sotto voce

This seems to be a personal Gove initiative. He tried to get it paid for on the state, but was caught out. He's an unbelievable disgrace, the kind of vile jerk one finds only on the internet, one of totalitarian instinct who wets underwear at the thought of Christianity alive and well in Britain, or anywhere else, for that matter. The 'KJV' seemingly supports polytheistic trinitarianism, that permits the RCC of fascist association to demote Jesus, facilitating priest control of the masses. It supports priest control by reference to an 'office' of bishops. It tends to support works justification by reference to fasting (the reason it is used by English-speaking Eastern Orthodox). It contains additions to verses, or whole passages, that dilute the impact of the New Testament. It is guaranteed to put off the majority of working class British people because of its archaisms, particularly of verb endings and prepositions, that are now the object of mockery.

No evangelical under 90 years old uses the 'KJV', and no evangelical supports the use of it for young people. The people who call themselves evangelicals who support this move are phoneys, evangelicals in the American sense, which is neo-Catholic. Fascists, iow.

Steven Carr

There are people out there who can help you. Seek them out.

sotto voce

Check out the 20th century fascist governments of Spain and Portugal. And of course Hitler modelled his government on the RC hierarchy, and considered himself the successor of popes.

Mind how you go, Steven.

spin

This is certainly true, but then you wouldn't know. You're stuck with modern translations with their attempts at semantic equivalence which are usually further away from the original than is the significance of the language of the KJV when it is not let down by its faulty manuscript source. Just look at the perversions that most modern translations have in Gen 1:7 for רקיע (raqi`a) which the KJV gives as "firmament": dome, expanse, horizon, space. The word means "that which is the result of being beaten (as with metal)". Firmament carries the notion of solidity furnished by רקיע, but not the guessed shape of "dome" nor the lack of substance implied by the others.

You may as well give up reading the bible. You have difficulties with the language of the KJV and are forced to read translations that are often less accurate. Tell me a non apologetic, non-pc reason why the "son of man" has disappeared from the tanakh in the NRSV, but retained in the christian testament?? Look at the morally bankrupt translations of Daniel 9:25 where many versions imply that the seven weeks (or sevens) should be added to the sixty-two weeks. Grammatically the seven belongs to the previous clause, while the 62 belongs to the following clause. But if you can add the two numbers together you can hide the fact that there are two anointed. Look at how many pull this cheap trick. Why do most christian translators not have the guts to translate Gen 1:1 properly? It's not that creatio ex nihilo is required by the religion. The Hebrew is clear, literally "at the beginning of god create the heavens and the earth the cosmos was without form and empty" or, more Englishy, "when god created the heavens and the earth, the cosmos was without form and empty". (Then came three days of god forming the world and three days of filling it.)

Most christians are dependent on the faithful translations of those who should know better, yet they are let down frequently. They are at the mercy of the foibles of doctrinal dictates that translators feel obliged to adhere to.

I recommend that people refer to numerous translations using different translating techniques, both more literal and more equivalent, so that you can get more angles on the idea underlying the text. It's no substitute for the original languages but it is better than being kept in the dark.

spin

How many psychiatrists does it take to change a lightbulb?.....

N/A

DCHindley

I'll have to agree with Spin, here.

American Fundamentalists effectively think the KJV translation as itself divinely inspired. A LOT of their doctrines are based upon the interpretation of it. Now a lot of what we call "evangelical" Christians here do use the NIV and the NKJV. Many "mainline" churches use RSV or NRSV, or something like ASV or ESV.

I was brought up Episcopalian, but only had a vague idea of what the readers or the minister were talking about when they read or expounded the bible. It was at a bible study when I was 15 or so that I remember reading through the bible myself (the NT mainly) for the first time. I was fascinated, because I realized the source of many doctrines I had merely assumed and generally accepted were right there. I barely heard a thing the bible study leader was saying.

It was a KJV, of course, because in 1970 that was what everyone who was a "born again" Christian read. I found the language quite difficult to comprehend at first, especially the no-longer-in-use spellings (gaol for jail) and "antique" language. However, I doggedly read it front to back numerous times until I understood the thees and thous, etc, as if I was reading modern English. I have two dog eared KJVs marked and underlined all over the place. I even took a class in High School entitled "Bible as Literature," which made me realize that the bible (the KJV) had influenced Western culture way more than I had realized.

Here I am 40 years later and I never even open the KJV anymore. My dad got me a study bible (the NAV, New American Version, was a publication of the RCC) when I was 16 and I went through that one front and back several times as well, noting the footnotes about dates and alternate translations. I found that more interesting to be honest, but continued to use the KJV for the bible studies I still went to. Later, I think in college, I got an RSV study bible that helped me better flesh out the dates and facts related to the texts.

At first I read the bible in an effort to understand what I was being asked to believe. I was puzzled by it sometimes (Paul's letters were "choppy" to me ... like a chopped idea salad) and I also noted that the four gospels tell the same story four often very different ways, and that the sequence of events in the Acts of the Apostles could not be easily reconciled to the places and people mentioned in the letters themselves. Over time I have come to be what many might call "agnostic" or even "athiest" (if that means not believing in a god that has a personality like a human being). If I had not been exposed to that KJV, I would not be as I am today.

DCH

So, when Dawkins approves of the distribution of free KJV bibles, he is hoping there will be more folks like me (shudder :melodramatic out there who have learned to think independently of the Bible in spite of its impact on the culture I live in.

sotto voce

Neither did they, on occasion. I recall several sermons by well-meaning clerics on 'Authorised' verses that did not correspond to any Greek or Hebrew ms. I think that embarrassment was one of the reasons for revision. This context Dawkins is probably blissfully unaware of. But then he pronounces himself an expert on almost everything except what he's qualified in!

In fact, the 'KJV' contributed to Bible study among evangelicals (that is, by the non-USA definition) because it drove them to use Greek and Hebrew as it was so useless, except for finding an initial reference. Today, it's much too easy, with sometimes slick translations, or translations that purport to be 'literal' or otherwise worthy, but are actually horrendously heretical (the ESV being probably the worst offender). So, in a way, another King James who banned everything but his treacle version could be a progressive move!

Joan of Bark

I'd love to see all the different versions of the Bible distributed to schools; then it wouldn't be necessary for students to read them. They could see that there's a major problem with the 'word of God' just because Christians can't decide which one is true.

sotto voce

"Good morning, sixth form. Let me introduce Ms Joan of Bark, invited here by Mr Foreham, your own RE teacher because, as you know, he believes that as many opinions as possible be heard in his subject. We are fortunate to have Ms Joan as a visiting teacher on this occasion. You will have noticed on each of your desks two shining new copies of books, alongside the rather battered Good News Bible you're used to. They are copies of the New International Version, and the New Revised Standard Version, best-selling Bibles that you may already know. They are kindly provided by the local Humanist Association. As headteacher I can assure you that, without their generosity, it is unlikely that we could make the study that Ms Joan is going to help you with today.

So, without further ado, over to you, Ms Joan."

[applause from head, students, Mr Foreham and various other interested teachers at the back]

mountainman

The Romans (in whose rule the new testament appeared) would disagree with that.