The King James Version

Religion is probably the biggest divider in world history, but for those that believe in God it is central to our existence. Share your views.
black
Middle Weight
Middle Weight
Posts: 713
Joined: November 16th, 2005, 6:49 am
Location: "It is the racist who creates the inferior." fanon.

The King James Version

Unread postby black » May 10th, 2006, 6:49 am

The King James Version

The early Protestants, who were the heirs of the Reformation, exclusively used the Geneva Bible. The Calvinists, the Puritans, and the Pilgrims used this Bible until it went out of print in 1644.
The first Geneva Bible, both Old and New Testament, was published in English in 1560 in Geneva Switzerland. It was essentially a revision of William Tyndale's revised and corrected 1534 edition. The majority of the work was done by William Whittingham, the brother-in-law of John Calvin.
In 1560 a complete revised Bible was published, translated according to the Hebrew and Greek, and conferred with the best translations in divers languages, and dedicated to Queen Elizabeth I. After the death of Mary Tudor(Bloody Mary), a fanatical Catholic, Elizabeth was crowned queen in 1558, and once again England moved toward Protestantism.
The Geneva Bible was an instant success; more than a 144 editions appeared between the years of 1560 and 1644. As a matter of fact, for forty years after the publication of the King James Bible, the Geneva Bible continued to be the Bible of choice. Interestingly, until King James had his own version named after him, he too, used the Geneva Bible. Afterwards, James tried to disclaim any knowledge of the Geneva Bible.
It is important to note that when James became king of England in 1603, there were only two translations of the Bible in use; the Geneva Bible, as stated, was the most popular, and the Bishops' Bible was used for church services. Gary DeMar, in his historical article titled, "The Geneva Bible: The Forgotten Translation," points out that King James disapproved of the Geneva Bible because of its Calvinistic leanings. He also frowned on what he considered to be seditious marginal notes on key political texts. A marginal note for Exodus 1:9 indicated that the Hebrew midwives were correct in disobeying the Egyptian King's orders, and a note for 2 Chronicles 15:16 said that King Asa should have had his mother executed and not merely deposed for the crime of worshipping an idol. The King James version of the Bible grew out of the king'sdistaste for these potent doctrinal commentaries. He considered the marginal notes to be a political threat to his kingdom.
At a conference at Hampton Court in 1604 with bishops and theologians, the king listened attentively to a suggestion by the Puritan scholar, John Reynolds, that a new translation of the Bible was greatly needed because of the king's distaste and dislike for the Geneva Bible. James was anxious for a new translation. He exclaimed, "I profess," "I could never yet see a Bible well translated in English; but I think that, of all, that Geneva is the worst."
In addition to being a threat to the king of England, the Geneva Bible was vociferously anti-Roman Catholic. One must bear in mind that Rome was still persecuting Protestants in the 16th century. Furthermore, one must bear in mind that the English translators, John Wycliff, and William Tyndale, Wycliff was the first to translate the entire Bible into English. Although he only had the Latin Vulgate to work with, one can, upon careful scrutiny, see his influence on Tyndale's translation and ultimately the King James Version.
John Rogers, Myles Coverdale, and the above were all exiles from a nation that was returning to the Catholic faith under a queen, Mary Tudor, who was burning Protestants at the stake (that is why she was/is called Bloody Mary. She burned 300 or more).
The anti-Roman sentiment is most evident in the Book of Revelation: "The beast that cometh out of the bottomless pit (Rev. 11:17) was represented by the Pope, which hath his power out of hell and cometh thence." It was not long before the Geneva Bible was replaced by the King James Version, but not before it helped to settle the United States and the Americas.
It safe to say without reservation that the King James Version of the Bible was a government publication. It was a government publication simply because James was a devout believer in the "divine right of kings." The "divine right of kings" dictum meant that since a king's power came from God, the king then had to answer to no one but God. This also meant that an evil king must not be challenged; the people should suffer in silence; contrastly, a benevolent king was therefore a blessing sent from God.
This is primarily why James disliked the Geneva Bible. On the other hand, the Geneva Bible, with its marginal notes, was popular with the common people. The Geneva Bible did not conform to the rights of king maxim. However, it must be said that the marginal notes in the Geneva Bible were placed there by leaders of the Reformation, John Knox and John Calvin.
A marginal note such as: "When tyrants cannot prevail by craft they burst forth into open rage," (Exodus 1:22) annoyed James immensely. The Reformation prospered in Geneva; many of those religious scholars who fled the reign of Mary Tudor (Bloody Mary) started a congregation there. Their greatest effort and contribution was the first Geneva Bible. The marginal notes were added to later editions.
Religious wars engulfed Europe. The Spanish, because of the Protestant rebellion, waged a war to restore Roman Catholicism to Western Europe. The Dutch fought for the Reformation and religious freedom. The Dutch declared religious freedom for all; thus Amsterdam became an open city for liberal ideas. As a result, the 1599 Edition of the Geneva Bible was printed in Amsterdam and England in large quantities until the 17th century.
King James made it crystal clear before he became James I of England that he had no use for the "Dutch Rebels" who had rebelled against their Spanish King.
Queen Elizabeth died in 1603 and her cousin, James Stuart, son of Mary Stuart, who up until that time had been King James VI of Scotland ascended the throne and became known as King James I of England. He ascended the throne, as indicated earlier, with the "divine right of kings" maxim entrenched in his mind.
In 1603 James was declared king, he wasted no time in ordering a new edition of the Bible as a means of denying the common people the marginal notes they so cherished and quoted in the Geneva Bible. He was not going to allow those marginal notes to sway English citizens away from his commands.
Thus, on February 10, 1604, he ordained the following: That a translation be made of the whole Bible, as consonant > as can be to the original Hebrew and Greek, and this to be set out and printed without any marginal notes, and only to be used in all churches of England in time of divine service.
James painstakingly set up rules that made it impossible for anyoneinvolved in the project to make an honest translation. Those rules are as follows:
