| Author |
Message |
John Dean
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 04, 2004 7:41 am
Post subject: Authorized Version |
|
|
Anyone know when and why the King James Version of the Bible started to
be called the Authorized Version?
--
John Dean
Oxford
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
CyberCypher
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 04, 2004 9:32 am
Post subject: Re: Authorized Version |
|
|
John Dean wrote on 04 Nov 2004:
| Quote: | Anyone know when and why the King James Version of the Bible
started to be called the Authorized Version?
|
Because somebody (somebodies, actually) actually *wrote* it?
--
Franke: EFL teacher & medical editor
For email, replace numbers with English alphabet. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Arcadian Rises
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 04, 2004 9:43 am
Post subject: Re: Authorized Version |
|
|
| Quote: | From: "John Dean" john-dean@frag.lineone.net
Anyone know when and why the King James Version of the Bible started to
be called the Authorized Version?
--
|
Good question.
To your "when" and "why" I add my " who" because I'd like to know who
authorized it? The Highest Authority?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Raymond S. Wise
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 04, 2004 9:44 am
Post subject: Re: Authorized Version |
|
|
"John Dean" <john-dean@frag.lineone.net> wrote in message
news:cmc18u$37o$1@newsg1.svr.pol.co.uk...
| Quote: | Anyone know when and why the King James Version of the Bible started to
be called the Authorized Version?
|
I can tell you when the name "Authorized Version" first appeared in print:
1824 according to *Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary,* 11th edition.
--
Raymond S. Wise
Minneapolis, Minnesota USA
E-mail: mplsray @ yahoo . com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bloke
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 04, 2004 11:37 am
Post subject: Re: Authorized Version |
|
|
"John Dean"spake thus
| Quote: | Anyone know when and why the King James Version of the Bible started to
be called the Authorized Version?
--
John Dean
Oxford
|
AFAIK, the "King James" title is more colloquial than "Authorised Version".
Curiously, the Geneva Bible came to be known as the "breeches bible" owing
to the verse in Genesis, "and they sewed together fig leaves and made for
themsleves breeches".
An early edition of the King Jim was known as the 'naughty bible' owing to
the misprints in the commandments, whereby the critical 'not' was left out -
a popular, though short-lived, edition no doubt.
Bloke |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steve Hayes
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 04, 2004 11:45 am
Post subject: Re: Authorized Version |
|
|
On 4 Nov 2004 02:32:17 GMT, CyberCypher <cybercypher@19-16-25-13-01-03.com>
wrote:
| Quote: | John Dean wrote on 04 Nov 2004:
Anyone know when and why the King James Version of the Bible
started to be called the Authorized Version?
Because somebody (somebodies, actually) actually *wrote* it?
|
But who were the somebodies, and when and why did they write it?
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7734/stevesig.htm
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Don Aitken
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 04, 2004 12:11 pm
Post subject: Re: Authorized Version |
|
|
On Wed, 3 Nov 2004 20:44:42 -0600, "Raymond S. Wise"
<mplsrayNOSPAM@gbronline.com> wrote:
| Quote: | "John Dean" <john-dean@frag.lineone.net> wrote in message
news:cmc18u$37o$1@newsg1.svr.pol.co.uk...
Anyone know when and why the King James Version of the Bible started to
be called the Authorized Version?
I can tell you when the name "Authorized Version" first appeared in print:
1824 according to *Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary,* 11th edition.
|
But the words "printed by authority" appear (still, I think) on the
title page of editions produced in the UK. The one I have, published
in 1908, has the Royal Licence in the front matter, as follows:
"LICENCE
In terms of Her Majesty's Letters Patent to her Printers for Scotland,
and of the Instructions issued by Her Majesty in Council, dated
Eleventh July and Twenty-eighth December Eighteen Hundred and
Thirty-nine, I hereby License and Authorise WILLIAM COLLINS, SONS, AND
COMPANY LIMITED to Print and Publish as by the Authority of his
Majesty, but so far as regards the text only, an edition of the Holy
Bible in Nonpareil Type, Trigesimo-secundo size, to consist of Thirty
Thousand Copies, as proposed in their declaration, dated the Eighth
Day of March, Nineteen Hundred and four; the terms and conditions of
the said Instructions being always and in all points fully complied
with and observed by the said WILLIAM COLLINS, SONS, AND COMPANY
LIMITED."
