KJV Revision - Calling all Received Text Onlyists!

Status
Not open for further replies.

tdh86

Puritan Board Freshman
So…I could do with some help… I’m a Received Text onlyist who sees a great need for a faithful but readable Bible version which is based on the RT. (That’s not the reason I need help although some of you would say otherwise :)!)

I know most people would say that the NKJV and the MEV do the job quite adequately but there are various problems with both (a quick investiGoogle will show that) and, when my kids learned to read, I was faced with the same old difficulty – do we get them to read an inferior translation with better readability or just stick to the KJV and work through the readability issues? Having done plenty of research into the options available, I still wasn’t happy with any of them and started asking why no-one has just done a genuine update of the KJV – something more readable but staying true to the TR and not full of ‘the best manuscripts omit…’ kind of footnotes. So that’s what I started doing.

Taking the text of the KJV as my starting point, I’ve been working to produce an update for the last couple of years. The aim is to be far more readable than both the KJV and the NKJV and my goal is for closer to an NIV level but without losing the accuracy, and also to retain the singular/plural pronouns and the switches in verb tense. The New Testament is now in the editing phase and I’m very happy with the results but I’d really love to find someone else who sees the value in a project like this and who (maybe) has a good enough grasp of the Greek to make sure that there is no major deviations. Failing that, having some Beta readers who are theologically sound and have a love for the Word would be a massive help too. If anyone thinks they might be interested in helping out in any way at all then I’d love to hear from you.

