Home Archives Random Quotes Latest Comments Top 100 Submit Quote Search Log In

Quote# 65231

[Re King James Bible. Shadow Girl: I can barely read that version. Plus my grandmother told me that it was written by King James because he wanted a divorce from his wife but the Pope wouldn't grant it.]


You're thinking about the NKJV. This is the one that was commissioned by the king that wanted a divorce I believe. I think it was one of the King Henry's. Crazy kook either got the divorces he wanted or arranged the death and/or imprisonment of his wives so he could re-marry at will. The KJV is the original copy written and translated by Shakespeare, from the ancient greek and hebrew manuscripts. If not this, he may have translated it from an even earlier english translation (which was then translated from the original greek and hebrew) when english barely resembled what it is today. It's one of these two events. This is why it's considered the most accurate, a direct english translation from the originals and the standard for today despite being a relic from the 1300-1500's where fancy poetic language was the common english of those times.

At least, this is my understanding of where that notion came from. I might be wrong.

TimothyK, RR 90 Comments [8/28/2009 7:26:04 PM]
Fundie Index: 42
Submitted By: Grigori Yefimovich
WTF?! || meh
Username:
Comment:



1 2 3 4
clockworkgirl21

*blink blink*

Just...no.

8/28/2009 7:28:12 PM

Mog

The NKJV was published in 1979-1982. Hell, you were probably alive when it was published!

That sort of ignorance is just inexcusable.

And I'm pretty sure Shakespeare had nothing to do with the KJV, though I suppose until we know who "Shakespeare" was we won't be able to know for sure :-P

8/28/2009 7:30:34 PM

NoGodsEver

Yeah, you might be wrong.

8/28/2009 7:30:51 PM

Painful

Shakespeare? Wow, please tell me that's a troll, because that's a new level of stupid even for RR - though, imagine all the double meanings the bible would have had!

8/28/2009 7:33:34 PM

MPW

As an atheist, I find the KJV the one I'm best able to read - it's a remarkable work of literature in its own right, because of the "fancy poetic language." But it's FAR from being the most accurate. The history of the translation is a bit tangled, and it's been a while since I read about it, so I remember few details. But scholars and translators have found much better and more accurate material to work with since then, and besides, the primary motivation in the translation of the KJV was political - propping up a particular, official Church of England theology, and the power implications flowing from it. Accuracy of translation was way down the list of priorities.

The current Protestant fundie fetish for the KJV is one of their odder peculiarities, and that's saying something.

Anyway, regardless of any of what I said above, um... Holy crap, how is it possible to be this ignorant about the book you claim is the center of your life? I've gotta wonder if this is a joke/poe.

8/28/2009 7:35:39 PM

mad the swine

... okay, so Robert Heinlein (I think) wrote a short story wherein Shakespeare, Bacon, and the other great playwrights of the day were secretly giving King James' translation committee advice on phrasing. As a fictional conceit, Shakespeare as Bible author fits well with the rest of the fiction on RR :)

Edit: if fundies learned to use Wikipedia, we'd be out a good fifty percent of our lolquotes. Hell, even if they only learned to use Conservapaedia, we'd be out 25% :P

8/28/2009 7:39:26 PM

MPW

[whoops - delete double post]

8/28/2009 7:44:42 PM

Mudak

@MPW, you don't honestly believe any of these guys has actually *read* the Bible, do you?

8/28/2009 7:46:22 PM

preachers kid

Um, you MIGHT be wrong? Oh, yes, you are most definitely wrong. Let us count the ways...... Shakespeare????? What a dumb ass.

If you are computer literate (and I use that word loosely) enough to post on an internet forum, you'd think you could at least google something before you spew misinformation. Grow a brain.

8/28/2009 7:49:30 PM

Efrain

@Painful:
No where near as many as it does now, but that's because Shakespeare knew how to write. :3

8/28/2009 8:01:51 PM

anevilmeme

"I might be wrong."

Dead give away that it's a troll, a real fundie never admits the possibilty of error.

8/28/2009 8:09:00 PM

anevilmeme

"I might be wrong."

Dead give away that it's a troll, a real fundie never admits the possibilty of error.

8/28/2009 8:09:04 PM

Angua

Arrrgghhh! The KJV was written under the reign of James I of England (James VI of Scotland). He did not rule in the 1300s or the 1500s. The KJV was written in the early 1600s. And the fancy poetic language? They wanted it to sound fancy and poetic so they used terms that were already archaic to make it sound older and more dignified. There is no evidence that Shakespeare had anything to do with the writing of the KJV. I've heard other people say that, but the evidence to back it up is incredibly weak. And King Henry VIII ruled in the 1500s, before King James I came to the throne. How could he have written the New King James Bible when the original King James Bible hadn't even been conceived yet. And no, the KJV is not considered one if the most accurate translations of the Bible. People know more today than they did in the 1600s and poetic translations are rarely the most accurate translation.
You just failed history epicly. Please either go back to school of read a book or just do a quick google search before telling other people this tripe.

8/28/2009 8:17:06 PM

Philbert McAdamia

I might be wrong.

NAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHhhhhhhhh, Timo. Ya think?

8/28/2009 8:24:41 PM

LDM

"I might be wrong."

A fundie wrong? Never!

8/28/2009 8:32:09 PM

Caustic Gnostic

TimothyK:
You know, you shouldn't store your headphones in your hip pocket. I just had the weirdest impression that your asshole was speaking there for a minute.

8/28/2009 8:32:25 PM

Blackvoice

Holy shi-

8/28/2009 8:33:28 PM

LabCreatedRuby

SHAKESPEARE!????

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAA!!!

Oh, that's FANTASTIC. That made my week, seriously.

8/28/2009 8:33:39 PM



uhh, KJV was taken mostly from a guy named tiller (who did actualy translate from original hebrew) and a few other sources.

But the language used in the book was out of date even when it was first published.

8/28/2009 9:52:43 PM

Drax

What the fuck?

Seriously, read some history.

8/28/2009 10:42:13 PM

Papabear

King James didn't write the King James Bible.

King James was most probably gay.

Henry the VIII was the English king denied a divorce by the Pope.

NKJV was published in the early 80s... the 1980s.

The KJV wasn't written or translated by Shakespeare.

An "earlier English translation" would not need to be translated into English by Shakespeare or anyone else.

The original manuscripts of the Bible do not exist now nor did they exist in the king James era.

KJV dates to 1611 not "1300 - 1500."

"I might be wrong." Now you're on the right track.




8/28/2009 10:46:27 PM

Thinking Allowed

Wow...someone failed history in high school.

8/28/2009 11:37:33 PM

John_in_Oz

"At least, this is my understanding of where that notion came from. I might be wrong."

Please enjoy your time with Rapture Ready; they won't let you stay there long.
Nevertheless I must savour your final remark. The humility and sanity of your concluding words are a pair of unexpected roses situated in a blighted desert.
Shame about the preceding ones. Google is your friend.

8/28/2009 11:45:08 PM

Kristy

Someone give this guy a PhD in literary history! WTF?????

8/28/2009 11:45:10 PM

Freethink

YOU ARE WRONG!!!! End of story...

8/29/2009 12:26:28 AM
1 2 3 4