This is true, many are very very much against it. Especially most of the independent fundamental baptist folks, the KJV kind.
I still do find it FUNNY because the KJV was translated by CALVINISTS. So yeah.. BUT HEY it is what it is.
What most Christians do not realized about the KJV, is it was mostly just a PARAPHRASE from the 5 or 6 OLDER English Versions, to
update the English in the older version, to the English Language that King James spoke. The
Original Preface of the 1611 KJV is hard to find, but the Original Translation Team actually admitted it in the 1611 Original Preface to the KJV. When they ran into difficult verses, they sometimes referred to the
LATIN Translation, and the
Septuagint, BOTH WITH KNOWN ERRORS. That info, would SHOCK most KJV ONLY believers. Here is one photostatic copy of it, but it is hard to read in places:
https://library.osu.edu/innovation-...bible/sidebars/the-translators-preface-to-the
Here it is RETYPED:
http://www.ccel.org/bible/kjv/preface/pref1.htm
You really NEED to READ the Original Preface of the 1611 KJV, especially if you think it was a translation for the oldest original manuscripts, because they admitted that they paraphrased lots of it from earlier English Versions. I think many will find they have put the KJV on WAY TOO HIGH OF A PEDISTAL. Here, I have pulled some excerpts out for you:
QUOTE:
The Translators To The Reader
Zeale to promote the common good, whether it be by devising any thing our selves, or revising that which hath bene laboured by others, . . .
. . .
But how shall men meditate in that, which they cannot understand? How shall they understand that which is kept close in an unknowen tongue? . . . so lest the Church be driven to the like exigent, it is necessary to have translations in a readinesse. . .
. . .
Yet it seemed good to the holy Ghost and to them, to take that which they found, (the same being for the greatest part true and sufficient) rather then by making a new, in that new world and greene age of the Church, to expose themselves to many exceptions and cavillations, as though they made a Translation to serve their owne turne, and therefore bearing witnesse to themselves, their witnesse not to be regarded. This may be supposed to bee some cause, why the Translation of the Seventie was allowed to passe for currant. . . . he holdeth the Authours thereof not onely for Interpreters, but also for Prophets in some respect: and Justinian the Emperour enjoyning the Jewes his subjects to use specially the Translation of the Seventie, rendreth this reason thereof, because they were as it were enlighted with propheticall grace. . . .
. . . This is the translation of the Seventy Interpreters, com- monly so called, which prepared the way for our Saviour among the Gen- tiles by written preaching . . . It is certain, that that Translation was not so sound and so perfect, but it needed in many places correc- tion; . . . {KNOWN ERRORS in the Septuagint} . . . that the Seventy were Interpreters, they were not Prophets; they did many things well, as learned men; but yet as men they stumbled and fell, one while through oversight, another while through ignorance, yea, sometimes they may be noted to add to the Original, and sometimes to take from it; which made the Apostles to leave them many times, when they left the Hebrew, and to deliver the sense thereof according to the truth of the word, as the spirit gave them utterance. This may suffice touching the Greek Translations of the Old Testament. . . .
(and Saint Jerome affirmeth as much) that the Seventie were Interpreters, they were not Prophets; they did many things well, as learned men; but yet as men they stumbled and fell, one while through oversight, another while through ignorance, yea, sometimes they may be noted to adde to the Originall, and sometimes to take from it; which made the Apostles to leave them many times, when they left the Hebrew, and to deliver the sence thereof according to the trueth of the word, as the spirit gave them utterance. This may suffice touching the Greeke Translations of the old Testament. . . .
. . .
. . . But now
the Latin Translations were too many to be all good, for they were infinite (Latini Interprets nullo modo numerari possunt, saith S. Augustine.) [S. Augustin. de doctr. Christ. lib 2 cap II].
Again they were not out of the Hebrew fountain (we speak of the Latin Translations of the Old Testament) but out of the Greek stream, therefore the Greek being not altogether clear, the Latin derived from it must needs be muddy. . . .
There were also within a few hundreth yeeres after CHRIST, translations many into the Latine tongue: for this tongue also was very fit to convey the Law and the Gospel by, because in those times very many Countreys of the West, yea of the South, East and North, spake or understood Latine, being made Provinces to the Romanes. But now the Latine Translations were too many to be all good, . . . Now the Church of Rome . . . Yea, so unwilling they are to communicate the Scriptures to the peoples understanding in any sort, that they are not ashamed to confesse,
that wee forced them to translate it into English against their wills. . . .
. . .
. . .
the same will shine as gold more brightly, being rubbed and polished; also, if anything be halting, or superfluous, or not so agreeable to the original, the same may be corrected, and the truth set in place. { KNOWN ERRORS } . . .
. . .
Yet for all that, as nothing is begun and perfited at the same time, and the later thoughts are thought to be the wiser: so, if
we building upon their foundation that went before us, and being holpen by their labours, doe endevour to make that better which they left so good; no man, we are sure, hath cause to mislike us; they, we persuade our selves, if they were alive, would thanke us. . . .
. . .
to have the translations of the Bible maturely considered of and examined. For by this meanes it commeth to passe, that whatsoever is sound alreadie (and all is sound for substance, in one or other of our editions, and the worst of ours farre better then their autentike vulgar) the same will shine as gold more brightly,
being rubbed and polished; also
if any thing be halting, or superfluous, or not so agreeable to the originall, the same may bee corrected, and the trueth set in place. . . .
. . .
Now to the later we answere; that wee doe not deny, nay
wee affirme and avow, that the very meanest { poorest } translation of the Bible in English, set foorth by men of our profession (for wee have seene none of theirs of the whole Bible as yet)
containeth the word of God,
nay, is the word of God. . . .
. . .
Yet before we end, we must answere a third cavill and
objection of theirs against us,
for altering and amending our Taanslations [sic]
so oft; wherein truely they deale hardly, and strangely with us.
{ The very same thing you do to MODERN Translations. } For to whom ever was it imputed for a fault (by such as were wise) to goe over that which hee had done, and
to amend it where he saw cause? . . .
. . .
But the difference that appeareth betweene our Translations, and our often correcting of them, is the thing that wee are specially charged with;
let us see therefore whether they themselves bee without fault this way,
(if it be to be counted a fault, to correct) and
whether they bee fit men to throw stones at us: But it is high time to leave them, and to shew in briefe what wee proposed to our selves, and what course we held in this our perusall and survay of the Bible.
Truly (good Christian Reader) wee never thought from the beginning, that we should neede to make a new Translation, nor yet to make of a bad one a good one, (for then the imputation of Sixtus had bene true in some sort, that our people had bene fed with gall of Dragons in stead of wine, with whey in stead of milke,
but to make a good one better, or out of many good ones, one principall good one, not justly to be excepted against; that hath bene our indeavour, that our marke. . . .
{ That makes it a PARAPHRASE and not an actual Translation from the original languages. They only polished known errors and updated the language for King James.}
1
