danw700
Member
- Messages
- 39
Personally I think that Brandon ought to be thanked and congratulated. This is the only electronic format that I can find of the addition of the King James Bible that is sometimes called WW1 or circa 1900. I have PDF and Word document files of this particular text but I have never been able to find it in any electronic format that includes complex searches et cetera.
The history of the text of the King James Bible is incredibly interesting. Quite apart from the translators and the circumstances surrounding King James I it is very interesting to learn how that Henry VIII firstly changed his mind to agree to the Bible being published in English, then he declares The British Empire (empires, like the Spanish Empire had particular legal significance when it came to the authority of the Papal Roman Catholic Church) and then he commissioned the two universities (Oxford & Cambridge) as the Kings Royal printers and publishers of the Bible.
For some reason King James did not employ them and the printing got caught up with a London printer and all the Guilds. This particular printer did a terrible job and ended up in a debtors prison. The original handwritten copy of the KJV 1611 was destroyed, I believe, in the great fire of London.
It is interesting that Oxford and Cambridge universities now no longer own the printing plates and there is not an official record in their archives of the various edits and publications of the King James Bible through the centuries. I think that is a disgrace. The edits that are being engineered at present are sending the King James Bible backwards. This basically means that all printed King James Bibles not really King James Bibles. And even a Cambridge edition, a modern one, is becoming corrupted. It remains for small publishers and individuals to continue to preserve the text. There are several markers to look out for but I think the most common and important one is that there is a non-S in:
1 John 5:8 And there are three that bear witness in earth, the spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.
There is a lot of published material about all this but finding a condensed version is a bit tricky
. Maybe a working conversational English with a few references might be in order concerning the history of the editing and settings of the King James Bible. I have always been fascinated in how we got our Bible and how the Lord fulfilled his promise to preserve his word for all generations. I believe that the King James Bible pure Cambridge edition circa 1900 is the word of God in English and that basically any vernacular Bible published before 1880 that was accepted by the church in general is going to represent the word of God. There are pure Bibles in other languages should one care to take the trouble to find them. I also believe that the best way of translating the Bible into another language these days is to basically translate the King James Bible pure Cambridge edition English into that language.
While it is true there are plenty of copies of the Textus Receptus and the majority text there are no pure Greek lexicons that are not messed up with the spurious text introduced In the Revised Version of 1880. This is really a sad state of affairs. Most Bible students like to quote Strong's concordance and his numbering system without realising that Strong himself worked on the revision committee. There is no way in looking at any published lexicon of knowing for certain whether the Greek word listed is Koine Greek all pagan Greek – well I learnt it is classical Greek. While there are many existing copies of different authors of classical Greek there really are not any existing copies of different authors of Koine Greek. Therefore you cannot make comparisons to really know the connotations and definitions of the words used. There are only copies to refer them to but not to actual other author's writings.
We no longer have the vernacular Bibles and other documents that the King James translators had access to. It is a fascinating history and I wish that I paid more attention to it when I was at school.
Cheers for now
Dan
The history of the text of the King James Bible is incredibly interesting. Quite apart from the translators and the circumstances surrounding King James I it is very interesting to learn how that Henry VIII firstly changed his mind to agree to the Bible being published in English, then he declares The British Empire (empires, like the Spanish Empire had particular legal significance when it came to the authority of the Papal Roman Catholic Church) and then he commissioned the two universities (Oxford & Cambridge) as the Kings Royal printers and publishers of the Bible.
For some reason King James did not employ them and the printing got caught up with a London printer and all the Guilds. This particular printer did a terrible job and ended up in a debtors prison. The original handwritten copy of the KJV 1611 was destroyed, I believe, in the great fire of London.
It is interesting that Oxford and Cambridge universities now no longer own the printing plates and there is not an official record in their archives of the various edits and publications of the King James Bible through the centuries. I think that is a disgrace. The edits that are being engineered at present are sending the King James Bible backwards. This basically means that all printed King James Bibles not really King James Bibles. And even a Cambridge edition, a modern one, is becoming corrupted. It remains for small publishers and individuals to continue to preserve the text. There are several markers to look out for but I think the most common and important one is that there is a non-S in:
1 John 5:8 And there are three that bear witness in earth, the spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.
There is a lot of published material about all this but finding a condensed version is a bit tricky
. Maybe a working conversational English with a few references might be in order concerning the history of the editing and settings of the King James Bible. I have always been fascinated in how we got our Bible and how the Lord fulfilled his promise to preserve his word for all generations. I believe that the King James Bible pure Cambridge edition circa 1900 is the word of God in English and that basically any vernacular Bible published before 1880 that was accepted by the church in general is going to represent the word of God. There are pure Bibles in other languages should one care to take the trouble to find them. I also believe that the best way of translating the Bible into another language these days is to basically translate the King James Bible pure Cambridge edition English into that language.While it is true there are plenty of copies of the Textus Receptus and the majority text there are no pure Greek lexicons that are not messed up with the spurious text introduced In the Revised Version of 1880. This is really a sad state of affairs. Most Bible students like to quote Strong's concordance and his numbering system without realising that Strong himself worked on the revision committee. There is no way in looking at any published lexicon of knowing for certain whether the Greek word listed is Koine Greek all pagan Greek – well I learnt it is classical Greek. While there are many existing copies of different authors of classical Greek there really are not any existing copies of different authors of Koine Greek. Therefore you cannot make comparisons to really know the connotations and definitions of the words used. There are only copies to refer them to but not to actual other author's writings.
We no longer have the vernacular Bibles and other documents that the King James translators had access to. It is a fascinating history and I wish that I paid more attention to it when I was at school
.Cheers for now
Dan
