|
| Christian news worldwide |
 Home |
 Archives |
 Subscriptions |
 Adverts |
 Find a church |
 About us |
 Contact us |
 Site Map |
 PrintableVersion In the Beginning: The Story of the King James BibleGrand tradition-makingIN THE BEGINNING: The King James or Authorised Version of the Bible has been the mainstay of the Bible in the English language for the greater part of 400 years. Alister McGrath has provided a well-written account of events leading up to the 1611 translation and the impact, both good and less welcome, it has had throughout the generations. With regard to the events prior to the publication of the King James Bible, McGrath reaches back to the development of printing in 15th-century Europe and the production of the first printed New Testament translation by William Tyndale in 1525/26. Although three extant copies of Tyndale's 1526 octavo edition are known, including the Stuttgart copy complete with a title page, McGrath (page 73) surprisingly displays ignorance of the latter that came to light in 1997. Before leaving Tyndale, it seems to me that McGrath (pages 263-4) gives the credit to the King James Bible for phrases that in fact almost exclusively first appeared in Tyndale, including 'In the beginning'! It seems that some expressions used by Tyndale were already in common English usage in the early 16th century. Given the considerable influence of Tyndale on translations subsequent to his own including the King James, perhaps a better balance of credit may have been appropriate. A final negative point. Curiously, comparing the King James translation with modern - 20th century - translations, McGrath chose the Revised Standard Version of 1952. In my theological days, the initials RSV routinely carried the connotation of the really sound version! A modern new translation rather than a revision would be a better comparison in my view, the New English Bible or, most widely used of modern translations, the New International Version. The Bible of the PuritansI turn to areas covered in the book which I particularly, although not exclusively, appreciated. First, the chapter (5) that discusses the Geneva Bible. This was very much the Bible of the Reformed-minded and early Puritans in the English-speaking world, the theological tradition with which I suspect many readers of this paper would identify, myself included. Thanks to McGrath's chapter 5, a gaping hole in my knowledge of the history and influence of the Geneva Bible has been filled. For example, I was unaware that the accompanying commentaries and notes were more the cause of controversy rather than the actual Bible translation. Some pre-Restoration editions of the King James Bible, in fact, included this Geneva Bible extra-biblical material. Alister McGrath recognises the rather sudden demise of the Geneva Bible in favour of the King James translation in the latter days of Cromwell's Protectorate. This coincided with new conflicts between the Puritans and the establishment during the reign of Charles II. I had long known sufficient about the Geneva Bible to have puzzled over why many Christians who hold Reformed and non-establishment views cling so tenaciously to the pro-establishment King James. Restraints were placed on the translators of the King James Bible which resulted in a deliberate rejection of some more accurate translation found in Tyndale and Geneva. An example is the translation in 1 Corinthians 13 of agape. Tyndale correctly translated 'love'. King James reflects the Latin Vulgate, 'charity', which in turn has connotations of what a person may do - charitable actions - independently of God's grace. I am not suggesting a return to the Geneva Bible now. Like all translations, it was not perfect. I believe full credit should be given to good contemporary translations of God's written word. Vested interestsMcGrath further shows that much of the English of the King James Bible was long outdated by the time of its publication in 1611. The glaring example is the almost 100% use of 'thee', 'thou', etc., which belongs more to middle English than the modern English emerging throughout the 16th century and occurring at an even more rapid rate in the present century. The translators of the King James Bible were briefed to model their work largely on the strongly establishment Bishops Bible of 1568 that retained, rather than shed, the pre-Reformed ecclesiastical position. The result, always a temptation whatever a translator's theological stance, was imposition of English words to reflect vested interests, in this case those of establishment ecclesiology, instead of conveying in good everyday English the accurate meaning of the Greek original. Alister McGrath serves all who are seriously interested in the history of the Bible in English and the issues of contemporary translations well in this interesting and lively account which I heartily recommend. Derek J. Lewis, Dudley© Evangelicals Now - January 2002 |
|
