be feared’), ‘sophisticated’ meant ‘unnatural’, ‘p*ss’ was a perfectly normal word for urine, ‘replenish’ meant ‘fill completely’ (rather than ‘refill’), ‘closet’ also referred to ‘private room’ (“But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet…”).Thanks Patrick! That’s very interesting, and it comes as no surprise that words change meaning over 500 years. Some words even acquire the opposite of their original meaning. I am thinking of something in the KJV, but can’t remember it right now. It’ll probably come to mind later
I mean, c’mon, should we expect these 17th-century translators to be familiar with every nook and cranny of Palestine?
I mean, we’ve got the Internet and air travel right now, but we’re talking about the days when you can’t even be sure you’ll make it to the Holy Land and back alive in one piece.Go on.
Yes, please do.
That is a problem with the NIV, not the KJV. The KJV translates paradosis as “tradition” whether it is “bad” tradition or “good” tradition.
Thankyou!
bibletools.org has a complete reference for paradosis in the KJV. In only one case is it translated as other than tradition.
Thanks Patrick!Good ol’ days of English. ‘Suffer’ meant ‘let’ (“Suffer the little children …”), ‘let’ meant ‘prevent’ (“He who now letteth will let …”), ‘nice’ meant ‘stupid’ then ‘coy’ then ‘fastidious’ or ‘subtle’, ‘doubt’ meant ‘fear’ (so the line “'Tis to be doubted” in King Lear actually means, ‘It’s something to be feared’), ‘sophisticated’ meant ‘unnatural’, ‘p*ss’ was a perfectly normal word for urine, ‘replenish’ meant ‘fill completely’ (rather than ‘refill’), ‘closet’ also referred to ‘private room’ (“But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet…”).
gotquestions.org/KJV-words.html
I mean, c’mon, should we expect these 17th-century translators to be familiar with every nook and cranny of Palestine?
P.S. Caesarea Philippi (Banias) was destroyed in 1291, and was only rediscovered in the mid-19th early-20th century (AFAIK the Roman period layer was only excavated properly during the late 1980s-1990s). The ‘other’ Caesarea (Maritima) was also in ruins around this time.
:thumbsup:Yes, it does. In fact, I think it’s very much possible that with the Deuterocanonicals re-inserted, or interspersed in the traditional Vulgate arrangement, the KJV can be approved for Catholic use, probably even without any modification to the text.
As some of you may know, there is an edition of the KJV available on the market right now known as the Third Millenium Bible (you can read about it here) that contains the Apocrypha. The version is actually of the same family as the “KJV21”, or “the 21st Century KJV”, though the latter does not contain the Apocrypha.
