Happy Birthday King James Bible

The King James Bible is 400 years old today. The Queen celebrated the fact as Westminster Abbey today.

www.bbc.co.uk...

That's 400 years longer than it should have existed.

That's all I have to say about that.

Wrong! The KJV has survived and thrived because it is not corrupted like so many versions. In fact, it can not be denied that it (along with the works of Shakespeare and Tolkien - maybe a very few others) is a major pillar of English Literature, even if you discount the religious content, which I don't.

Originally posted by Lazarus Short
Wrong! The KJV has survived and thrived because it is not corrupted like so many versions. In fact, it can not be denied that it (along with the works of Shakespeare and Tolkien - maybe a very few others) is a major pillar of English Literature, even if you discount the religious content, which I don't.

Not corrupted. Right. Because the translators of the KJV didn't intentionally take out the apocrypha.

Originally posted by LeftySinister

Originally posted by Lazarus Short
Wrong! The KJV has survived and thrived because it is not corrupted like so many versions. In fact, it can not be denied that it (along with the works of Shakespeare and Tolkien - maybe a very few others) is a major pillar of English Literature, even if you discount the religious content, which I don't.

Not corrupted. Right. Because the translators of the KJV didn't intentionally take out the apocrypha.

Have you considered that they may have had good reason? Happily, we do have the Apocrypha, I have read them, but I was not all that impressed, especially with the Books of the Maccabees. Go here, go there, fight Greeks, do this, do that - tedious, tedious.

Originally posted by Lazarus Short

Originally posted by LeftySinister

Originally posted by Lazarus Short
Wrong! The KJV has survived and thrived because it is not corrupted like so many versions. In fact, it can not be denied that it (along with the works of Shakespeare and Tolkien - maybe a very few others) is a major pillar of English Literature, even if you discount the religious content, which I don't.

Not corrupted. Right. Because the translators of the KJV didn't intentionally take out the apocrypha.

Have you considered that they may have had good reason? Happily, we do have the Apocrypha, I have read them, but I was not all that impressed, especially with the Books of the Maccabees. Go here, go there, fight Greeks, do this, do that - tedious, tedious.

I would hope they had good reason. I'd hate to think of people running around editing, rewording, and reinterpreting sacred scriptures with no rhyme or reason. Or, worse yet doing all of those things BECAUSE they have very specific rhymes and reasons with sinister implications. I'd hate to live in a world like that. Oh wait...

reply to post by LeftySinister


There is a fellow here, KJV1611, who has stated that the 1611 King James Version is actually superior to the original manuscripts. I think it must be that the translators spent much time in prayer, and were led by the original Author. I respect his viewpoint.

You know, there are two lines of Bible translations, one pure, and one corrupted. Guess which line most modern translations lie on?

I really do like the KJV. in spite of all the semicolons and sentences beginning with "and." Now that written English has been standardised, Jay P. Green has come out with the KJV II, not to be confused with the NKJV. I gather that it updates the language, without changing anything substantial.

reply to post by alldaylong


Great to see a little media coverage for the one single greatest social, political and moral contribution to the whole world for the last 1000 years; the King James Bible.

Happy birthday God's preserved and inspired words! Continue blessing those who love you, and cursing those who hate you, till the Lord returns! S&F The might two-edged Sword of the Lord. (Isa 34:6, Heb 4:12)