Updating the KJV

[moral necessity]

I am desirous to update the KJV this year as a project, saving it all as a Word document. No changes will be made to the text, beyond 3 things:

- Archaic words are substituted with exact replacements ("thou" to you, "goest" to go, etc...)
- Subject/verb order is updated ("for strong is the Lord God" to "for the Lord God is strong)
- Spelling is updated ("honour" to "honor")

Every change is performed in "color-coded" type, so it can be examined and assessed by others alongside the actual KJV. Red, Blue, and Green colors are used to match the 3 categories above respectively, so the reader can know what type of change was made.

I began last week with it, to iron out the system. Where I'm unsure of what to do, I've left everything original and noted the footnotes with a question mark for now.


I'd appreciate your thoughts/suggestions regarding this. If you think I should drop it, and consider it an effort outside of my concern, I'd appreciate that too. My only hope would be to see it happen by somebody, and to see it done right, leaving the text alone execpt what is archaic.

Blessings!

 

[Notthemama1984]

I would keep the "thee" and "thou" it makes the point of singular vs. plural. It helps in interpretation.

 

[dudley]

Charles, Are you talking about the New King James Version commissioned in 1975 by Thomas Nelson Publishers? It was done by 130 respected Bible scholars, church leaders, and lay Christians worked for seven years to create a completely new, modern translation of Scripture, yet one that would retain the purity and stylistic beauty of the original King James.

 

[AThornquist]

I think that's a great cause, Charles. I will not give a KJV to the people I come in contact with due to some of the current issues that you mentioned; often the people I witness to are only somewhat educated and have a hard enough time understanding the modern English. If you helped alleviate the difficulty of older English for this modern audience, the use of the KJV would be much more likely.

 

[PuritanCovenanter]

I love my KJV. I still use it primarily.

 

[Ivan]

I have used the KJV in the past for devotions and preaching and that will be the case in 2011.

 

[moral necessity]

Charles, Are you talking about the New King James Version commissioned in 1975 by Thomas Nelson Publishers? It was done by 130 respected Bible scholars, church leaders, and lay Christians worked for seven years to create a completely new, modern translation of Scripture, yet one that would retain the purity and stylistic beauty of the original King James.

Well, I thought that was an entire re-translation of the TR hebrew/greek. Aren't some of the words different, like "corrupt" became "peddling" in II Cor., and "heretic" became "divisive man" in Titus. I wasn't interested in any re-translation of the text.

 

[baron]

I went back to the KJV, because I can not find the HCSB audio bible for free on the net. I listen to the KJV on my computer. Also I have KJV on my Kindle and 2011 is the 400 anniversary of the KJV.

I have known dropout's from high school who read the KJV and when they went to college they placed higher than high school graduates.

 

[dudley]

Charles, Are you talking about the New King James Version commissioned in 1975 by Thomas Nelson Publishers? It was done by 130 respected Bible scholars, church leaders, and lay Christians worked for seven years to create a completely new, modern translation of Scripture, yet one that would retain the purity and stylistic beauty of the original King James.

Well, I thought that was an entire re-translation of the TR hebrew/greek. Aren't some of the words different, like "corrupt" became "peddling" in II Cor., and "heretic" became "divisive man" in Titus. I wasn't interested in any re-translation of the text.

Yes you are correct there. So I guess you would work with the original KJV.

 

[moral necessity]

Yes you are correct there. So I guess you would work with the original KJV.

Well, are you meaning the 1611 specifically? I was just going to use the common one of today.

 

[toddpedlar]

Just a word of caution, Charles, regarding word order. It isn't always innocuous to replace "strong is the Lord God" with "The Lord God is strong". Word order in Greek (at least I know it's the case in Greek, but Hebrew also I think) is not an unimportant detail - and older translations like the KJV often actually retain the word order in their translation choices. Just because it sounds odd to the modern ear does not mean it's without consequence to make such replacements. The first word or phrase of a Greek sentence is often there in order to emphasize what is said first... so something that would appear in the Greek in word order such as "Mighty to save is the Lord" would be emphasizing the characteristic "mighty to save" as opposed to other characteristics, and be subtly different than the same sentence spoken as "The Lord is Mighty to save" (where the emphasis would be on the fact that it is the Lord, and not someone else, who is "mighty to save").