1. The ordinary Bible read in church, commonly called the Bishops' Bible, to be followed and as little altered as the truth of the original will permit. Since the common people preferred the Geneva Bible to the existing government publication, it was advised that a superseding government publication be placed on their bookshelves.
2. The Ecclesiastical words to be kept, viz. The word "church" not to be translated "congregation." That is, if a word should be translated a particular way, it should be deliberately mistranslated to make the people think that God still belongs to the Anglican Church--exclusively.
3. No marginal notes at all to be affixed, but only for the explanation of the Hebrew or Greek words, which cannot without some circumlocution, sobriefly and fitly be expressed in the text. In essence, these rules and the translation became the King James Version of the Bible and the religious source of the Western world--particularly the third world and among the slaves in the United States.
Before I conclude, it is imperative that I briefly discuss the character of King James. A number of historians and religious scholars have argued that King James was a homosexual; his activities in that regard have been recorded in numerous books, public records; as well as articles. However, there are some historians, individuals that I refer to as King Jamesites, who vehemently deny that James was homosexual or effeminate, and they skillfully invert the words of James to accomplish their task.
Stephen A. Coston, author of "King James The VI of Scotland & I of England Unjustly Accused?" is one such individual who defends James's moral character to the utmost. Coston writes these words: "More often than not even when actual facts of King James VI & I are presented they are subjected to interpretative twists designed to give the reader the impression that the words and deeds of King James VI & I support the allegations commonly leveled against him.
Case in point, it is a known fact King James was handicapped from birth with weak limbs and injured himself many times. This caused him to have an unsteady gait. To compensate for this James often leaned on his most trusted councilors and friends which also happened to be members of his personal staff, individual critics freely term "favorites" giving the reader the impression King James did so not because of a physical handicap but because of sexual attraction to same. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Further, it is also freely alleged that King James "passionately kissed" his "favorites" in public." Coston continues, "Critics of King James VI & I are fond of inferring from the above that King James engaged in the: French Kissing" of his "favorites." They then use this assumption as yet another "proof" to support their contention that King James was indeed truly a "homosexual."
For Coston, these critics of James had not presented any concrete proof that went beyond doubt to advance the belief that James was a homosexual. He goes on to say, "Most indeed who have written about King James VI & I have never actually sat down to read what he actually wrote. This environment has created a prime climate for the kind of slanders and libels King James has been subjected to." Coston strongly argues that these religious scholars and historians have merely toyed with conjecture and not facts regarding the sexual orientation of King James.
Contrarily, I would passionately urge Mr. Coston to read "King James & Letters of Homoerotic Desire" by David M. Bergerson. Mr. Bergerson not only presents facts of King James's effeminate, if not, homosexual tendencies, but of his erotic interests as well. Bergerson's exploration of letters between King James and three of his "favorites" reveals an intimate world of collaborative homoerotic and sexual desire. These primary source letters which were newly collected involve correspondence between James and George Villiers, duke of Buckingham, passionate, touching, amazing missives that will remove any doubt about James's sexual preferences. His other two "favorites" were Esme Stuart (Lennox) and Robert Carr (Somersett). Bergerson grounds his provocative study on an examination of the tradition of letter writing during the Renaissance and draws a connection between homosexual desire and letter writing that historical period. James's letters to his "favorites" were saturated with same sex innuendo and proposals of marriage--especially to Buckingham. The evidence clearly demonstrates that the king was most definitely homosexually inclined.
History also records with ample documentation that James was indeed a sadist as many royal personages were during that era. He enjoyed torturing people. When he was the King of Scotland in 1591, he personally supervised the torture of people allegedly involved in witchcraft. He would often suggest new tortures to the examiners.
One woman, named, Barbara Napier, was acquitted for practicing witchcraft. This acquittal so angered James that he wrote a personal letter to the court on May 10, 1551, ordering a sentence of death, and he had the jury called into custody. To make sure the jury understood his anger about the acquittal and the severity of the offense, he presided at the new hearing, and released them without punishment when they reversed their verdict.
History also records that James was cowardly; on January 7, 1591, he was in Edinburgh. An entourage followed that included the Duke of Lennox and Lord Hume. They had an argument with the laird of Logie and subsequently pulled their swords. James looked behind, saw the flashing steel, and fled into the nearest refuge which turned out to be a skinners booth. There to his shame, he "fouled his breeches in fear."
In conclusion, King James was a complex, enigmatic, dastardly individual. However, his major contribution to Christian history was his opposition to Roman authority (The Pope).
It was James's opinion that only the authority of a king, backed by the unified support of fellow Protestant princes, could realistically challenge the usurped authority of the Pope.
Therefore, his version of the Bible was, as stated above, a political document designed by way of revised translations > to ensure that the king's reign could not be challenged by Rome or the common people.
I implore the reader to study "Wide as the Waters The Story of the English Bible and the Revolution It Inspired," by Benson Bobrick to get a complete understanding of how various verses in the King James Bible were changed or deleted from the original texts.
Another book of note worth about King James and the Bible is "In The Beginning The Story of the King James Bible and How It Changed A Nation, A Language and A Culture," by Alister McGrath.
After reading and studying the aforementioned sources, if people still want and need to believe that the King James Version of the Bible is the "Word of God," then the history and research pertaining to this subject is moot at best and will subsequently go for naught.

