• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

King James

Free4all

Free4all

It's all about the blood
I found this out on the web, and just thought I share.

As God promised, He has preserved His word for the English people in the King James Bible. Proverbs 16:10 says, "A divine sentence is in the lips of the KING. . ." Ecclesiastes 8:4 says, "Where the word of a KING is, there is power . . ." King James. "James" is not an English word but a Hebrew word. Did you know the Hebrew word for James is Jacob! You'll never guess what Psalms 147:19 says, "He showeth His WORD unto JACOB . . ."

I didn't realize the Hebrew word for James is Jacob.
Okay I can go to bed now:)
 
A

alwayswondering

Frubler
As history would have it:

Old Johanes Gutenberg went and invented the printing press and the printing press, in turn, made the Bible available to people who otherwise would never have been able to afford one - scribed books were mighty expensive back in the day.

Not only that, but the availibility of books made people want to learn to read, if for no other reason than to read their Bible. Up to that point they simply accepted what their pastor/preacher read to them during services.

Well the problem with that was a lack of uniformity.

So King James established guidelines for the translation/publication of the Bible. He also commissioned a group of scholars to create a standard version, that's why it's "Authorized." Of course it had to meet James' standards in terms of content.

And that's the way it was.
 
A

angellous_evangellous

Guest
alwayswondering said:
Of course it had to meet James' standards in terms of content.
Click to expand...

:slap: King Jimmy: the second Constantine. :bow:
 
Free4all

Free4all

It's all about the blood
kiwimac said:
It is quite wrong, of course, but thats by-the-by.
Click to expand...

Found this at Wikipedia:

James is a given name. It is the most popular name for a male in the United States according to the 1990 Census. It is derived from the same Hebrew name as Jacob, meaning "grasps by the heel" or "supplanter," probably in a deceiving way (in the Bible Jacob was born grasping Esau's heel and later bought his birthright).

Looks like a true statement to me.
 
Free4all

Free4all

It's all about the blood
Reverend Rick said:
Does anyone know what King James sexual preference was?
Click to expand...

Oh, come on, you don't really believe all the ******** thats going around now do ya?
 
Free4all

Free4all

It's all about the blood
Reverend Rick said:
Does anyone know what King James sexual preference was?
Click to expand...

Oh, come on, you don't really believe the crap thats going around now do ya?
 
*Paul*

*Paul*

Jesus loves you
Free4all said:
Wow, posted it anyway just blotted out -********-, is that a cussword?
Click to expand...

What a slanderous lie, i read the book that alleged that, even though James wrote in his book Basilicon Doron that sodomy was in the same vein as witchcraft, murder and incest.

What depths some people sink to to discredit the bible.
 
kiwimac

kiwimac

Brother Napalm of God's Love
Free4all said:
Found this at Wikipedia:

James is a given name. It is the most popular name for a male in the United States according to the 1990 Census. It is derived from the same Hebrew name as Jacob, meaning "grasps by the heel" or "supplanter," probably in a deceiving way (in the Bible Jacob was born grasping Esau's heel and later bought his birthright).

Looks like a true statement to me.
Click to expand...

That bit is about the ONLY bit that is correct there. The KJV was an OK translation FOR ITS TIME, it is now dated.
 
kiwimac

kiwimac

Brother Napalm of God's Love
*Paul* said:
What a slanderous lie, i read the book that alleged that, even though James wrote in his book Basilicon Doron that sodomy was in the same vein as witchcraft, murder and incest.

What depths some people sink to to discredit the bible.
Click to expand...

Nothing to do with the Bible, plenty to do with James.
 
James the Persian

James the Persian

Dreptcredincios Crestin
*Paul* said:
What a slanderous lie, i read the book that alleged that, even though James wrote in his book Basilicon Doron that sodomy was in the same vein as witchcraft, murder and incest.

What depths some people sink to to discredit the bible.
Click to expand...

How on earth would saying James I was a sodomite discredit the Bible? I don't even think it would discredit the KJV translation, given that he didn't actually have a hand in producing it, only in patronising it. Are you one of those KJV only crowd? If so, I'd be interested to hear why. I'd also point out that the idea that the Bible, or even one version of it, would be discredited due to the moral character of its patron comes perilously close to the heresy of Donatism.

James
 
*Paul*

*Paul*

Jesus loves you
JamesThePersian said:
How on earth would saying James I was a sodomite discredit the Bible? I don't even think it would discredit the KJV translation, given that he didn't actually have a hand in producing it, only in patronising it. Are you one of those KJV only crowd? If so, I'd be interested to hear why. I'd also point out that the idea that the Bible, or even one version of it, would be discredited due to the moral character of its patron comes perilously close to the heresy of Donatism.

James
Click to expand...

The book that I read was written in response to the AV only controversy and it worked it's way into the covers about James's so called sexual preferences. So yes it was an attempt to discredit the bible.
In my opinion it wouldn't be a big deal if he was (in terms of the bible itself) - it would have no effect on the ability or faithfulness of it's translators and there is no apparent softening of the homosexual sin in the KJV except that it doesn't use the word buggerers which the geneva used.
King James did have more involvment than mere patronage as far as I am aware but I don't have my references to hand.
 
A

angellous_evangellous

Guest
Free4all said:
Wow, posted it anyway just blotted out -********-, is that a cussword?
Click to expand...

Learn something new every day. :rolleyes:
 
kateyes

kateyes

Active Member
The rumors about King James are concurrent with his reign--and didn't have much to do with his sponsorship of a new standardized English version of the Bible. That arguement may be used in current times to argue against the validity of his authorized version--but that seems rather far-fetched to me. James was not known for his scholarship, even in his time. This is a link to a brief history of the KJV--that some might find interesting.

http://www.av1611.org/kjv/kjvhist.html


I think it is important to remember that word usages change over time--and reading the KJV-has some of the same interpretation isssues as reading Shakespeare, Sydney or Marlowe.
 
Scuba Pete

Scuba Pete

Le plongeur avec attitude...
There are so many contentions about the KJV being the inspired version. All are baseless as evidenced in the OP.
 
kateyes

kateyes

Active Member
Good Lord--even James didn't claim it was divinely inspired. James was a mighty strange character--and there were some pretty persistant rumors during his reign that he was a changling. Frankly I always thought that as John Knox had such a strangle hold on the the church in Scotland, -- James just really got off on being the head of the Church in England.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top