It is the "authorised version" because no edition of it may be
published in the UK without this authorisation. This was been true
ever since the translation was made. Such authorisation is given only
to Collins and Eyre and Spottiswoode, as successors to the
King's/Queeen's Printers for Scotland and England respectively, and to
Oxford and Cambridge University Presses. No attempt has ever been made
to restrict publication abroad.
--
Don Aitken
Mail to the addresses given in the headers is no longer being
read. To mail me, substitute "clara.co.uk" for "freeuk.com". |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CyberCypher
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 04, 2004 12:15 pm
Post subject: Re: Authorized Version |
|
|
Steve Hayes wrote on 04 Nov 2004:
| Quote: | On 4 Nov 2004 02:32:17 GMT, CyberCypher
cybercypher@19-16-25-13-01-03.com> wrote:
John Dean wrote on 04 Nov 2004:
Anyone know when and why the King James Version of the Bible
started to be called the Authorized Version?
Because somebody (somebodies, actually) actually *wrote* it?
But who were the somebodies, and when and why did they write it?
|
The only such somebody we are sure of is Joseph Smith, the writer of
The Book of Mormon. His motives were the same as all other such
somebodies: he wanted the money and power that came from having a
following. L. Ron Hubbard demonstrated quite clearly that "If you write
it, people will believe it" when he gave birth to Scientology. We don't
keep quoting P. T. Barnum's "There's a sucker born every minute" for
nothing. "O, Lord, won't you give me a Mercedes-Benz?"
--
Franke: EFL teacher & medical editor
For email, replace numbers with English alphabet. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bloke
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 04, 2004 12:17 pm
Post subject: Re: Authorized Version |
|
|
"Steve Hayes" spake thus:
| Quote: | John Dean wrote on 04 Nov 2004:
Anyone know when and why the King James Version of the Bible
started to be called the Authorized Version?
Because somebody (somebodies, actually) actually *wrote* it?
But who were the somebodies, and when and why did they write it?
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
|
A bunch of clever-trousers in the church, commissioned by King James I, did
it. The first edition (authorised for reading in churches) was published in
1611, with numerous amendments and revisions since (flame warning! this is
heresy amongst some King Jim enthusiasts). It is based on the Greek version
of the New Testament known as Textus Receptus (or you guessed it, 'the
received text'), as opposed to the Majority Text (used for New King James)
or the Nestle-Aland (used for the NIV).
At the turn of the 19-20 Century, the King Jim had the OT apocrypha removed
(AKA deuterocanonicals or second-canon in Catholic bibles). To mention that
King Jim had his deuterocanonicals removed also inspires flared nostrils
amongst some of the brethren (not Brethren).
(I am confident the faithful will forgive my irreverence)
Bloke |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Martin Ambuhl
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 04, 2004 12:49 pm
Post subject: Re: Authorized Version |
|
|
Bloke wrote:
| Quote: | "Steve Hayes" spake thus:
John Dean wrote on 04 Nov 2004:
Anyone know when and why the King James Version of the Bible
started to be called the Authorized Version?
Because somebody (somebodies, actually) actually *wrote* it?
But who were the somebodies, and when and why did they write it?
A bunch of clever-trousers in the church, commissioned by King James I, did
it. The first edition (authorised for reading in churches)
^^^^^^^^^^ |
"appointed" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tony Cooper
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 04, 2004 1:30 pm
Post subject: Re: Authorized Version |
|
|
On Thu, 4 Nov 2004 12:37:22 +0800, "Bloke" <here@nowhere.com> wrote:
| Quote: | "John Dean"spake thus
Anyone know when and why the King James Version of the Bible started to
be called the Authorized Version?
--
John Dean
Oxford
AFAIK, the "King James" title is more colloquial than "Authorised Version".
Curiously, the Geneva Bible came to be known as the "breeches bible" owing
to the verse in Genesis, "and they sewed together fig leaves and made for
themsleves breeches".
|
BRYAN O'LYNN (Traditional Irish Folk Song)
Bryan O'Lynn was a gentleman born
He lived at a time when no clothes they were worn,
But as fashion went out, of course Bryan walked in
"Whoo, I'll lead the fashions," says Bryan O'Lynn.
Bryan O'Lynn had no breeches to wear
He got him a sheepskin to make him a pair,
With the fleshy side out and the woolly side in,
"Whoo, they're pleasant and cool." says Bryan O'Lynn.
Bryan O'Lynn had no shirt to his back,
He went to his neighbor's and borrowed a sack
Then he puckered the meal bag up under his chin
"Whoo, they'll take them for ruffles," says Bryan O'Lynn.
Bryan O'Lynn had no hat to his head,
He thought that the pot would do him instead,
Then he murdered a cod for the sake of its fin,
"Whoo, 'twill pass for a feather." says Bryan O'Lynn.
Bryan O'Lynn was hard up for a coat
He borrowed a skin of a neighboring goat
With the horns sticking out from his oxters, and then
"Whoo, they'll take them for pistols," says Bryan O'Lynn.
Bryan O'Lynn had no stockings to wear,
He bought him a rat's skin to make him a pair,
He then drew them on and they fitted his shin,
"Whoo, they're illegal wear," says Bryan O'Lynn.
Bryan O'Lynn had no brogues to his toes,
He hopped on two crab shells to serve him for those,
Then he split up two oysters that matched just like twins,
"Whoo, they'll shine out like buckles," says Bryan O'Lynn.
Bryan O'Lynn had no watch to put on,
He scooped out a turnip to make him a one
Then he planted a cricket in under the skin
"Whoo, they'll think it's a-tickin," says Bryan O'Lynn.
Bryan O'Lynn to his house had no door,
He'd the sky for a roof and the bog for a floor,
He'd a way to jump out and a way to swim in,
"Whoo, it's very convanient," says Bryan O'Lynn.
Bryan O'Lynn, his wife, and wife's mother,
They all went home o'er the bridge together,
The bridge it broke down and they all tumbled in,
"Whoo, we'll go home by water," says Bryan O'Lynn.
Brian O'Lynn and his wife's mother
Went under the bridge to piddle together
One piddled needles and one piddled pins
"That's mighty sharp piddling," says Bryan O'Lynn.
Bryan O'Lynn had no watch for to wear
He got a big turnip and scooped it out fair,
He put a live cricket right into it then,
"Sure, they'll think it's a-ticking," says Bryan O'Lynn. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steve Hayes
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 04, 2004 2:24 pm
Post subject: Re: Authorized Version |
|
|
On 04 Nov 2004 02:43:00 GMT, arcadianrises@aol.com (Arcadian Rises) wrote:
| Quote: | From: "John Dean" john-dean@frag.lineone.net
Anyone know when and why the King James Version of the Bible started to
be called the Authorized Version?
--
Good question.
To your "when" and "why" I add my " who" because I'd like to know who
authorized it? The Highest Authority?
|
Who authorised what? The version, or the authorisation?
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7734/stevesig.htm
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Raymond S. Wise
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 04, 2004 3:01 pm
Post subject: Re: Authorized Version |
|
|
"Bloke" <here@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:cmcbm3$2g3$1@mws-stat-syd.cdn.telstra.com.au...
| Quote: | "John Dean"spake thus
Anyone know when and why the King James Version of the Bible started to
be called the Authorized Version?
--
John Dean
Oxford
AFAIK, the "King James" title is more colloquial than "Authorised
Version".
Curiously, the Geneva Bible came to be known as the "breeches bible" owing
to the verse in Genesis, "and they sewed together fig leaves and made for
themsleves breeches".
An early edition of the King Jim was known as the 'naughty bible' owing to
the misprints in the commandments, whereby the critical 'not' was left
out -
a popular, though short-lived, edition no doubt.
|
It is usually referred to as the "Wicked Bible." Other errors in Bible
printing are listed in a message titled "Typesetter's Nightmares" at
http://jmm.aaa.net.au/articles/6334.htm
The article at
http://www.slipups.com/items/901.html
has a link to a picture of the Wicked Bible on display, presumably in a
museum. The error can't be read in that picture, but it can be read in a
picture at
http://library.thinkquest.org/26451/contents/timeline/time6.htm
--
Raymond S. Wise
Minneapolis, Minnesota USA
E-mail: mplsray @ yahoo . com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Raymond S. Wise
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 04, 2004 3:39 pm
Post subject: Re: Authorized Version |
|
|
"CyberCypher" <cybercypher@19-16-25-13-01-03.com> wrote in message
news:Xns959786E435F8Ecctxt2002@130.133.1.4...
| Quote: | Steve Hayes wrote on 04 Nov 2004:
On 4 Nov 2004 02:32:17 GMT, CyberCypher
cybercypher@19-16-25-13-01-03.com> wrote:
John Dean wrote on 04 Nov 2004:
Anyone know when and why the King James Version of the Bible
started to be called the Authorized Version?
