Geneva Bible

[Pilgrim]

My blog entry today (btw, I am not an "only" person...but I am a "preferred" person):

1611 KJVO? How about the 1560 Geneva?

The Battle of the Versions...a century old debate? Actually not. There was the debate over Hebrew/Greek/Aramaic vs Latin, Latin vs Other Germanic Tongues (I would say "common" languages, but Latin was common at one time), and the 1560 Geneva vs 1611 King James. Apparently King James did not like what the Geneva had to say about his duties nor the applaude of those that followed God before King. And likewise the KJV was spurned by the early Reformed because of the changes.

I grew up KJVO. In highschool, my husband carried around an NIV and a Parallel (KJV, NKJV, NIV, TLB). As we studied the differing versions early in our marriage, the NIV was given the boot. To this day, I will not touch the NIV with a ten foot pole. I tolerate the NKJV. My verses are still memorized in the KJV. And I discovered the ESV. I must admit an appreciation for my ESV, but mainly because I have it in the Reformation Study Bible and enjoy the notes.

Several years back, I was learning high German from an elderly Mennonite lady and her Martin Luther's German Bible. Die Erste Epistle St. Johannes. That is the book I was learning from. I miss those lessons. Translating directly from German to English gave a more descriptive view of the passage.

Re-enter the Geneva. And no, this is not the "Geneva" Bible that had been on the shelves 10-15yrs ago. This is THE Geneva Bible. Vision Forum is one of the places offering the reprint of the 1599 edition (where they dropped the Apocrypha). The list of men on board the Geneva Project is quite impressive. They have maintained even the original notes, despite the fact that the controversy between credo-baptists and paedo-baptists could cause a loss in sales from the stand the notes take.

I've barely been able to pry this bible from my husband's hands. When I called a pastor, and board member at WTS, I was told that it was antiquitated and useless as a study or devotional bible and was only good for historical interest. Sir, I humbly disagree with you. Just as the KJV, it is readable by those capable of reading. Dumb down the language, and you weaken a person's reading and speaking skills. In fact, we have found the Geneva to be more readable than the KJV...with insights into passages that had been lost through over simplifications.

1611 KJV
Romans 3:23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;

1599 Geneva
Romans 3:23 For there is no difference: all have sinned and are deprived of the glory of God,

Of course reprint of this Bible has led to jests about GBO cults. You have to laugh...but I will take an antiquitated Bible over any that are printed today.

I concur WRT readability. My first exposure to the Geneva Bible was through E-Sword. While I didn't read it very often, But I found that when I did, once I got used to the antiquated spelling (which is also found in the 1611 KJV), most passages were clear and were generally in a more direct, less elevated style than the KJV. Unfortunately, the language of the Geneva notes on E-Sword and most other sites has been modernized and is sometimes edited to reflect a point of view different than the Geneva translators, as mentioned earlier.

I would say that especially for someone who is familiar with the KJV and can read it with comprehension, the Geneva should not be difficult to understand.

Am I correct in thinking that this new version of the Geneva Bible features modernized spelling?

1587 Geneva Bible:

Rom. 3:23: For there is no difference: for all haue sinned, and are depriued of the glorie of God,

 

[LadyFlynt]

Yes, they have kept the wording (word for word), but have modernized the spelling simply for readability. A friend of our (and a quiet member of the board ) owns a fasimile of the 1599...I was looking through it tonight while at their house (old spelling and print). Though I was able to read it fairly easily, I could see how that could be a problem for most ppl today. (my introduction to German makes it easier for me...the "s" looking like an "f" and other such older print). I will admit to something in their's that is missing from the new reprint. Their's has the psalter IN it along with the original musical scale (that could be picked out on a piano even by an amateur like me). The new ones has them on the CDR, but unless you know what the tune is, forget it. (petty, but I was so thrilled to see it in their's)

 

[caddy]

I hope I receive mine early this coming week...

 

[C. Matthew McMahon]

I'm still waiting....

Sniff, sniff.

I have read it in the past multiple times in facsimilie, but I'm "stowked" to read it in modern English and to use it as my new Bible.

 

[LadyFlynt]

I'm still waiting....

Sniff, sniff.

I have read it in the past multiple times in facsimilie, but I'm "stowked" to read it in modern English and to use it as my new Bible.

Matt, I'm so glad to hear a pastor state that it's not too antiquitated for regular use.