The PuritanBoard  

Go Back   The PuritanBoard > The Scriptures > Translations and Manuscripts

Translations and Manuscripts Discussions regarding translations of the Bible and Bible manuscripts

» Online Users: 43
6 members and 37 guests
Backwoods Presbyterian, J.C. Philpot, panta dokimazete, ReformedTarheel, Rev. Todd Ruddell
Most users ever online was 856, 07-06-2007 at 12:19 AM.
Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 08-17-2007, 05:59 PM
Coram Deo's Avatar
Puritanboard Junior
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Denton, Maryland America
Posts: 1,792
Thanks: 315
Thanked 147 Times in 103 Posts
Question 1560 vs 1599 Geneva Bibles

A friend called me up today ready to buy his copy of the Geneva Bible and wanted to know which version is better translated? 1560 or the 1599? The author of the 1560 claims that the 1560 is more superior in translation then the later 1599 translation. He also claimed that the 1599 edition is one of the most error ridden copies of all Geneva's.

What do you make of all this? My friend really wants to buy the best translation of the two..

Here is the complete quote from the author of the republished 1560 version:

Quote:
Why the 1560 vs. 1599 edition?

The 1560 Geneva Bible is far more important as a historical production. It is directly in the line of the 16th century translation accomplishments. The notes reflect the reformation theology better than the later notes. The notes of the 1560 edition show John Calvin's influence from his commentaries.

The 1599 has Tomson's NT notes and was the first to have notes on Revelation by Junius (an avid Calvinist whose father was brutally murdered). They also included the Metrical Psalms, which were popular. The basic problem, however, is that the 1599 edition is one of the most error ridden copies of all Geneva's. Furthermore, many were dated 1599 but were really printed in 1633, as explained in my Introduction. The notes put into the "1599" became more and more Calvinistic, and also show anti-catholic sentiment, probably in response to the notes in the 1582 Catholic Rhemes NT. In a Revelation 9 note, for instance, Francis Junius blasts Pope Gregory VII for his "evil doings."

Finally, the advertising for the 1599 reproduction makes it sound much more important than it was. While the Geneva Bible was popular among the Pilgrims, they continued to use the KJV as well. The 1599 edition was only one out of the many Geneva Bible editions that the Pilgrims and Puritans would have brought to America.

The 1560 Geneva Bible will be much more sought after by collectors and historians.
__________________
Michael Daniels
Reformed, RPCNA
Denton, Maryland

[i][b]As For Me And My House, We Will Serve The Lord[/i][/b]

[SIZE="1"][I][FONT="Century Gothic"]Unum Deum in Trinitate: Pater, Filius, et Spiritus Sanctus [RIGHT]Sola scriptura - Sola gratia - Sola fide - Solus Christus - Soli Deo gloria - Solum psalterium - Lex talionis[/RIGHT][/FONT][/I][/SIZE]
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 08-17-2007, 06:45 PM
VirginiaHuguenot's Avatar
Puritanboard Librarian
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Warrenton, VA, USA
Posts: 21,570
Blog Entries: 11
Thanks: 1,813
Thanked 2,222 Times in 1,353 Posts
I can't say that I've studied all of the differences between the 1560 and 1599 editions, nor all of the various editions in-between (a key difference from 1576 onwards being Laurence Tomson's revision of the New Testament), but based on what little I know, I am partial to the 1599 edition for the following reasons:

* The 1560 edition included the Apocrypha (albeit with a note stating that it was not canonical) but did not include a Psalter for singing; the 1599 edition was the first English Bible to not include the Apocrypha, and it does include a Psalter for singing; and

* I prefer the annotations of Francis Junius which appeared in the 1599 edition first, replacing the previous notes by John Bale and Heinrich Bullinger (which are good and not to be despised). I think the editing of the annotations in the intervening period enables the 1599 edition to reflect a richer and more profound Biblical interpretation.

A good library will include both editions; if forced to choose, I would choose the 1599 edition.

__________________
Andrew Myers
Husband of Jessica, Father of Jackson, Katie and Samuel
Member, Presbyterian Reformed Church of Northern Virginia
Warrenton, VA USA
Editor, The Matthew Poole Project

"Let your Morning Thoughts, and your last Evening Thoughts, be what shall become of you to all Eternity." -- Matthew Poole

Last edited by VirginiaHuguenot; 08-17-2007 at 08:24 PM.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Closed Thread

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On
Forum Jump

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.0.1

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:43 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.2.0 ©2008, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright © 2002-2008 PuritanBoard.com
Hosted by WebsiteMaven - helping ministries with web hosting advice, reviews, and design.
Westminster Abbey © Confessional Presbyterian Presses - used with permission.
Add Our Custom Button to your Google Toolbar

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64