User avatar
Old Shatterhand
Light Heavy Weight
Light Heavy Weight
Posts: 1318
Joined: March 5th, 2006, 4:18 pm
Contact:

Unread postby Old Shatterhand » May 10th, 2006, 9:51 am

Modern English Bibles such as the New American Standard Bible and the English Standard Version derive their authority from a completely different set of N.T. manuscripts (Egyptian Minority Texts as opposed to the Byzantine Majority Texts).

Your information is way too biased. Though often referred to as the King James Version, the only active part King James took in the translation was lifting the criminal (death) penalty attached to its translation and setting very reasonable guidelines for the translation process (such as prohibiting partisan scholarship and footnotes).

There are some minor translation errors associated with it.

MiChuhSuh

Unread postby MiChuhSuh » May 11th, 2006, 3:35 am

Old Shatterhand wrote:There are some minor translation errors associated with it.


I think the main reason some people still use it is the way it sounds.

What version would you recommend? So far on this site you seem to be the most educated in this stuff.

User avatar
Old Shatterhand
Light Heavy Weight
Light Heavy Weight
Posts: 1318
Joined: March 5th, 2006, 4:18 pm
Contact:

Unread postby Old Shatterhand » May 11th, 2006, 9:50 pm

EVN - I'm just me... wrote:
Old Shatterhand wrote:There are some minor translation errors associated with it.


I think the main reason some people still use it is the way it sounds.

What version would you recommend? So far on this site you seem to be the most educated in this stuff.


New American Standard is the best translation.

