Celebrating the King James Version

Comment by James Robertson on November 8, 2010 at 7:52am

What King James wrought
How the Bible still shapes the language
By Jan Freeman | November 7, 2010 | Boston.com

In the past week or so, anyone following the news might have read that Jon Stewart is “a thorn in the side of politicians”; that Senator Harry Reid of Nevada won reelection “by the skin of his teeth”; and that people in the newspaper industry “see the writing on the wall.”

That well-informed reader wouldn’t have been especially surprised to hear that these phrases all come from the same source, the Bible. It has long been an article of faith among speakers of English that biblical language — especially that of the Authorized, or King James, version, published in 1611 — has been immensely influential. The KJV, wrote linguist David Crystal in 2004, “has contributed far more to English in the way of idiomatic or quasi-proverbial expressions than any other literary source.”

But just how much was that “far more”? Not even Crystal knew, and with the KJV about to celebrate its 400th year, he set out to explore and tabulate its contributions to everyday language. Now, in “Begat: The King James Bible and the English Language,” he has some answers. The short one is “257” — that’s the number of familiar idioms, from “be fruitful and multiply” (Genesis) to the whore of Babylon (Revelation), that he credits to the stature and popularity of the King James Bible.

This doesn’t sound like a lot, given some past claims that thousands of phrases are Bible-derived. But Crystal is counting only idioms — the expressions we use and modify freely with no reference to their origins. He excludes what he labels “quotations,” like “the meek shall inherit the earth” — Bible words that are rarely borrowed for reuse in nonreligious contexts. And even that 257 beats Shakespeare, who has fewer than 100 original phrases to his credit.

But Shakespeare was an innovator, notes Crystal, and a prolific coiner of words, if not of phrases. The translators who produced the KJV were conservative, dedicated to continuing a language tradition. Their mandate was to improve on the earlier English Bibles — “to make...out of many good ones, one principall good one.” And in fact, only a handful of our 257 familiar idioms — “how the mighty are fallen,” “to every thing there is a season” — appear only in the KJV.

Crystal displays these variants clearly in a tabular appendix, showing which idioms were preserved from earlier Bibles and which were rewritten. Only the KJV, for instance, has “a thorn in the flesh”; earlier versions had “a prick” or “a sting” or “unquietness,” none as sharp as that thorn. The KJV asks if a leopard can “change its spots,” but the committee might have gone with “a pard may change his diversities,” from the Wycliffe Bible. “Cast thy bread upon the waters” is mysterious, but we manage to use it anyway; “lay thy bread upon wet faces” would not have been so versatile.

Other Bible-based idioms have evolved with use so they no longer reflect any one text. “From the cradle to the grave” was once “womb to the grave”; “pride goes before a fall” condenses four much wordier alternatives; our shorthand “fly in the ointment” no longer spells out the stink of the fly-fouled ointment.

But if you think this is dull, sober scholarship, think again. In Crystal’s definition, an idiom is an adaptable expression, and his 257 phrases have been adapted, twisted, and punned on to a fare-thee-well. “Signs of the times” begets “whine of the times” (on an advice column) and “shine of the times” (for a hair product). “Love of money is the root of all evil” becomes “Money is the root of all baseball” (and so on) and even “Monet is the root of all evil.”

Headline punsters, read this book with caution: When you see what your tribe hath wrought, you may have to conclude that when it comes to biblical wordplay, there’s nothing new under the sun.

Comment by James Robertson on November 9, 2010 at 7:12am

King James defends Bible from liberalism --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
November 08, 2010
WorldNetDaily
By Jim Fletcher

As mentioned previously, just one of the positive aspects of the KJV is that one doesn't get commentary that is often coming from a leftwing bias. The KJV translators just let the text do their talking, unlike the geniuses who operate as Bible translation editorial boards today. One only needs to look at the old Interpreter's Bible and gasp at the long list of liberals who wrote that insufferable commentary. By the way, if you want to torture yourself, crack the Interpreter's Bible open and just attempt to get through a couple sections of commentary. It is the very definition of bad writing.

