KJV v. pre-1611 English Translations

[Cope]

A question for those who know: What are some of the differences between the KJV and the pre-1611 English Translations of the Bible? I am inquiring specifically about different readings, rather than spelling differences, chapter/verse numbering differences, etc.

I am referring to the Bishop's, Tyndale, etc.

Are there readings that affect the sense, etc?

Thanks,

Cope

 

[Archangel7]

Originally posted by Cope:

A question for those who know: What are some of the differences between the KJV and the pre-1611 English Translations of the Bible? I am inquiring specifically about different readings, rather than spelling differences, chapter/verse numbering differences, etc.

I am referring to the Bishop's, Tyndale, etc.

Are there readings that affect the sense, etc?

One such reading would be Lk. 17:36 in the KJV, "Two men shall be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left." The Tyndale Bible doesn't have this verse. Neither does the majority of Greek MSS (which includes MSS of the Alexandrian and Byzantine types). It appears only in Western MSS (and a handful of others influenced by them) as a scribal assimilation to Mt. 24:40. Clearly this is an addition to the KJV.

 

[skanwmatos]

The verse was included by Wycliff, left out by Tyndale, included in italics by The Great Bible and Cranmer, left out of the Geneva, included in Bishops and the Rheims, and included in the AV.

The vast majority of manuscripts omit the verse, but it is contained in D, 700, 1071, 1230, 1241, 2174, in 1253 and 1344 with a variant, in 1646 with a different variant, and 2148 with yet a third variant. It is quoted by Ambrose and Augustine.

It seems the strongest evidence in favor of the verse is found in the Latin, both Old and Vulgate which might explain why Wycliff and the Rheims both contain the verse as part of the original canon.

 

[BrianT]

Author Rick Norris wrote:

"An actual comparison of these Bibles would indicate many surprising differences. There are differences in number of words, in meaning of words, in whether a noun or pronoun is used, in use of italics, etc. Sometimes the early English Bibles have fewer words than the KJV, and sometimes they have more words than the KJV. These same type of differences are labeled "serious defects" in any translations after 1611. For example, D. A. Waite labeled these same type differences as "not faithfulness in translation," "not accuracy in translation," "not reliability in translation," but as "diabolical dynamic equivalency" (NKJV compared to KJV, pp. xi-xiii).

Check out the evidence for yourself. The KJV added whole verses, clauses, and phrases that are not found in some of the early English Bibles. Compare Mark 11:26, Mark 15:3c, Luke 17:36, John 8:6, John 8:9c, John 19:38c, James 4:6b, 1 John 2:23b, Revelation 18:23a, and Revelation 21:26, and see for yourself. The KJV does not have over one hundred words found in the Great Bible in the book of Acts alone. In one of the Psalms, the Great Bible has three whole verses that are not in the KJV. On what authority did the KJV translators remove so many words from the Great Bible and add so many words to the earlier English Bibles such as Tyndale's and Matthew's?"

( link )

 

[Anti-Alexandrian]

On what authority did the KJV translators remove so many words from the Great Bible and add so many words to the earlier English Bibles such as Tyndale's and Matthew's?"

Jeremiah 36:32
Then took Jeremiah another roll, and gave it to Baruch the scribe, the son of Neriah; who wrote therein from the mouth of Jeremiah all the words of the book which Jehoiakim king of Judah had burned in the fire: and there were added besides unto them many like words.

 

[Daniel David]

Originally posted by Anti-Alexandrian:
Jeremiah 36:32
1. Then took Jeremiah another roll, and gave it to Baruch the scribe, the son of Neriah; who wrote therein from the mouth of Jeremiah all the words of the book which Jehoiakim king of Judah had burned in the fire:

2. and there were added besides unto them many like words.

1. The first part Jeremiah had Baruch write down.

2. The rest of the book.

Nice.

 

[Archangel7]

Originally posted by Anti-Alexandrian:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />On what authority did the KJV translators remove so many words from the Great Bible and add so many words to the earlier English Bibles such as Tyndale's and Matthew's?"

Jeremiah 36:32
Then took Jeremiah another roll, and gave it to Baruch the scribe, the son of Neriah; who wrote therein from the mouth of Jeremiah all the words of the book which Jehoiakim king of Judah had burned in the fire: and there were added besides unto them many like words. </font>[/QUOTE]Unlike the KJV translators, Jeremiah was a prophet inspired by God.

 

[Pastor KevinR]

Anti-Alex, your post implies you believe in "Advanced Revelation", which is a violation of 2 Peter 1:21; "...old time...but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost." KJV 1769 correct me if I've misread you please.