By grace,
Tim


Here’s a chapter preview for anyone who’s interested…


LUKE CHAPTER 1

SINCE many have undertaken to set out in order an account of the things that are most surely believed among us,
2 Just as those who were eyewitnesses from the beginning, and ministers of the word, handed them down to us;
3 It seemed good for me also, having fully investigated everything from the very beginning, to write to you in order, most noble Theophilus.
4 So that you could know the reliability of the things that you have been instructed in.
5 ¶ IN the days of Herod, the king of Judæa, there was a certain priest named Zacharias, from the sequence of Abijah; and his wife was from the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elisabeth.
6 And they were both righteous in the sight of God, going about their lives blamelessly in all the commandments and regulations of the Lord.
7 And they did not have a child, because Elisabeth was barren, and they were both now getting on in years.
8 And it came about, that while he was serving as a priest in the presence of God in the order of his sequence,
9 In keeping with the custom of the priesthood, the lot fell for him to burn incense when he went into the temple of the Lord.
10 And the whole crowd of the people were praying outside at the time of incense.
11 And an angel of the Lord appeared to him, standing to the right of the altar of incense.
12 And, when Zacharias saw him, he was troubled and fear came over him.
13 But the angel said to him, Do not be afraid, Zacharias, because your prayer is heard; and your wife Elisabeth will produce a son for you, and you will call his name John.
14 And you will have joy and gladness; and many will rejoice at his birth.
15 Because he will be great in the sight of the Lord, and will not drink wine or strong drink; and he will be filled with the Holy Spirit, right from his mother’s womb.
16 And he will turn many of the children of Israel to the Lord their God.
17 And he will go ahead of him in the spirit and power of Elijah, to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and to turn the disobedient to the wisdom of the righteous; to make ready a people prepared for the Lord.
18 And Zacharias said to the angel, How will I know this? Because I am an old man, and my wife is advanced in years.
19 And, in reply, the angel said to him, I am Gabriel, the one who stands in the presence of God and was sent to speak to you and to bring you this good news.
20 But look, you will be silent and unable to speak, until the day when these things are done, because you do not believe my words which will be fulfilled in their time.
21 And the people waited for Zacharias, and wondered that he delayed for so long in the temple.
22 And when he came out, he was unable to speak to them. And they realised that he had seen a vision in the temple, because he gestured to them and remained speechless.
23 And it came about, that, as soon as the days of his public service were completed, he went away to his own house.
24 And, after those days, his wife Elisabeth conceived, and hid herself for five months, saying,
25 This is how the Lord has dealt with me in the days when he looked upon me, to take away my disgrace among men.
26 And, in the sixth month, the angel Gabriel was sent from God to a city of Galilee, named Nazareth,
27 To a virgin who was engaged to a man whose name was Joseph, from the household of David. And the virgin’s name was Mary.
28 And the angel came in to where she was and said, Hail, highly favoured one! The Lord is with you. You are blessed among women.
29 And when she saw him, she was troubled at his statement, and tried to work out what kind of greeting this could be.
30 And the angel said to her, Do not be afraid, Mary. For you have found favour with God.
31 And, look, you will conceive in your womb and give birth to a son and will call his name Jesus.
32 He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High; and the Lord God will give him the throne of his father David.
33 And he will reign over the household of Jacob forever; and there will be no end to his kingdom.
34 Then Mary said to the angel, How will this be, since I do not know a man?
35 And, in reply, the angel said to her, The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. And so, the holy one who will be born from you will be called the Son of God.
36 And, look, your relative Elisabeth, she has also conceived a son in her old age. And this is the sixth month for her, the one who was called barren.
37 Because, with God, nothing will be impossible.
38 And Mary said, See the maidservant of the Lord! May it be to me in accordance with your word. And the angel went away from her.
39 And, in those days, Mary got up and went hurrying to the hill country, into a city of Judah.
40 And went into the house of Zacharias, and greeted Elisabeth.
41 And it came about, that, when Elisabeth heard Mary’s greeting, the baby leapt in her womb; and Elisabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit.
42 Then she spoke out with a loud voice, and said, You are blessed among women, and the fruit of your womb is blessed.
43 And why is this granted to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?
44 For, look, as soon as the sound of your greeting came into my ears, the baby jumped for joy in my womb.
45 And blessed is she who believed; because there will be fulfilment of the things that were told her from the Lord.
46 And Mary said, My soul magnifies the Lord.
47 And my spirit has rejoiced in God my Saviour.
48 Because he has looked upon the lowly state of his maidservant. For, look, from now on, all generations will call me blessed.
49 Because the mighty one has done great things to me; and his name is holy.
50 And his mercy is upon those who fear him from generation to generation.
51 He has shown strength with his arm. He has scattered the proud in the imagination of their hearts.
52 He has pulled the rulers down from their thrones, and exalted the lowly.
53 He has filled the hungry with good things; and he has sent the rich away empty.
54 He has helped his servant Israel, in remembrance of his mercy;
55 As he said to our fathers, to Abraham, and to his offspring for ever.
56 And Mary stayed with her for about three months and then returned to her own house.
57 Now Elisabeth’s full time came for her to be delivered; and she gave birth to a son.
58 And her neighbours and her relatives heard how the Lord had shown great mercy towards her; and they rejoiced with her.
59 And it came about, that, on the eighth day, they came to circumcise the child; and they called him Zacharias, after the name of his father.
60 And, in response, his mother said, No, but he will be called John.
61 And they said to her, There is no-one in your family who is called by this name.
62 And they signalled to his father, asking what he wanted him to be called.
63 And he asked for a writing tablet, and wrote, saying, His name is John. And they all marvelled.
64 And his mouth was immediately opened, and his tongue was released, and he spoke and praised God.
65 And fear came over all who lived around them. And all these reports were talked about throughout the hill country of Judæa.
66 And all who heard them placed them in their hearts, saying, What kind of child will this be! And the hand of the Lord was with him.
67 And his father Zacharias was filled with the Holy Spirit, and prophesied, saying,
68 Blessed be the Lord God of Israel; because he has visited and redeemed his people.
69 And has raised up a horn of salvation for us in the house of his servant David;
70 As he spoke through the mouth of his holy prophets, who have been prophesying since the world began.
71 So that we would be saved from our enemies, and from the hand of all who hate us;
72 To enact the mercy promised to our fathers, and to remember his holy covenant;
73 The oath that he swore to our father Abraham,
74 That he would grant to us that, being rescued out of the hand of our enemies, we could serve him without fear,
75 In holiness and righteousness in his sight, all the days of our life.
76 And you, child, will be called the prophet of the Most High. For you will go ahead of the face of the Lord to prepare his ways;
77 To give knowledge of salvation to his people by the absolving of their sins,
78 Through the compassionate mercy of our God; in which the Sunrise from on high has visited us,
79 To give light to those who sit in darkness and in the shadow of death, to guide our feet into the way of peace.
80 And the child grew up, and grew strong in spirit, and was in the wildernesses until the day of his being announced to Israel.
 
It might be valuable to investigate some other light revisions of the KJV to make sure you don't duplicate work, such as: 21st Century King James Version, American King James Version, Modern King James Version, KJII and KJIII by Jay Green, and Updated King James Version, among numerous others.
 
Thanks Jake. That's a very good point. I've looked at all of these and there are a few decent versions but a lot only make very minor changes and so aren't really worth switching for. Or in the case of Jay Green's translations, he went too far and made them fairly unusable (for me at least). It's a big task so I'd love to think someone else has already done it but I'm not sure they have.
Thanks for the reply!
 