One of the things the Christian left has done in tampering with Scripture is forcing an environmentalist, "green" agenda into the Bible. It has effectively taken the discussion far beyond what the Bible intended regarding stewardship.

Many, many conservative Christians, by the way, emphasize careful stewardship of our environment, but that news rarely makes the news. It doesn't fit the liberal agenda of a knuckle-dragging constituency on the right.

Also, notice what liberal policies have influenced in The Message, the popular version championed by the center-left. Eugene Peterson's 10-million selling The Message Bible alters Scripture in the name of environmentalism.

The Message translates John 3:17, saying that Jesus "came to help, to put the world right again," instead of "that the world through Him might be saved" (referring to salvation of souls, as stated in the KJV).

Peterson doesn't stop there. He also adds "green" to Romans 15:13: "Oh! May the God of green hope fill you up with joy …"

The Green Bible – no doubt popular in mainline circles – is no less ideological to the point of making the left swoon. Produced in league with the Sierra Club, The Humane Society and the National Council of Churches, The Green Bible has an intro by Desmond Tutu and contributions from N.T. Wright and Brian McLaren.

These contributors claim that the Bible is virtually obsessed (my word) with environmental concerns, but actually, the Bible is not terribly concerned with, ultimately, this present world. You see, this is where worldview and eschatology come to the fore.

The Bible actually says that even this physical planet is under judgment and will one day be completely remade.

Another feature of the "newer Bibles" is the emphasis on mysticism. This goes in lock-step with those who wish to push the square peg of environmental excesses into the round hole of Scripture.

Hear Ray Yungen, from his terrific book, "A Time of Departing":

I am aware that Foster and Manning both say things that would stir the heart of any Christian. But the issue here is one of mysticism. Is their mysticism legitimate? Biblical meditation and prayer, as found abundantly in the book of Psalms, is not to stop thinking about God but rather to think intently on God and to direct all our thoughts toward God. The following statement by William Shannon quoting Merton leaves an inescapable conclusion:

'The contemplative experience is neither a union of separate identities nor a fusion of them; on the contrary, separate identities disappear in the All Who is God.'

In essence, he is saying there is only one big identity – God. This is more in tune with core shamanism than Christianity, yet Manning embraces Shannon.

In Leviticus 19:31, God says, 'I am the Lord your God.' Only God possesses God's identity. Any other teaching is heretical.
Amen.

This whole emphasis on liberal causes that has seeped into the Bible itself is eye-opening.

I was amazed back in the 90's to see a copy of the NIV Men's Devotional Bible and a quote from Thomas Merton. The NIV team saw fit to include this statement by the Catholic mystic Merton, who claimed that "sin is the refusal of spiritual life."

The quote sounds spiritual. It sounds "deep."

The problem is, it's nonsense. If sin were the refusal of spiritual life, we'd have billions of sinless people. Many people are spiritual. It was shocking at the time that a "Christian" publisher would produce something like that. It isn't anymore.

Comment by James Robertson on November 9, 2010 at 4:39pm

The great standard of literature as to purity and exactness of style is the (King James)Bible.
- Hugh Blair

Comment by James Robertson on November 11, 2010 at 3:51pm

The English Bible,—a book which if everything else in our language should perish, would alone suffice to show the whole extent of its beauty and power. - Thomas Babington, Lord Macaulay. (1800–1859),On John Dryden,1828.

Comment by James Robertson on November 11, 2010 at 3:53pm

James I saw his task as giving his newly acquired kingdom a beautiful gift that would also serve as a unifying force. It didn’t quite turn out as he wished, but many of those families who left these shores to begin life in the
New World took James’s book with them.