Because somebody (somebodies, actually) actually *wrote* it?
But who were the somebodies, and when and why did they write it?
The only such somebody we are sure of is Joseph Smith, the writer of
The Book of Mormon. His motives were the same as all other such
somebodies: he wanted the money and power that came from having a
following. L. Ron Hubbard demonstrated quite clearly that "If you write
it, people will believe it" when he gave birth to Scientology. We don't
keep quoting P. T. Barnum's "There's a sucker born every minute" for
nothing. "O, Lord, won't you give me a Mercedes-Benz?"
|
Joseph Smith is not the only one who created the holy writings for a
religion, sect, or cult, as even your own post suggests. L. Ron Hubbard is
another one to do so, and I've read of others (including the holy writings
of religions/sects/cults which no longer exist). However, Mary Baker Eddy,
the founder of Christian Science, was not the sole writer of her works,
which included passages plagiarized from the works of Phineas Parkhurst
Quimby and Francis Lieber.
--
Raymond S. Wise
Minneapolis, Minnesota USA
E-mail: mplsray @ yahoo . com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CyberCypher
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 04, 2004 4:30 pm
Post subject: Re: Authorized Version |
|
|
Raymond S. Wise wrote on 04 Nov 2004:
| Quote: | "CyberCypher" <cybercypher@19-16-25-13-01-03.com> wrote in message
news:Xns959786E435F8Ecctxt2002@130.133.1.4...
Steve Hayes wrote on 04 Nov 2004:
On 4 Nov 2004 02:32:17 GMT, CyberCypher
cybercypher@19-16-25-13-01-03.com> wrote:
John Dean wrote on 04 Nov 2004:
Anyone know when and why the King James Version of the Bible
started to be called the Authorized Version?
Because somebody (somebodies, actually) actually *wrote* it?
But who were the somebodies, and when and why did they write
it?
The only such somebody we are sure of is Joseph Smith, the writer
of The Book of Mormon. His motives were the same as all other
such somebodies: he wanted the money and power that came from
having a following. L. Ron Hubbard demonstrated quite clearly
that "If you write it, people will believe it" when he gave birth
to Scientology. We don't keep quoting P. T. Barnum's "There's a
sucker born every minute" for nothing. "O, Lord, won't you give
me a Mercedes-Benz?"
Joseph Smith is not the only one who created the holy writings for
a religion, sect, or cult, as even your own post suggests.
|
My post never suggests anywhere that what the whoremaster, political
meddler, and charlatan Joseph Smith wrote was "holy". Please do not
ascribe your characterizations to me or my words. The man perpetrated
a major fraud (so much for "holiness") more than 180 years ago. That
suckers believed him and accepted that he had been given by the angel
Moroni (a Freudian name if ever there was one) golden tablets from
which he copied his words was their problem, but now it is the
problem of the rest of the world, none of which is safe from its
presumptuous teenaged "elders of the church" bicycling their way
through their proselytizing missions to win sous for their church's
treasury and the names of souls for their geneaology of the saved.
| Quote: | L. Ron Hubbard is another one to do so,
|
As an elaborate practical joke that backfied because so many were so
emtionally and intellectually impoverished that they were ready and
willing to believe
| Quote: | and
I've read of others (including the holy writings of
religions/sects/cults which no longer exist).
|
And good riddance to them.
| Quote: | However, Mary Baker Eddy, the founder of Christian
Science, was not the sole writer of her works, which included
passages plagiarized from the works of Phineas Parkhurst Quimby
and Francis Lieber.
|
Yes, another prophet as fraud.
--
Franke: EFL teacher & medical editor
For email, replace numbers with English alphabet. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in