Thanks for that Jake! The closest one I've seen is the KJ2000 but, again, much of the old sentence structure is retained and there is also no distinction between singular and plural pronouns.
 
Thanks Jake. That's a very good point. I've looked at all of these and there are a few decent versions but a lot only make very minor changes and so aren't really worth switching for. Or in the case of Jay Green's translations, he went too far and made them fairly unusable (for me at least). It's a big task so I'd love to think someone else has already done it but I'm not sure they have.
Thanks for the reply!
The Modern Version Bible claims to be based upon the TR used by the KJV, and just updated modern meanings to certain terms...
 
Hi David
I'm not aware of that one. You don't mean the Modern English Version do you? My goal is an update of wording and sentence structure though. The substitution of archaic words has been done a few times already. I think the KJV Easy Reader is one of the best examples of that.

Thanks
Tim
 
Hi David
I'm not aware of that one. You don't mean the Modern English Version do you? My goal is an update of wording and sentence structure though. The substitution of archaic words has been done a few times already. I think the KJV Easy Reader is one of the best examples of that.

Thanks
Tim
Yes, that would be the one....
 
Just looking at the Luke chapter you have here, I would immediately get rid of most, if not all, of the "and's" at the beginning of so many of the verses. Greek "de" and "kai" do not correspond precisely to the English "and" in all situations. English "and" is a conjunction meant to tie together two thoughts in a close way. Greek "de" and "kai" often mean no more than "I am continuing the narrative," quite adequately translated most of the time by putting things in paragraph form. Sometimes, it can mean "and," but more often it simply means continuation. It is not good English to start so many sentences in a row with "and." Modern grammatical rules do not preclude starting some sentences with "and." However, if every sentence, or too many sentences, start with "and," then the word loses its conjunctive English force. We don't talk this way, so why should our translation look that way?
 
However, if every sentence, or too many sentences, start with "and," then the word loses its conjunctive English force. We don't talk this way, so why should our translation look that way?

It would be in good company with the parataxis of Robert Alter's translation of the Pentateuch.
 
An artificial standard of "readability" is not going to extend a child's vocabulary, comprehension, and the ability to adapt to different contexts. A good reader brings the skill-set to the text; he does not alter the text to fit the skill-set.
 
By artificially line breaking it into verses you are impairing readability.

Then poetry would pose a real problem.

Exposure to more forms, not a restriction to less forms, will improve the readability of the reader.
 
Just looking at the Luke chapter you have here, I would immediately get rid of most, if not all, of the "and's" at the beginning of so many of the verses. Greek "de" and "kai" do not correspond precisely to the English "and" in all situations. English "and" is a conjunction meant to tie together two thoughts in a close way. Greek "de" and "kai" often mean no more than "I am continuing the narrative," quite adequately translated most of the time by putting things in paragraph form. Sometimes, it can mean "and," but more often it simply means continuation. It is not good English to start so many sentences in a row with "and." Modern grammatical rules do not preclude starting some sentences with "and." However, if every sentence, or too many sentences, start with "and," then the word loses its conjunctive English force. We don't talk this way, so why should our translation look that way?

Thanks for the response. I know where you're coming from and appreciate what you're saying. My only concern with that approach is that the word is in the Greek and, if the aim is to remain as word-for-word as possible, then I don't feel comfortable with taking them out. The same applies to all the instances of 'and he answered and said'. We wouldn't say it like that but I don't think it's so off-putting.

T
 
An artificial standard of "readability" is not going to extend a child's vocabulary, comprehension, and the ability to adapt to different contexts. A good reader brings the skill-set to the text; he does not alter the text to fit the skill-set.

Thanks for the reply, Matthew. I'll be honest, when it comes to the Word of God 'extending a child's vocabulary, comprehension, and the ability to adapt to different contexts' is the furthest thing from my mind. The Word of God should not be viewed as an English literature textbook but as a war manual. The Bible is literally a matter of life and death. The soldier on the battlefield doesn't need his vocabulary extending, he just needs access to the instructions that are going to keep him alive. The Lord did not use flowery language to challenge His hearers; he used very straightforward language but it was the truths which that language was expressing that people couldn't grasp as they are 'spiritually discerned'. I believe that our Bibles should reflect that and be, in the words of the KJV translators, 'in the language of Canaan' and understandable 'to the most vulgar'. The Word of God should be accessible to the modern equivalent of Tyndale's ploughboy.