The result was beyond what the King could ever have imagined. As James’s Bible spread around the world, Britain established a linguistic empire that has outlasted any imperial power. Indeed, the subjects of this English-language commonwealth are bound together by the strongest of bonds, a use and love of the English language.
Frank Field, MP, is chairman of the 2011 Trust

Comment by James Robertson on November 24, 2010 at 6:31am

More than half of young people have never heard of the King James Bible
By Daily Mail Reporter
23rd November 2010


More than half of younger people have never heard of the King James Bible, a survey shows.
Fifty-one per cent of under-35s did not know what the Authorised Version was, compared with 28 per cent of over-55s.
The Authorised King James Version, which will be 400 years old next year, took the English language around the world and is thought to be the biggest-selling book ever.
It was prepared on the orders of King James I to correct flaws and political problems left by existing translations and provide one that would unite religious factions.
And it provided the language with hundreds of now well-known phrases such as ‘let there be light’ and ‘eat, drink and be merry’.
A spokesman for the King James Bible Trust, which commissioned the poll, said: ‘There has been a dramatic drop in knowledge in a generation.

'Yet this is a work which was far more influential than Shakespeare in the development and spread of English.’
He said the book should be taught by schools in English, history and religious education classes.

Labour MP Frank Field said: ‘It is not possible to comprehend fully Britain’s historical, linguistic or religious development without an understanding of this great translation.’ The King James translation has dropped out of fashion in recent years as clergy have turned to more modern translations.

Comment by James Robertson on December 2, 2010 at 9:18am

400 Years Later, KJV Bible Still Going Strong
Written by Dave Bohon
Thursday, 02 December 2010 - TheNewAmerican

As the Protestant Christian world gears up to celebrate the 400th anniversary of the King James Version of the Bible, which many historians call the “single most important publication in whole of history,” the BBC reports that the United Kingdom is going “Bible bananas” for the anniversary, with perpetual readings, services, and commemorations in churches and cathedrals, a flurry of YouTube postings, and even a party hosted by the Duke of Edinburgh at the Banqueting House at Whitehall, “even though there are 162 days to go before the anniversary of its publication.”

While the British have every reason to celebrate their momentous cultural, literary, and spiritual contribution to the world, they should also take a step back in reflection at how significantly they have neglected the spiritual training of their own children (a trend that, unfortunately, has also dramatically impacted America). A poll conducted by the King James Bible Trust, an organization established to lead the 400th anniversary celebration, has found that over half of adults under age 35 in the U.K. have never even heard of the King James Version of the Bible. That compares to 28 percent of U.K. residents over 55 who were unaware of the KJV.
A spokesman for the Trust noted that while the historic volume “was far more influential than Shakespeare in the development and spread of English,” there has been a “dramatic drop in knowledge” about the work in just one generation.

Commissioned in 1604 by King James I, and known officially as the Authorized Version, the KJV Bible was the work of a team of nearly 50 of the best Bible scholars of the day, and following its first publication in May 1611 quickly spread across the English-speaking world, remaining the dominant Protestant scriptural reference up until the very end of the 20th century. Even in today’s churches across the world, the KJV continues to be the standard by which many Protestant believers judge all other versions of Scripture.

In reality, the King James Version published today is not the same text as that of the original 1611 version, with hundreds of changes in spelling, grammar, vocabulary, and punctuation creeping in over the past 400 years. Most KJV Bibles published today are based on the version revised in 1769 by Benjamin Blayney, an Oxford educated scholar who was retained by the printer commissioned by the Crown to produce the Bible.

To demonstrate the influence the KJV Bible has had across the globe, the BBC in its coverage of the 400th anniversary noted that while the latest installment of the “Harry Potter” series has sold some 44 million worldwide, estimates of the number of the KJV in print range from 2.5 billion to six billion, and it is widely considered to be the best-selling volume in history.

While in the United States updated versions of Scripture, such as the New International Version (which has comes under intense criticism with its most recent update) and the New King James Version (an updating of the original into modern English), have replaced the KJV in a majority of Christian circles, a solid core of conservative Evangelical Christians continue to embrace the ancient volume as pre-eminent. Websites devoted to the KJV have proliferated across the Internet, and a popular Canadian website even offers a free downloadable audio version of the Bible in the King James Version.

Comment by James Robertson on December 4, 2010 at 12:11pm

Though its language may sound a bit square,
The Authorized Version has flair.
Every Thee, Thou, and Thy
Brings a tear to my eye;
Without them, you haven't a prayer. - By David Schildkret

Comment by James Robertson on December 14, 2010 at 6:13am

Secularists complain of BBC’s plan for day-long Bible readings
Dec 13, 2010 by ■ Andrew John
Secularists in the UK are up in arms over a BBC plan to elbow regular programmes off the schedules on a day in January to make way for a day of Bible readings.