User avatar
alexalonso
Founder
Founder
Posts: 8731
Joined: May 12th, 2003, 7:56 pm
Country: United States
If in the United States: California
What city do you live in now?: Los Angeles
Location: Los Angeles
Contact:

Unread postby alexalonso » September 19th, 2007, 2:10 am

the Kings James version is not the best English translation, but since it has been out since 1611 it has become one of the most popular versions.

User avatar
king phoenix
Middle Weight
Middle Weight
Posts: 120
Joined: February 20th, 2007, 8:07 pm

Unread postby king phoenix » September 19th, 2007, 6:00 pm

to me the botom line is the same! no matter what version you read, its been tainted by man!

TarHeelRED
Middle Weight
Middle Weight
Posts: 873
Joined: July 3rd, 2004, 8:00 pm
Country: Israel
If in the United States: North Carolina
What city do you live in now?: New Jerusalem
Location: SPRING LAKE, NC
Contact:

Unread postby TarHeelRED » December 11th, 2007, 11:59 pm

Old Shatterhand wrote:
EVN - I'm just me... wrote:
Old Shatterhand wrote:There are some minor translation errors associated with it.


I think the main reason some people still use it is the way it sounds.

What version would you recommend? So far on this site you seem to be the most educated in this stuff.


New American Standard is the best translation.


New American Standard is the best translation. YEAH RIGHT!!!!

Check this link out: http://www.biblelineministries.org/arti ... HE+SCRIBES

For an even more exhaustive revelation of the deliberate desecration and contortion of God's Word read the book 'New Age Bible Versions' by Gail Riplinger.

User avatar
alexalonso
Founder
Founder
Posts: 8731
Joined: May 12th, 2003, 7:56 pm
Country: United States
If in the United States: California
What city do you live in now?: Los Angeles
Location: Los Angeles
Contact:

Unread postby alexalonso » December 24th, 2007, 4:08 am

king phoenix wrote:to me the botom line is the same! no matter what version you read, its been tainted by man!


nothing has been tainted. you were taught by some fool that it has been tainted. You can always read the original Greek and original Hebrew. They exist, or you can read the Dead Sea Scrolls in the Hebrew if you dont like any of the English translations. Are those scrolls tainted too? Are the Dead Sea Scrolls tainted?

User avatar
clipse
Middle Weight
Middle Weight
Posts: 307
Joined: October 21st, 2007, 12:01 pm

Unread postby clipse » December 24th, 2007, 7:47 pm

alexalonso wrote:
king phoenix wrote:to me the botom line is the same! no matter what version you read, its been tainted by man!


nothing has been tainted.



:shock:

noname20
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 18
Joined: January 28th, 2009, 6:40 pm
What city do you live in now?: oklahoma city

Re: The King James Version

Unread postby noname20 » January 28th, 2009, 7:10 pm

any bible can help you as long as you see it as symbolic

Tony12nc
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 5
Joined: March 16th, 2009, 8:03 am
What city do you live in now?: Q.C.-Tre-4

Re: The King James Version

Unread postby Tony12nc » March 16th, 2009, 8:46 am

The King James Version is the closest the the original text that we have God will hold us accountable for what we have today written as the word of God any one how has added or taken away from the bible is at the mercy of God himself

the last verses of revelations

Rev 22:18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
Rev 22:19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and [from] the things which are written in this book.
Rev 22:20 He which testifieth these things saith, Surely I come quickly. Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus.
Rev 22:21 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ [be] with you all. Amen.

also remeber that the bible is not one book but a collection of books and letters but all are the Word of God spiritually guided by the Spirit of God

Scooby318
Straw Weight
Straw Weight
Posts: 59
Joined: September 20th, 2009, 6:13 am
Country: United States
If in the United States: Kentucky
What city do you live in now?: Shreveport
Location: South

Re: The King James Version

Unread postby Scooby318 » November 27th, 2009, 7:51 pm

Not just tainted by man, written by man and composed for political purposes.

perongregory
Super Heavy Weight
Super Heavy Weight
Posts: 5147
Joined: February 12th, 2004, 9:17 pm
Location: Los Angeles

Re: The King James Version

Unread postby perongregory » December 15th, 2009, 3:19 am

Treat your fellow man, animal, and planet right, and your fellow man should do the same. If you can comprehend this, why do you need religious books?

