GodisgraciousR325
Member
Post is tagged KJB #4 - Inspired
First of all, here are some words of the Hampton Court regarding two verses which were not translated correctly:
"
AN EXCERPT FROM THE SUM AND SUBSTANCE OF THE CONFERENCE, FROM
14 JANUARY, 1603, AT HAMPTON COURT, BY WILLIAM BARLOW.
ON Monday, January sixteen, between 11. and 12. of the clock, were the 4. plaintiffs called into the
privy chamber, (the two Bishops of London, and Winchester being there before) and after them all the
Deans and Doctors present, which had been summoned ... the King’s Majesty, entering the chamber,
presently took his chair ...
[Dr Rainolds, the foreman, addressed King James:]
After that, he moved his Majesty, that there might be a new translation of the Bible, because those
which were allowed in the reign of King Henry the Eighth, and Edward the sixth, were corrupt and
not answerable to the truth of the original.
For example, first, Galatians 4. 25. the Greek word sustoicheo is not well translated, as now it is;
Bordereth, neither expressing the force of the word, nor the Apostle’s sense, nor the situation of the
place.
Secondly, Psalm 105. 28. They were not obedient; The original being, They were not disobedient.
Thirdly, Psalm 106. verse 30. Then stood up Phinees and prayed, the Hebrew hath, Executed
judgement. To which motion there was, at the present, no gainsaying, the objections being trivial,
and old, and already in print, often answered; only my Lord of London well added, that if every man’s
humour should be followed, there would be no end of translating. Whereupon his Highness wished,
that some especial pains should be taken in that behalf for one uniform translation (professing that he
could never, yet, see a Bible well translated in English, but the worst of all his Majesty thought the
Geneva to be) and this to be done by the best learned in both the Universities, after them to be
reviewed by the Bishops, and the chief learned of the Church; from them to be presented to the Privy
Council; and lastly, to be ratified by his Royal authority; and so this whole Church to be bound unto
it and none other: Mary, withal, he gave this caveat (upon a word cast out by my Lord of London that
no marginal notes should be added, having found in them which are annexed to the Geneva
translation (which he saw in a Bible given him by an English Lady) some notes very partial, untrue,
seditious, and favouring too much of dangerous, and traitorous conceits.
... And so concluded this point as all the rest, with a grave and judicious advice. First, that errors in
matters of faith might bee rectified and amended. Secondly, that matters indifferent might rather be
interrupted, and a gloss added ..."
First of all, here are some words of the Hampton Court regarding two verses which were not translated correctly:
"
AN EXCERPT FROM THE SUM AND SUBSTANCE OF THE CONFERENCE, FROM
14 JANUARY, 1603, AT HAMPTON COURT, BY WILLIAM BARLOW.
ON Monday, January sixteen, between 11. and 12. of the clock, were the 4. plaintiffs called into the
privy chamber, (the two Bishops of London, and Winchester being there before) and after them all the
Deans and Doctors present, which had been summoned ... the King’s Majesty, entering the chamber,
presently took his chair ...
[Dr Rainolds, the foreman, addressed King James:]
After that, he moved his Majesty, that there might be a new translation of the Bible, because those
which were allowed in the reign of King Henry the Eighth, and Edward the sixth, were corrupt and
not answerable to the truth of the original.
For example, first, Galatians 4. 25. the Greek word sustoicheo is not well translated, as now it is;
Bordereth, neither expressing the force of the word, nor the Apostle’s sense, nor the situation of the
place.
Secondly, Psalm 105. 28. They were not obedient; The original being, They were not disobedient.
Thirdly, Psalm 106. verse 30. Then stood up Phinees and prayed, the Hebrew hath, Executed
judgement. To which motion there was, at the present, no gainsaying, the objections being trivial,
and old, and already in print, often answered; only my Lord of London well added, that if every man’s
humour should be followed, there would be no end of translating. Whereupon his Highness wished,
that some especial pains should be taken in that behalf for one uniform translation (professing that he
could never, yet, see a Bible well translated in English, but the worst of all his Majesty thought the
Geneva to be) and this to be done by the best learned in both the Universities, after them to be
reviewed by the Bishops, and the chief learned of the Church; from them to be presented to the Privy
Council; and lastly, to be ratified by his Royal authority; and so this whole Church to be bound unto
it and none other: Mary, withal, he gave this caveat (upon a word cast out by my Lord of London that
no marginal notes should be added, having found in them which are annexed to the Geneva
translation (which he saw in a Bible given him by an English Lady) some notes very partial, untrue,
seditious, and favouring too much of dangerous, and traitorous conceits.
... And so concluded this point as all the rest, with a grave and judicious advice. First, that errors in
matters of faith might bee rectified and amended. Secondly, that matters indifferent might rather be
interrupted, and a gloss added ..."
