[bibleprotector]

There are some folk who have so much hate of the King James Bible, that they have been promoting a story that the King James Bible was translated by men who where almost Roman Catholics.

Their argument is based on several dubious ideas, such as, that King James the First was a tyrant, that the King James Bible was made by Bishops who loved power and position more than truth, and that many words such as “bishop” are deliberately incorrect translations (and this implies that rulers and government in the Church are evil, even though such leaders already existed in the book of Acts).

There is a whole misguided article here which has plenty of examples of attempting to go to the Greek to change God’s Word: http://www.awildernessvoice.com/GEC.html

And there is a particular laughable quote,

“Deacons
Although the KJV is called a translation, we should note that in some places it is not a translation but a paraphrase. We should be leery of all such portions of scripture. A word for word translation would have left the readers to decide the truth for themselves, but that was unacceptable.”

This statement is entirely wrong. But I call to attention the words “We should be leery of all such portions of scripture.” This statement admits that the King James Bible IS Scripture, and this statement also reveals that the authors would rather deny Scripture than believe it, basically saying, “I don’t have to believe that particular portion of Scripture because it is a paraphrase”.

This article is an excellent example of fooling about with words and their meaning to make the Scripture say what the reader wants it to say ... rather that to believe God’s Word as is.

1. The King James Bible was made in the most excellent way, and is a wonderful and accurate presentation of God's Word in English.
2. The men who made the KJB were learned God fearing Bible believers.
3. The people who backed up the KJB were anti-Catholic.
4. The KJB is an exact translation, and not merely a paraphrase. If the English seems to paraphrase, this is because that is the proper English translation, and the actual sense of the original, not an alteration.
5. Every word in the KJB, such as "bishop" etc. is entirely correct and proper.
6. We don't need to go to the Hebrew and Greek to explain away God's Word, we need to go to God's Word in English and study it believingly.
7. We must love God's Word, and not be shaken by those who hate the Bible, and who mock Bible believers.

[stephanos]

Originally Posted by bibleprotector

There are some folk who have so much hate of the King James Bible, that they have been promoting a story that the King James Bible was translated by men who where almost Roman Catholics.

Their argument is based on several dubious ideas, such as, that King James the First was a tyrant, that the King James Bible was made by Bishops who loved power and position more than truth, and that many words such as “bishop” are deliberately incorrect translations (and this implies that rulers and government in the Church are evil, even though such leaders already existed in the book of Acts).

There is a whole misguided article here which has plenty of examples of attempting to go to the Greek to change God’s Word: http://www.awildernessvoice.com/GEC.html

And there is a particular laughable quote,

“Deacons
Although the KJV is called a translation, we should note that in some places it is not a translation but a paraphrase. We should be leery of all such portions of scripture. A word for word translation would have left the readers to decide the truth for themselves, but that was unacceptable.”

This statement is entirely wrong. But I call to attention the words “We should be leery of all such portions of scripture.” This statement admits that the King James Bible IS Scripture, and this statement also reveals that the authors would rather deny Scripture than believe it, basically saying, “I don’t have to believe that particular portion of Scripture because it is a paraphrase”.

This article is an excellent example of fooling about with words and their meaning to make the Scripture say what the reader wants it to say ... rather that to believe God’s Word as is.

1. The King James Bible was made in the most excellent way, and is a wonderful and accurate presentation of God's Word in English.
2. The men who made the KJB were learned God fearing Bible believers.
3. The people who backed up the KJB were anti-Catholic.
4. The KJB is an exact translation, and not merely a paraphrase. If the English seems to paraphrase, this is because that is the proper English translation, and the actual sense of the original, not an alteration.
5. Every word in the KJB, such as "bishop" etc. is entirely correct and proper.
6. We don't need to go to the Hebrew and Greek to explain away God's Word, we need to go to God's Word in English and study it believingly.
7. We must love God's Word, and not be shaken by those who hate the Bible, and who mock Bible believers.

This was talked about in the gook "God's Secretaries". The whole bishop mumbo jumbo is silly nonsense. Bishop was used in the Bibles that came before the KJB, so the idea that these Anglican bishops added these words is a lie.

Wiclif 1380 "and it is writun in the book of salmes, the abitacioun of hem be made desert: and be there noon that dwelle in it, and another take his bischopriche,"

Tyndale 1534 "It is written in the boke of Psalmes: His habitacion be voyde, and no man be dwellinge therin: and his bisshoprychke let another take."

Cranmer 1539 "For it is wrytten in the boke of Psalmes: hys habitacyon be voyde, and no man be dwellinge therin: and his Bisshoprycke let another take."

Geneva 1557 "For it is written in the boke of Psalmes, Let his habitation be voyde, and no man dwel therin: And let another take his charge."

King James 1611 "For it is written in the booke of Psalmes, Let his habitation be desolate, and let no man dwell therein: And his Bishopricke let another take."

Now, concerning those bishops, there is no doubt that they were just as much in love with their rituals and traditions as catholics are and were. Most of the attacks against the biships came from the puritans, and rightfully so, being that the state church was overbearing at that time (they put to death masses of puritans just before the translation process began. I think the last 'heretic' was burned in 1612). I even read that if you didn't attend the Anglican church in the 17th century, you'd have to pay a tax for not being there. There is also no doubt that some of the translators were very carnal. In other words, they were men just like us. HOWEVER, there are a few of the translators that were so brilliant that I doubt any man since (especially today) could compare to the knowledge of Greek and Hebrew these individuals had. Two such individuals that come to mind are Lancelot Andrews, the chief translator, and by far the most brilliant. Andrews was in charge of the Torah portion of the OT, but he got involved in the low level efforts in other parts of the translation project, which is evidened by the fact that there is written evidence of him complaining of the fact that other translators weren't doing their part and he had to step in to see that things stayed on track. By the way, Andrews was conversant in 15 languages. The other translator I remember reading about was John Boise. John Bois was able to read the Bible in Hebrew at the age of five years! He was a proficient Greek scholar at the age of fourteen and for years he spent from 4 o'clock in the morning till 8 o'clock at night in the Cambridge library studying manuscripts and languages. His library contained one of the most complete collections of Greek literature ever assembled.

I think we should honor and respect these men who were entrusted with the task of bringing us the final purification of God's Word. I know I do. I thank my God everyday for His Word.

Peace and Love,
Stephen

EDIT: I wanted to also add that James made sure there were Puritans on the translation committee. They were moderates, but Puritans none the less. Another things I wanted to add is that these men all had a very deep love and respect for their King. Sediton was a VERY serious sin in the eyes of these men. As it is in mine.

[bibleprotector]

The Bishops in the 1630s would have tended to be of the overbearing kind, however I think that to make the same charge against the KJB Bishops (and the other charges against other translators and the King) to be false. There are modern "history books" of the King James Bible translators which are filled with half truths.

Here is an example:

Nicolson says that Miles Smith walked out of a sermon to go to the pub.

Someone researched this, and found that:
1. Nicolson has no citation to any source material
2. Nicolson personally cannot remember or has misplaced his source material
3. That there were several people called Miles Smith, including a preacher in Gloucester

http://cadhas-radiant.dreamhosters.c...uments/NQ3.pdf