On bible-translations and bible-translators and
their employers and directives.
There are other New
Testament passages which in many bible versions may seem to say that elders had
or wielded "authority" over others. That is mostly a matter of misleading
translations, but all of those passages cannot be discussed here. Bible
translations are for the most part produced by churchmen, for churches.
Translators add and choose words, and twist things, according their own bias,
goals and purposes - or according to the bias, goals and purposes of their
employer.
A note: Also the
so-called "biblical" lexicons of old Greek and Hebrew are misleading.
They are limited and biased, and even though they can be of help in some
things, they can at times give the reader a totally wrong impression of what a
given Greek or Hebrew word or phrase meant. The pages bible01b.htm
and bible02b.htm
have more on tools for bible study.
Another note: There is a
cult around the KJ version. It is important to understand that the production
of the KJ version was ordered and controlled by James I of
The essay bible03b.htm
has more on the translation which James I ordered and controlled.
Credo
Creed, creeds
KingJamesUnderNewVersion
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorized_King_James_Version#Authorized_Version
There were instructions given to
the translators that were intended to limit the Puritan influence on this new
translation. The Bishop of London added a qualification that the
translators would add no marginal notes (which had been an issue in the Geneva
Bible). King James cited two passages in the Geneva translation where he
found the marginal notes offensive:[19] Exodus 1:17, where the Geneva Bible had
commended the example of civil disobedience showed by the Hebrew midwives; and
also II Chronicles 15:16, where the Geneva Bible had criticised King Asa
for not having executed his idolatrous mother, Queen Maachah. Further, the King
gave the translators instructions designed to guarantee that the new version
would conform to the ecclesiology of the Church
of England. Certain Greek and Hebrew words were to be translated in a
manner that reflected the traditional usage of the church. For example, old
ecclesiastical words such as the word 'church' were to be retained and not to
be translated as 'congregation'. The new translation would reflect the episcopal
structure of the Church of England and traditional beliefs about an ordained
clergy.
The King's instructions included
several requirements that kept the new translation familiar to its listeners
and reader. The Text of the Bishops'
Bible would serve as the primary guide for the translators, and the
familiar proper names of the biblical characters would all be retained. If the Bishops'
Bible was deemed problematic in any situation, the translators were
permitted to consult other translations from a pre-approved list: the Tyndale
Bible, the Coverdale Bible, Matthew's
Bible, the Great Bible, and the Geneva Bible. In
addition, later scholars have detected an influence on the Authorized
Version from the translations of Taverner's
Bible and the New Testament of the Douai-Rheims Bible.[20] It is for this reason that the flyleaves of most
printings of the Authorized Version observe that the text had been
"translated out of the original tongues, and with the former translations
diligently compared and revised (by His Majesty's special command.)"
The task of translation was
undertaken by 47 scholars, although 54 were originally approved.[21] All were members of the Church of England and except
Sir Henry Savile were ordained priests.[22] The scholars worked in six committees, two based in
each of the University of Oxford, the University of Cambridge, and Westminster.
The committees included scholars with Puritan sympathies, as well as High
Churchmen. Forty unbound copies of the 1602 edition of the Bishops'
Bible were specially printed so that the agreed changes of each committee
could be recorded in the margins.[23] The committees worked on certain parts separately, and
then the drafts produced by each committee were compared and revised for
harmony with each other.[24] The scholars were not paid directly for their
translation work, instead a circular letter was sent to bishops encouraging
them to consider the translators for appointment to well paid livings as
these fell vacant.[25] Several were supported by the various colleges at
Oxford and Cambridge, while others were promoted to bishoprics, deaneries and
prebends
through royal patronage.
The committees started work
towards the end of 1604. King James I of England, on
"Right
trusty and well beloved, we greet you well. Whereas we have appointed certain
learned men, to the number of 4 and 50, for the translating of the Bible, and
in this number, divers of them have either no ecclesiastical preferment at all,
or else so very small, as the same is far unmeet for men of their deserts and
yet we in ourself in any convenient time cannot well remedy it, therefor we do
hereby require you, that presently you write in our name as well to the
Archbishop of York, as to the rest of the bishops of the province of
Cant.(erbury) signifying unto them, that we do well, and straitly charge
everyone of them... that (all excuses set apart) when we prebend or
parsonage... shall next upon any occasion happen to be void... we may commend
for the same some such of the learned men, as we shall think fit to be
preferred unto it... Given unto our signet at out palace of West.(minister) on
the 2 and 20th of July, in the 2nd year of our reign of England, France, and of
Ireland, and of Scotland xxxvii." [26]
They all had completed their
sections by 1608: the Apocrypha committee finishing first.[27] From January 1609, a General Committee of Review met at
Stationers' Hall,
London to review the completed marked texts from each of the six companies.
The committee included John Bois, Andrew Downes, John
Harmar, and others known only by their initials, including
"AL" (who may be Arthur Lake) and were paid
for their attendance by the Stationers' Company. John Bois prepared a note of
their deliberations (in Latin) - which has partly survived in a later
transcript.[28] Also surviving are a bound-together set of marked-up
corrections to one of the forty Bishops' Bibles - covering the Old
Testament and Gospels,[29] and also a manuscript translation of the text of the Epistles,
excepting those verses where no change was being recommended to the readings in
the Bishops' Bible.[30] Archbishop Bancroft
insisted on having a final say, making fourteen changes; of which one was the
term "bishoprick" at Acts 1:20.[31]