It's a beautiful book, full of curiosities, and quite different in parts from the text of the KJV used today. To "dig in" one has to peel each of the gold-edged pages apart, a pleasure I'd long forgotten. The next surprise was the genealogy charts. Who cares who begat who? Apparently they cared a good deal back in the seventeenth century. If you ever need to nut out exactly how David is related to Jesus, it's all there in dubious detail, spread over two pages, with pages more in the introductory section charting the descendants of other worthies, such as Ephraim and Manasseh, and going as far as the text allows.
There are a few puzzlers for the twenty-first century reader, especially in the page headings and chapter descriptions. "Afke, feek, knocke" wasn't too hard (ask, seek, knock), but what on earth does "The harueft great" mean? Okay, you got there long before me: the harvest great. Alright, I can cope, but I've been teaching and proof reading too long not to be taken aback by the absence of the possessive apostrophe. Four hundred years later the irony is that there are those who want to take it out again.
Another feature is the inclusion of the Apocrypha. There, in the 1611 Bible, are the books that later disappeared from Protestant versions, including the KJV.
There are obviously more accurate translations available today, informed by current scholarship and better manuscripts, but arguably there are also a few that are worse (did I mention The Message?) But if you take pleasure in the sound and 'feel' of English, then "the 1611" is a pleasure unto itself, regardless of one's religious views or lack thereof.
Very nice Gavin, and great congratulations again on your efforts leading to your recent degree in Theology.
ReplyDeleteAround here in SC, the King James is the only acceptable Bible because...well...this is the one God wrote himself :)
I got a blank stare of late asking someone which is it, the geneologies through Joseph, Jesus father or Jesus, Son of God? Can't be both. They said yes it could but could not quite come up with how.
Since all copies we have are copies of copies of copies of copies of copies, we do have to wonder what the original words were and why God, who makes our salvation depend on the words, didn't preserve the original words.
I shall always enjoy the study of the Bible, it's origins and all the internal conflicts and contradictions. Congratulations again on your degree.
And you're right about the pleasure of a good book. I have resisted E-Book pad because, well, it just doesn't smell and feel the same as a book.
Thanks Den. I'm glad it's over though. Now I can catch up guilt-free with some Sci-Fi and historical novels!
ReplyDeleteCongrats with your degree. Good to hear you're doing well. :-)
ReplyDelete"Another feature is the inclusion of the Apocrypha. There, in the 1611 Bible, are the books that later disappeared from Protestant versions, including the KJV"
ReplyDeleteOooh, which Apocryphal books are you reading, Gavin?? I have a 1980s NKJV kicking around the place somewhere, but I had to get all my apocryphal needs met online. :-)
"Now I can catch up guilt-free with some Sci-Fi and historical novels!"
ReplyDeleteRecommendation #1
Recommendation # 2
Recommendation #4
That ought to keep you distracted for a reasonable length of time. :-)
Congrats again on surviving the degree!
Congratulations on the degree.
ReplyDeleteI join the other bloggers in offering congratulations! One interesting facet of education seems to be that the more we "know", the more questions and possibilities are raised. So, it's a never ending process.
ReplyDeleteUp until perhaps the past five years, I had no idea how the early translators had suffered or been martyrred, simply for going against the church's and monarchies' wishes for the Bible not to be available for the masses. Apparently, having a direct connection with the deities was a very subversive idea at the time, one to be suppressed and elliminated at all cost! KJV was an officially sanctioned, somewhat middle of the road solution for that day, an antidote to the sometimes unpleasant problems seen as being inherent through Wycliffe or Tyndale.
In our neck of the woods here in the Southwest USA, TNIV passes quite nicely as God's Word amongst the Protestant community. I like the Zondervan Study Bible because the footnotes explain the Old Testament and put it into context with the New Covenant. I'm also grateful that the publishers had the good sense to leave anything from their pornographic library out! Surely, there would be no edifying reason to vividly illustrate the tales of Lot and his daughters, Samson and Delilah, or David and Bathsheba!
BB
Congrats, Gavin. Hey, you can probably write a book now and get it published without going the self-publishing route. Thumbs up.
ReplyDeleteSurely, there would be no edifying reason to vividly illustrate the tales of Lot and his daughters, Samson and Delilah, or David and Bathsheba!
And don't forget not illustrating how to beat a slave so that he doesn't die until the day after tomorrow. And how to properly stone a man to death for picking up wood on the Sabbath in a desert where there is no wood.
Yeah, there's a lot of that stuff that needs to be swept under the rug. Clean it up, I say.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeletePH: The comments you're referring to come from BBob and are quoted by Corky. Nuthin to do with me.
ReplyDeleteCongrats on the degree.
ReplyDeleteIn Theology.