SpiritualKnight
Straw Weight
Straw Weight
Posts: 55
Joined: August 7th, 2018, 4:12 pm
Country: United States
If in the United States: Texas
What city do you live in now?: waco
Contact:

Re: The King James Version

Unread postby SpiritualKnight » September 12th, 2018, 4:23 am

God is the author for the Holy Scriptures, mankind penned it being led by the Holy Spirit. The bible has been divinely preserved throughout history, all the way to our current times.

I advise you people to check this stuff out, it's important:

Russ Dizdar is a current preacher/former ohio police chaplain, who speaks about the massive satanic cult activity going on in ohio, and other states/places. (his facebook is: https://www.facebook.com/russ.dizdar). He lives in summit county, ohio - he helps people that are born into satanic cults get out, receive salvation, and provides protection to them, and also helps bring healing from a condition they often impose on members from birth, called multiple personality disorder (MPD - also known as DID, dissociative identity disorder), which they use to help keep members under control/hidden.. The satanic covens/cult groups do this through various methods of torture from birth, to bring about a 'split' in the personality through trauma - then hypnosis (and other essentially brainwashing techniques) are used on the 'split personalities', which are 'programmed' (so to speak) to be obedient and do the work. The process is known/documented as satanic ritual abuse (SRA - look it up..) - the man russ helps get salvation/healing for ALL the personalities, and can help provide means of escape/protection for those that want out of these satanic cults/secret society groups.These satanic cult groups I'm talking about are part of the anti-christ's satanic army that's spoken about in the prophetic bible verses of revelation (revelation 16:13-14, revelation 19:19), and are secretly operating inter-connected HEAVILY all over the country, and in other places world wide... They have people operating covertly at all levels of government, education, entertainment, law enforcement, and religions/religious groups (pretending to be one religion, while secretly they're a satanist), and they are VERY ORGANIZED, AND VERY ACTIVE. (*Note* also youtube search: 'cia and satanism' - ted gunderson, a former FBI member, has some really valuable/interesting information concerning this topic.. also look up 'MK-Ultra', and 'project bluebird'.... there are official government files/documents available online, concerning this stuff.) These are the last days (matthew 24), and the end of this world as we know it is not far off. These satanic cults engage in the act of casting spells/hexes on people, as well, but christians are able to combat this with the power of God them through prayer, and also deliverance for the satanic witch's can be attained. The preacher russ has powerful spiritual warfare teachings (Judges 9:57, Matthew 16:18-19, Mark 16:16-18, Luke 10:18-20, Acts 13:1-12, Acts 16:16-18, Ephesians 6:10-17) - witchcraft is real (Deuteronomy 18:10-11, Luke 10:18-20, Romans 16:10, Acts 19:18-29, 1 Timothy 4:1, Revelation 2:24), and these satanic covens/cult groups are heavily into it, doing human sacrifice and other things for demonic empowerment (2 Kings 21:6, Matthew 16:26-27, Luke 4:5-7, Acts 8:9-1, Revelation 18:23), and are involved in/tied to child kidnappings, much of the sex trafficking/sex slave stuff, serial killers (for example: charles manson, and richard ramirez -AKA the night stalker, who was from texas...), and also many people believe that some of the mass murderer's/shooters that have been arrested are potentially satanic cult coven members/victims of the satanic ritual abuse, themselves... This stuff is VERY REAL, and it is a VERY SERIOUS SITUATION - the man russ provides massive concrete evidence concerning this matter, and I have a qucik/powerful overview teaching that's posted at the top of my page, with a few links attached to it, that will help bring a strong understanding concerning the situation, while providing evidences as well. PLEASE LOOK INTO THIS MATTER, IT IS VERY IMPORTANT! (my face book is: https://www.facebook.com/kenny.jackson.5011)

shaolinmonche
Straw Weight
Straw Weight
Posts: 34
Joined: July 7th, 2017, 12:09 pm
Country: United States
If in the United States: California
What city do you live in now?: Orange

Re:

Unread postby shaolinmonche » October 15th, 2018, 7:31 pm

alexalonso wrote:the Kings James version is not the best English translation, but since it has been out since 1611 it has become one of the most popular versions.

Sooo which bible is the best English translation?


Return to “Religious Thought”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest