Regi Addictissimus
Completely sold out to the King
Good afternoon. Let me start off by pleading for this to not become a translation debate. I am simply looking to spend more time with the King James and trying to find the right one to do it with.
Can anyone comment on the NCPB that has spent significant time with it? David Norton seems to have put a lot of effort into this rendering of the KJ. I will probably purchase it for Logos first and then buy it in print later.
I found the following article about the NCPB interesting.
"you want to know what the KJV translators really intended, you need the New Cambridge Paragraph Bible. Editor David Norton, like F.H.A. Scrivener before him, dedicated years of his scholarly life to blowing away “thousands of specks of dust from the received text.” He looked at the personal diaries of KJV translators. He learned Hebrew. He went to Oxford’s Bodleian library and studied the surviving notes from the translators’ work—particularly their scrawls on unbound copies of the Bishop’s Bible, which they were instructed to revise. Norton performed his task with excessive care: to call him “detail-oriented” would be like calling Paul “an influential theologian” or calling Spurgeon “good with words.”
https://blog.logos.com/2017/06/youve-probably-never-seen-real-king-james-version/
https://www.logos.com/product/24557/the-new-cambridge-paragraph-bible-with-the-apocrypha-rev-ed
I have also been drooling over the Schuyler Canterbury KJV for some time.
Can anyone comment on the NCPB that has spent significant time with it? David Norton seems to have put a lot of effort into this rendering of the KJ. I will probably purchase it for Logos first and then buy it in print later.
I found the following article about the NCPB interesting.
"you want to know what the KJV translators really intended, you need the New Cambridge Paragraph Bible. Editor David Norton, like F.H.A. Scrivener before him, dedicated years of his scholarly life to blowing away “thousands of specks of dust from the received text.” He looked at the personal diaries of KJV translators. He learned Hebrew. He went to Oxford’s Bodleian library and studied the surviving notes from the translators’ work—particularly their scrawls on unbound copies of the Bishop’s Bible, which they were instructed to revise. Norton performed his task with excessive care: to call him “detail-oriented” would be like calling Paul “an influential theologian” or calling Spurgeon “good with words.”
https://blog.logos.com/2017/06/youve-probably-never-seen-real-king-james-version/
https://www.logos.com/product/24557/the-new-cambridge-paragraph-bible-with-the-apocrypha-rev-ed
I have also been drooling over the Schuyler Canterbury KJV for some time.
Last edited: