franklinmonroe
Active Member
According to the Preface this book was "occasioned by the four hundredth anniversary" of the KJB "to provide information" about the version and "it's influence." Anybody read it? I just started it.
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Also in the Preface, Ryken states of the NIV (NT) that he thought it was "an insipid and lifeless translation." Apparently, he feels he has proved that the NIV is "an inferior translation" (in a review for Christianity Today on the NIV's literary merits).
I've read about half the book, and he comes down hard on dynamic equivalency versions.
Wow! He now thinks the NIV is an insipid and lifeless translation. He has gone over the edge these days. He really disliked the NIV in his book :The Word of God In English,but he didn't take it that far then.
In all my criticism of the ESV I have never,and would never, say those things about it.
In his book :TWOGIE, he makes frequent factual errors and uncalled for denigration of the NIV,NLT etc. Most of his wrath comes down on the NIV,I guess because it has continued to be the best-selling English Bible version internationally for close to 30 years. He's desperate to knock it out and bring the ESV into the top three.
If he is as sloppy in his new book,it will not bring him any new fans. Perhaps he has improved his accuracy,but that snip from his Preface is not an encouraging sign.
Chapter One from Tyndale 3 additional principles of translation (that it be from original languages, that it be essentially literal, and that the readers are expected to rise to "standard formal English").
Chapter Three the translators were only modestly paid.
Chapter Four a few archaisms.
At the end of each chapter Ryken includes suggestions for "further reading" which include such books as: Bobrick's Wide As The Waters, Moynahan's God's Bestseller, Bruce's History of the English Bible, McGrath's In The Beginning, Brake's Visual History of the English Bible, Nicolson's God's Secretaries are the ones I've read & own; and a few others like Daniell's The Bible In English.
Here's what Ryken says about the "plowboy" statement (p.25): "The reference to the plowboy has been extravagantly misinterpreted. It is not a comment on Tydale's preferred English style but rather a statement about (a) how widely Tyndale wanted the Bible distributed across English social strata and (b) the large quanity of the Bible that Tyndale wanted people to know..."I disagree,and so do Tyndale experts. William Tyndale put things in a colloquial form --in everyday language. If that plowboy and other common laymen were to understand --then it did rise to standard formal English in the first quater of the 16th century.
Ryken does not deny that (Preface): "the real case agaist the KJV for regular use today is the archaism of the language." Later he says (p.62): "... the archaic language of the KJV is so acute for people unfamiliar with it that it is easy to conclude that it cannot be an accurate rendering of the original biblical text." I don't want to get ahead of where I am in the review so far but I'll say now that Ryken actually claims later in the book that it is precisely some of the archaisms that contribute to the KJV's majesty and eloquence, and makes it more memorable.The folks of 1611 England didn't speak the way the KJV read. It was made to be old-fashioned even then. A lot of expressions in the KJV were out-of-date by 1611.
A fact confirmed in another book I am concurrently reading. I had considered doing a separate thread for Gordon Campbell's Bible: The Story of the King James Version (2010) but I think I will just add some comments to this thread for contrast and comparison. For example, Campbell writes about the 'general meeting' (a revision committee of 6 to 12 members, some coming from each company as declared in Rule 10) on page 61 (my italics) --Only the general committee of review were paid regularly by a private sponsor. ...
Again, Campbell backs you up (this being a point not raised at all by Ryken) --The folks of 1611 England didn't speak the way the KJV read. It was made to be old-fashioned even then. A lot of expressions in the KJV were out-of-date by 1611. ...
One example of a quote from this chapter is apparently by George Bernard Shaw (p.163) --Chapter 11 is a compilation of quotes by literary figures (authors, scholars) speaking their acclaim for the elegance and beauty of the KJV.
Makes me wonder: What does Ryken think about many of the revisions that Parris and Blayney made? (He doesn't mention any revisions to the KJV.) Was the KJV even more superior before they got hold of it? According to Campbell for examples, Parris is responsible for the change of "fourscore" to the less elegant word "eightieth" in 1 Kings 6:1; and Blayney downgraded the exalted 1611 original text in Mark 6:7 from "he calleth" to "he called".... In part, he attributes the exalted style to words like lo, behold, and verily. He asserts that the KJV translators did not intentionally set out to make great literature, however their cultural context contributed to a literary Bible...