T
 
The Word of God should not be viewed as an English literature textbook but as a war manual.

War is only one theme utilised by holy Scripture. To reduce it to this one theme would destroy the richness and variety of special revelation in equipping souls for faith and obedience. Nor is holy Scripture a manual. Like creation there is beauty and excellence which are fitted to allure as well as truth and righteousness to instruct. The Lord commands our attention and draws the heart with delight in Him.

Although it is not a literature textbook, the Bible is literature, and should be translated accordingly. The translation should bear all the internal marks whereby holy Scripture demonstrates itself to be the word of God, as described in the Westminster Confession of Faith, chap. 1, sect. 5: "the heavenliness of the matter, the efficacy of the doctrine, the majesty of the style, the consent of all the parts, the scope of the whole (which is, to give all glory to God), the full discovery it makes of the only way of man's salvation, the many other incomparable excellencies, and the entire perfection thereof, are arguments whereby it does abundantly evidence itself to be the Word of God."
 
By artificially line breaking it into verses you are impairing readability.

Paragraph format is nice for devotional reading, but for preaching I need verse by verse format. Otherwise I struggle to find particular verses when I look back down at my Bible.
 
Tim, just because a word is in the source language does not mean that it has to be in the target language. The very best translation philosophy I have ever seen is in the forward to the Christian Standard Bible. There is meaning on every level: word level, phrase level, clause level, sentence level, paragraph level, chapter level, book level, testament level, and canon level. This means you cannot ignore any level when determining what you believe the meaning to be. Words occur in ever-expanding and important contexts, and a pure word for word does not wind up doing justice to either language. Individual words matter, of course. We don't want to remove words like "justification," "propitiation," etc. I am no advocate for "thought for thought" pure dynamic equivalence, thereby ignoring the meaning of individual words. But you have to take more levels of meaning into account than merely the word level, otherwise we might confuse the word "lie" (is one telling a lie, or is one going to lie down?). Context matters just as much as individual words, and the Greek "de" and "kai" CANNOT be adequately translated by "and" every time. I would advise you to rethink your policy on this, as there are many times translating Greek into English where you do not have a full English equivalent word for word, and either a Greek word needs to be dropped, or English words added. This is part of the give and take of translation.

Nor can many, many other words be translated by a one to one equivalent every time. One word can mean several different things depending on context. The Greek word "dikaioo" is often a transfer term, especially in Paul, indicating an imputation of guilt or righteousness (even there, there is a difference!). But imputation is not present in the sentence "wisdom is justified by her children." Surely wisdom does not receive an imputation of Christ's righteousness! It rather means "shown to be correct," or simply "vindicated."

The KJV has plenty of instances where it supplies words that are not technically in the original, but are implied. The same goes in reverse. What I am saying is that translating Greek "de" and "kai" every time by the word "and" is actually a mistranslation, a misuse of the English "and," and it's bad English.
 
Tim, just because a word is in the source language does not mean that it has to be in the target language. The very best translation philosophy I have ever seen is in the forward to the Christian Standard Bible. There is meaning on every level: word level, phrase level, clause level, sentence level, paragraph level, chapter level, book level, testament level, and canon level. This means you cannot ignore any level when determining what you believe the meaning to be. Words occur in ever-expanding and important contexts, and a pure word for word does not wind up doing justice to either language. Individual words matter, of course. We don't want to remove words like "justification," "propitiation," etc. I am no advocate for "thought for thought" pure dynamic equivalence, thereby ignoring the meaning of individual words. But you have to take more levels of meaning into account than merely the word level, otherwise we might confuse the word "lie" (is one telling a lie, or is one going to lie down?). Context matters just as much as individual words, and the Greek "de" and "kai" CANNOT be adequately translated by "and" every time. I would advise you to rethink your policy on this, as there are many times translating Greek into English where you do not have a full English equivalent word for word, and either a Greek word needs to be dropped, or English words added. This is part of the give and take of translation.

Nor can many, many other words be translated by a one to one equivalent every time. One word can mean several different things depending on context. The Greek word "dikaioo" is often a transfer term, especially in Paul, indicating an imputation of guilt or righteousness (even there, there is a difference!). But imputation is not present in the sentence "wisdom is justified by her children." Surely wisdom does not receive an imputation of Christ's righteousness! It rather means "shown to be correct," or simply "vindicated."

