FAQ |
Calendar |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
a.v. or k.j.v.
i was just wondering whehn and why they started calling the king james bible the king james version bible, i read it was originally called the "authorized version" but then for some reason it was being called the king james bible, i was just wondering why.
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Couldn't really tell you when they started calling it the King James Bible, But I have read that King James himself never authorized it. The authorized version name was what the common people called it. I hope that helps.
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
I believe it was 1929 when the name change happened if I remember correctly. someone told me once that maybe that was the cause of the ''crash'' of '29, messing with the word but maybe not.
|
#4
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
1. The King ordered the translation, and covered expences of it, 2. The Anglican Hierarchy officially backed it, 3. The rights of the KJB have been held by the Crown, that is, successive sovereigns of Great Britain, including Lord Protector Oliver Cromwell, and presently the Universities still print it with the subtitle “Cum Privilegio”. 4. The Revision of 1638 was done by Royal Authority too. Historically, the KJB was called the "authorised Version", and therefore in the 1800s, called the "Authorized Version". It seems to be in contrast to the Revised Version that the wording "King James Version" came about into common use. Around the present time, the name "Authorized Version" is old fashioned. The wording "King James Version" tends to be used generally, while the name "King James Bible" tends to be the name used by those who in some way defend the KJB. Considering that a major market for the KJB printers now is KJB onlyists, even Cambridge editor, David Norton, uses the title "KJB" and "King James Bible", to have the best possible appeal for his revisionary ideas. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|