King James Translators Notes Online

An exhaustive listing of the marginal notes of the 1611 edition of the King James Bible – Literatura Bautista

 

Conan... Thank you for that... I've been strict KJV before I joined... I have in paperback... Translating For King James, notes made by the translator... John Bois... Translated and edited by Ward Allen... Nice to have and addition to my collection and added it to my bookmarks... Brother Glen

 

In their own words, the KJV guys stated that it was not perfect and that there should be more changes in the future when warranted

not sure how the KJV folks don’t understand it but hey man ………..

 

From the preface of the KJV.

The Translators to the Reader

An Answer to the Imputations of Our Adversaries
Now to the latter we answer; that we do not deny, nay we affirm and avow, that the very meanest translation of the Bible in English, set forth by men of our profession, (for we have seen none of theirs of the whole Bible as yet) containeth the word of God, nay, is the word of God. As the King's speech, which he uttereth in Parliament, being translated into French, Dutch, Italian, and Latin, is still the King's speech, though it be not interpreted by every Translator with the like grace, nor peradventure so fitly for phrase, nor so expressly for sense, everywhere

 

While the makers of the KJV noted that it was their mark or aim to make “one principal good” revision or translation, they also clearly condemned any presumption that would suggest that they accomplished their goal perfectly. Verifiable, convincing facts in the 1611 edition would demonstrate this truth.

In the 1611 preface, this is stated: “doth not a margin do well to admonish the reader to seek further, and not to conclude or dogmatize upon this or that peremptorily? For it is a fault of incredulity, to doubt of those things that are evident; so to determine of such things as the Spirit of God hath left (even in the judgment of the judicious) questionable, can be no less than presumption.” The 1611 preface also noted that “diversity of signification and sense in the margin, where the text is not so clear, must needs do good, yea, is necessary, as we are persuaded.”

According to the large number of marginal notes in the 1611 edition, its makers must have found many places where they considered the text not to be so clear in its meaning. The makers of the KJV gave many more word-for-word, literal renderings in their marginal notes, and they also offered many acceptable, alternative renderings. In some marginal notes, they provided examples of where they gave no English word/rendering for an original-language word of Scripture in their underlying texts. These marginal notes clearly contradict any suggestion that all their translation decisions should be considered certain and unquestionable. The marginal notes could also raise doubt concerning some of their textual criticism decisions.

The 1611 preface noted: “They that are wise, had rather have their judgment at liberty in differences of readings, than to be captivated to one, when it may be the other.”