The KJV has plenty of instances where it supplies words that are not technically in the original, but are implied. The same goes in reverse. What I am saying is that translating Greek "de" and "kai" every time by the word "and" is actually a mistranslation, a misuse of the English "and," and it's bad English.
There are also the issues with translating Idioms into another language, as to how literal to try to keep it and make it understandable, and also when the Nasv tries to keep the meaning of the Greek verb brought over in to the English, that is when it can get strange reading at times...
We also need to accept that the same words in the Greek text at times can have different English renderings, and that there is really no strictly literal translation. not unless one does it as an Interlinear...
 
Thanks for the response. I know where you're coming from and appreciate what you're saying. My only concern with that approach is that the word is in the Greek and, if the aim is to remain as word-for-word as possible, then I don't feel comfortable with taking them out. The same applies to all the instances of 'and he answered and said'. We wouldn't say it like that but I don't think it's so off-putting.

T

In that case, you're going to end up with a very stiff, wooden translation that is not easy to read. May as well use the New American Standard.
 
Thanks for the reply, Matthew. I'll be honest, when it comes to the Word of God 'extending a child's vocabulary, comprehension, and the ability to adapt to different contexts' is the furthest thing from my mind. The Word of God should not be viewed as an English literature textbook but as a war manual. The Bible is literally a matter of life and death. The soldier on the battlefield doesn't need his vocabulary extending, he just needs access to the instructions that are going to keep him alive. The Lord did not use flowery language to challenge His hearers; he used very straightforward language but it was the truths which that language was expressing that people couldn't grasp as they are 'spiritually discerned'. I believe that our Bibles should reflect that and be, in the words of the KJV translators, 'in the language of Canaan' and understandable 'to the most vulgar'. The Word of God should be accessible to the modern equivalent of Tyndale's ploughboy.

T

Well, the KJV's language was understandable "to the most vulgar" of their own time. Today's "most vulgar" do not speak or read 16th- or 17th-century English. A modern translation, even an updating of the KJV, should reflect our time, not theirs. Also, in the New Testament, the KJV is about 80% William Tyndale's translation, which was already almost 100 years old then. So, even in 1611, the KJV's English in the New Testament was already somewhat archaic and out-of-date.
 
In that case, you're going to end up with a very stiff, wooden translation that is not easy to read. May as well use the New American Standard.
The Nas is excellent to use for study, but for reading out loud, or for casual reading, not so much...
 
Archaisms are often used for literary effect and do not necessarily imply something is out of date, so I challenge just a wee bit the claim that the KJV is archaic (out of date). We regularly find Biblical archaisms in everyday speech and in the media or newspaper. I welcome these archaisms as they challenge me to dig deeper and the communication of them has lasting effects upon my knowledge of what they intended to communicate and instruct.
 
How about a website where you could answer questions about your age, background, and education level, and it spits out a Bible translated just for you. If readability is the goal, then that would be the way to go. ;)
 
Archaisms are often used for literary effect and do not necessarily imply something is out of date, so I challenge just a wee bit the claim that the KJV is archaic (out of date). We regularly find Biblical archaisms in everyday speech and in the media or newspaper. I welcome these archaisms as they challenge me to dig deeper and the communication of them has lasting effects upon my knowledge of what they intended to communicate and instruct.
The translation is not archaic on the whole, but there are definite sections where the intended meaning is hard to figure out for many who were not raised up on it...
 
Well, the KJV's language was understandable "to the most vulgar" of their own time. Today's "most vulgar" do not speak or read 16th- or 17th-century English. A modern translation, even an updating of the KJV, should reflect our time, not theirs. Also, in the New Testament, the KJV is about 80% William Tyndale's translation, which was already almost 100 years old then. So, even in 1611, the KJV's English in the New Testament was already somewhat archaic and out-of-date.

My point precisely.
 
Archaisms are often used for literary effect and do not necessarily imply something is out of date, so I challenge just a wee bit the claim that the KJV is archaic (out of date). We regularly find Biblical archaisms in everyday speech and in the media or newspaper. I welcome these archaisms as they challenge me to dig deeper and the communication of them has lasting effects upon my knowledge of what they intended to communicate and instruct.

Depends what you mean. If you mean 'the powers that be' for example, then I agree. But if you think we should leave Master in instead of Teacher then I submit that that is very unhelpful. Just to use that as an example, everyone seems to read Master and understand it as Lord instead of the earlier meaning of the word as in the headmaster or my science master. The word is not wrong, it's just shifted meaning.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top