Next year sees the 400th anniversary of the King James Bible, and on January 9 readings on BBC Radio 4 – the corporation’s main radio speech channel – will be spread throughout the day, running from early morning till midnight.
Each 15-minute reading will feature a well-known voice, including actors Samuel West, Hugh Bonneville and Emilia Fox, historian Simon Schama and writer Will Self.
Only the network’s most popular shows – such as The Archers and Gardeners’ Question Time – will still have their normal scheduling.
The move has angered Terry Sanderson, president of the UK’s National Secular Society.
The Daily Telegraph quotes Sanderson as saying: “It is fair enough to have a programme devoted to it, but the coverage is so excessive it beggars belief.
“The BBC is supposed to be for everybody, not just Christians, so to devote a whole day to a minority, which is what Christians now are, is unfair to other listeners who may want something different.”
A BBC spokesman is quoted as saying: “The King James Bible is generally accepted to have had a significant impact on our language, the arts and music.
“A 400th anniversary is a rather special landmark, and we feel it is appropriate that the BBC sets aside part of one day’s scheduling to mark such an event.


http://www.digitaljournal.com

Comment by James Robertson on December 30, 2010 at 8:41am

King James Bible's 400-year reign
Quadricentennial of KJV to get royal treatment
By Mark A. Kellner
The Washington Times
Wednesday, December 29, 2010

Its cadence is found in the speeches of Abraham Lincoln and the lyrics of Paul Simon. Renowned narrator Alexander Scourby and country music legend Johnny Cash have recorded spoken versions of the text. It's estimated that 1 billion copies have been printed since the first volume rolled off the press in 1611.

The King James Version of the Bible, also known as the "Authorized Version," marks its 400th anniversary in 2011, and by any measure, it has had a lasting impact on the world and on the language into which it was sent. The "authorized" moniker comes from a title-page declaration that this Bible was "authorized to be read in churches."

"The sheer poetry of the King James Version, not to mention its almost half-millennium of absolute authority, militates against its slipping into obscurity any time soon," declared Phyllis Tickle, longtime religion editor at Publishers Weekly magazine.

Even noted atheist Richard Dawkins has praise for the volume: "You can't appreciate English literature unless you are to some extent steeped in the King James Bible. There are phrases that come from it — people don't realize they come from it — proverbial phrases, phrases that make echoes in people's minds," he said in a video released by the King James Bible Trust, the British organization that is one promoter of the 400th-anniversary celebrations due next year.

"Not to know the King James Bible is to be, in some small way, barbarian," Mr. Dawkins added.

Indeed, many of its phrases have entered everyday use, among them: "my brother's keeper," "salt of the earth," "give up the ghost," "scapegoats," "an eye for an eye," "casting your pearls before swine," "scarlet woman," "writing on the wall" and "the blind leading the blind."

"A house divided against itself," Lincoln's signature sentiment, was translated that way 250 years before Lincoln was elected president.

Geof Morin, communications director for the American Bible Society, whose New York headquarters will host a King James Bible exhibit next year, called the King James "still relevant" in the age of Twitter and Facebook.

"It was the Bible staring Thomas Jefferson in the face," Mr. Morin said. Its words, he added, were "in the speeches of Abraham Lincoln. It's the language we still use today. It's part of the American psyche, of how we see ourselves as a nation."

But before the KJV — as the version is known by many readers and scholars — came into America's consciousness, it had to arrive on the scene at all. That happened following a contentious 1604 meeting at Hampton Court palace, when a young James VI of Scotland, newly crowned as James I of England, was trying to iron out differences between the Church of England and a dissident sect known as the Puritans.

Putting the Scriptures into English could be a dangerous practice: 16th-century translator William Tyndale was executed. After Henry VIII broke with the Roman Catholic Church, and established the Church of England under the monarch, there were some efforts to approve a complete English-language Bible.