 

[timothy 1769]

Originally posted by skanwmatos:
The verse was included by Wycliff, left out by Tyndale, included in italics by The Great Bible and Cranmer, left out of the Geneva, included in Bishops and the Rheims, and included in the AV.

The vast majority of manuscripts omit the verse, but it is contained in D, 700, 1071, 1230, 1241, 2174, in 1253 and 1344 with a variant, in 1646 with a different variant, and 2148 with yet a third variant. It is quoted by Ambrose and Augustine.

It seems the strongest evidence in favor of the verse is found in the Latin, both Old and Vulgate which might explain why Wycliff and the Rheims both contain the verse as part of the original canon.

It's also in the peshitta.

 

[Archangel7]

Originally posted by timothy 1769:

[Of Lk. 17:36] It's also in the peshitta.

It's also in the Old Syriac, which has a largely "Western" text. The Peshitta has a number of "Western" readings it retained when it was revised from the Old Syriac; Lk. 17:36 is one of them.

 

[Refreshed]

The Geneva reads "Passover" in Acts 12:4 while the KJV reads "Easter."

Jason

 

[robycop3]

Originally posted by Anti-Alexandrian:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />On what authority did the KJV translators remove so many words from the Great Bible and add so many words to the earlier English Bibles such as Tyndale's and Matthew's?"

Jeremiah 36:32
Then took Jeremiah another roll, and gave it to Baruch the scribe, the son of Neriah; who wrote therein from the mouth of Jeremiah all the words of the book which Jehoiakim king of Judah had burned in the fire: and there were added besides unto them many like words. </font>[/QUOTE]Big difference-GOD SPOKE DIRECTLY TO JEREMIAH! God had chosen Jerry before he was even a fetus!Jerry SAID SO! The AV translators, on the other hand, denied any special inspiration.

As usual, this is another Onlyist failed attempt to present any EVIDENCE for their myth.

 

[skanwmatos]

Originally posted by Refreshed:
The Geneva reads "Passover" in Acts 12:4 while the KJV reads "Easter."

That is not entirely correct. The original Geneva of 1557 read "ester." The revision of 1560 changed "ester" to "Paffeouer."

 

[Keith M]

Originally posted by Cope:
A question for those who know: What are some of the differences between the KJV and the pre-1611 English Translations of the Bible? I am inquiring specifically about different readings, rather than spelling differences, chapter/verse numbering differences, etc.

I am referring to the Bishop's, Tyndale, etc.

Are there readings that affect the sense, etc?

Thanks,

Cope

Why not read these versions for yourself? Visit Studylight.org for online versions of several pre-KJV Bibles.

 

[Askjo]

68 MSS contained Luke 17:36.

29 MSS omitted this verse.

 

[Askjo]

Originally posted by timothy 1769:
It's also in the peshitta.

From the 2nd Century!

 

[robycop3]

Originally posted by Anti-Alexandrian:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />On what authority did the KJV translators remove so many words from the Great Bible and add so many words to the earlier English Bibles such as Tyndale's and Matthew's?"

Jeremiah 36:32
Then took Jeremiah another roll, and gave it to Baruch the scribe, the son of Neriah; who wrote therein from the mouth of Jeremiah all the words of the book which Jehoiakim king of Judah had burned in the fire: and there were added besides unto them many like words. </font>[/QUOTE]Big difference.

Jeremiah was a prophet to whom God directly spoke, while the AV translators were merely translating God's already-presented words. And it was GOD who added to his own words to Jerry. He had no authority of his own to add to that which God spoke directly to him.

 

[Archangel7]

Originally posted by Askjo:

68 MSS contained Luke 17:36.

29 MSS omitted this verse.

You are mistaken. Lk. 17:36 is absent from the *majority* of Greek copies. Where are you getting your information? What's your source?

 

[Archangel7]

Originally posted by Askjo:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by timothy 1769:
It's also in the peshitta.

From the 2nd Century! </font>[/QUOTE]No, from the late 4th-early 5th C. We know this because (1) no Syriac Father before the late 4th C. used the Peshitta, and (2) the most ancient Syriac MSS we have show a pre-Peshitta Old Syriac text.

 

[Askjo]

Originally posted by Archangel7:
You are mistaken. Lk. 17:36 is absent from the *majority* of Greek copies. Where are you getting your information? What's your source?

A manuscript digest of 356 doctrinal passages will tell you what MSS contained and did not contain these passages.