The King James Bible
At a time when many in the evangelical world have abandoned the King James Version (KJV) of the Bible — or Authorised Version, as it is called in Britain — we find radio and television documentaries, newspaper articles
The King James Bible
At a time when many in the evangelical world have abandoned the King James Version (KJV) of the Bible — or Authorised Version, as it is called in Britain — we find radio and television documentaries, newspaper articles and special exhibitions waxing eloquent in praise of this seventeenth century English production.
‘The book that changed the world’ and ‘A masterpiece of biblical proportions’ are just two of the titles that have grabbed the public’s attention. But why all this sudden interest?
It is because 2011 marks the 400th anniversary of the publication of this Bible version. There is almost universal agreement that the KJV has had an enormous effect on the language, literature, culture, religion and national life of the UK. It has also had a profound influence on people all over the world, especially the USA.
It was the first of the Stuarts, James I of England and VI of Scotland, who enthusiastically encouraged a new English version and set in motion the whole enterprise. He disliked the popular Geneva Bible because of its notes, which he considered undermined the ‘divine right’ of kings to rule.
The idea of a new translation had been in his mind for some time. He had even tried to make a start himself with the Psalms. But in England at the time there was no great interest in a new translation. The Puritans were satisfied with the Geneva Bible and the rest of the Anglicans with the Bishops’ Bible.
James fancied himself as a theologian and peacemaker and early in his reign, aware of different factions in the Anglican Church, summoned a conference of churchmen and theologians at Hampton Court ‘for the hearing and determining of things amiss in the Church of England’.
The conference met in January 1604 and proved a disappointment to those eager for more ecclesiastical reform. So when John Reynolds, the leader of the Puritan delegation, seemed to propose a new Bible translation, the king saw it as a way to appease the disgruntled.
Thus it was resolved that ‘A new 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’.
All are agreed that the translators were among the leading biblical and linguistic scholars of the day. James decreed that 54 of the ‘best learned’ from the two universities south of the border, Oxford and Cambridge, should begin the task of translating, and that their work should be ‘reviewed by the bishops and the chief learned of the church’.
They were formed into six panels — two meeting at Westminster, two at Cambridge and two at Oxford. The first panels in each place were assigned the Old Testament — Westminster, Genesis – 2 Kings; Cambridge, 1 Chronicles – Song of Songs; and Oxford, Isaiah – Malachi.
The second Oxford panel was assigned the Gospels, Acts and Revelation; the second Westminster panel the New Testament epistles; and the second Cambridge panel the Apocrypha.
When each panel had completed its task, twelve delegates, two from each panel, were chosen to meet together at Stationers’ Hall in London to review and revise the entire translation. The bishops of Winchester and Gloucester were appointed to look over the whole work and make final adjustments.
While the majority of the 47 scholars identified were establishment men, two notable Puritans were among the translators: John Reynolds, President of Corpus Christi College, Oxford; and Laurence Chadderton, Master of Emmanuel College, Cambridge.
Until the Reformation period, the Western church was not interested in the original languages in which the Bible was written. Only from the beginning of the 16th century were grammars and dictionaries of biblical languages produced and editions of Hebrew and Greek texts of Scripture published.
For the Old Testament (OT), the Hebrew Christian Ben Chayyim’s 1524-5 edition was used. This was based on manuscripts no older than the 14th century. However, with the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls in the 20th century, we can see how accurate the Jews were in copying the Scriptures over a thousand year period.
For the New Testament (NT), the translators followed a Greek text compiled by the Parisian printer Stephanus in 1550 and based on earlier work by the Catholic humanist, Erasmus.
Compared with the thousands of Greek manuscripts we have today, they had very few to consult, but even the Stephanus edition contained variant readings in the margin. The term ‘Textus Receptus’ (‘Received Text’) was only applied to this text after 1633. They also had available to them the Genevan scholar Theodore Beza’s latest edition of the Greek text of 1604.
Strict rules were laid down for the guidance of the translators. One of the most significant was the first rule: they were not allowed to produce a fresh translation; it was to be a revision of what already existed.
They were to use the Bishops’ Bible as their basis and only depart from it when the original languages demanded it. Marginal notes were only allowed to explain difficulties in the original, give variant readings and add cross-references.
Over the previous 80 years there had been one transla