Henry authorized production of what came to be known as the "Great Bible," while the 1583 "Bishop's Bible" followed during the reign of Elizabeth I. In Geneva, English-speaking exiles who opposed Mary I's moves to reconcile with Rome produced the "Geneva Bible," whose translation and margin notes took a decidedly anti-monarchist and anti-clerical stance.

The Hampton Court Conference was drifting into sectarian arguments, historians note, when Puritan leader John Rainolds (also spelled Reynolds), took the bold step of addressing James and asking for a new translation of the Bible, since the previous Bibles "were corrupt and not answerable to the truth of the original."

By almost all accounts, James was delighted: He didn't like the Geneva Bible, and the earlier versions weren't fully up to his standards of scholarship. As a boy, James had immersed himself in Greek and Latin, among other intellectual pursuits. He hardly had known his parents and was installed on the Scottish throne while just a year old with a regent in charge.

It took seven years to create the volume known as the KJV. And while the title page stated it was "newly translated out of the original tongues, and with the former translations diligently compared and revised," the actual work drew more on an earlier English version, said Larry Stone, a former vice president at Thomas Nelson Publishers and author of "The Story of the Bible," a new history of the Scriptures published to coincide with the anniversary.

The translators "were told to follow the 'Great Bible,'" Mr. Stone said in a telephone interview, "and they would compare the translation of the 'Great Bible' with the Greek and the Hebrew. If they wanted to change [the wording], it would change for several reasons; either the 'Great Bible' translation was not accurate, or they could say the words better."

And because the 'Great Bible' drew on Tyndale's translations, the 16th-century "thee" and "thou" entered into the King James Version, even though they were long departed from common usage.

Would James I, the only English monarch to ascend the throne as a published author, be happy his eponymous Bible has survived this long?

"I actually think he would be somewhat pleased, because of its longevity," said David Teems, author of "Majestie: The King Behind the King James Bible," a 2010 biography of the monarch and his most famous book.

A strong believer in the "divine right of kings," Mr. Teems explained, James was determined "his Bible would reflect his reign, unite realms of Scotland and England. His desire was to unify, and to unify all of Christendom."

While that didn't happen, the impact of the KJV is without question: It quickly displaced the Geneva Bible as the Protestant standard in the English-speaking world, and was often the primary "reader" for generations.

Evangelists from Charles Finney to Billy Graham preached from it; Paul Simon derived the phrase "workman's wages" in his song "The Boxer," from reading I Timothy, he once told Rolling Stone magazine.

Author Joe Kovacs, whose 2009 "Shocked by the Bible" explored the lesser-known stories and facts of the Bible text, said he chose the King James to quote in his book because "it's the most well-known and frequently quoted translation."

Beginning in November, Thomas Nelson Publishers, which sold 329,000 printed copies of the King James Bible between July 2009 and July 2010, has mounted a major campaign to promote the text, with a website, www.kjv400celebration.com, and national marketing campaigns.

The firm also is working with the History Channel to promote the anniversary.

"To me, the 400th anniversary, is not just about KJV, but about the Bible. The fact that it is a historic milestone gives us the opportunity to go beyond and look at the impact of Scripture. It's not a translation story; it really is a Bible story," said Carla Ballerini, Nelson's bible group marketing vice president.

Despite the language changes and continued research of the past four centuries, the King James Version retains a great deal of authority, said Alister McGrath, head of the Center for Theology, Mission and Culture at King's College in London.

"The KJV is a surprisingly reliable translation, even though some minor translation changes are necessary on account of advances in our understanding of the manuscript tradition over the last 400 years," said Mr. McGrath, whose 2001 "In the Beginning" was a history of the KJV's development.

However, "the day of a single dominant biblical translation is past," he added. "In many ways, the KJV held a monopoly in English from about 1700 to 1950, as no other translation was seen as being significant over that period. Nowadays, there are multiple [English language] translations."

That may be the case, but there may be life in the older text yet: Compare its "Give us this day our daily bread," found in Matthew 6:11, to the rendering in "The Message," a popular modern version: "Keep us alive with three square meals."

Comment

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• Next ›
• Page