So, mucking with word order (unless you know the underlying Greek/Hebrew and can be certain that the word order is not important) is not a simple or innocuous change to be making. This is only one among other things already mentioned such as the singular/plural distinction that KJV english makes and is often VERY important and would be totally obscured by adopting the universal "you" we use today. This kind of thing makes me VERY leery of anyone saying they'll just "update" the KJV. It's not something to be done lightly at ALL.

 

[moral necessity]

Thanks, Todd. I was aware that the Greek order is important, but I didn't know that the KJV retained this for the same reason. It is all blue color-type for where the order was adjusted, so perhaps detail work could be added in the footnotes later for where it should be retained.

For the universal "you" pronoun, I see the problem there. Perhaps a footnote system could be devised for that too.

I hear your concern also, Todd, and I'm on your side. I don't regard the scripture as a light thing either. Like I said, if wisdom leads to it best being left to others, then so be it. Maybe the basics that I do get accomplished can be built upon later by someone else.

 

[Bradwardine]

Remember the KJV extensively used Tyndale's translation and when it changed it, it wasn't always for the better. For example in 1 Cor 13 Tyndale used 'love' whereas that became 'charity' in the KJV.

 

[Wayne]

Besides the NKJV, haven't there been a number of other such revisions? Didn't Jay Green, for one, publish a modest revision?

 

[KMK]

Archaic words are substituted with exact replacements ("thou" to you, "goest" to go, etc...)

These are not 'exact' replacements.

 

[moral necessity]

Remember the KJV extensively used Tyndale's translation and when it changed it, it wasn't always for the better. For example in 1 Cor 13 Tyndale used 'love' whereas that became 'charity' in the KJV.

Thanks for this...point noted.

 

[LeeJUk]

Aren't you doing what the NKJV and others already did?

 

[moral necessity]

Archaic words are substituted with exact replacements ("thou" to you, "goest" to go, etc...)

These are not 'exact' replacements.

You're right...I worded that wrong. Do you think there's a way around it, to convey the full meaning?

---------- Post added at 08:55 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:51 PM ----------

Aren't you doing what the NKJV and others already did?

If I am, I'd like to stop. I thought the NKJV was a re-translation of the TR, and had many variances somehow because of that.

 

[StrictBaptist]

I love the KJV and believe that it is the most beautifle translation of the word, and I will use it until I die. Remember when you "update" some of the words and wordings that you carefully study the greek and hebrew because some of them are there for a reason.
Back a few years ago I would disagree with any updating of the KJV, and I still believe that the KJV stands above the NKJV and other KJV updates.
Let me know how it turns out buddy, would love to read some of it when you are done.

 

[nicnap]

Do you think there's a way around it, to convey the full meaning?

You all for the plural, and you for the singular would be close.

 

[JML]

I wasn't interested in any re-translation of the text.

I agree...but you might want to make sure you correct Acts 12:4. AKA, the Easter verse.

 

[moral necessity]

I love the KJV and believe that it is the most beautifle translation of the word, and I will use it until I die. Remember when you "update" some of the words and wordings that you carefully study the greek and hebrew because some of them are there for a reason.
Back a few years ago I would disagree with any updating of the KJV, and I still believe that the KJV stands above the NKJV and other KJV updates.
Let me know how it turns out buddy, would love to read some of it when you are done.

Points noted, Ryan. I have no intention to change anything but what are typically viewed as "archaic words and spellings", and "subject/verb/object" order, as allowed. I love it very much too. If it can't be done properly, then I'll let it go.

---------- Post added at 09:47 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:38 PM ----------

I wasn't interested in any re-translation of the text.

I agree...but you might want to make sure you correct Acts 12:4. AKA, the Easter verse.

Thanks for that...it's been noted. Do you feel that there's basic universal consensus over the issue in reformed circles?

---------- Post added at 09:56 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:47 PM ----------

Do you think there's a way around it, to convey the full meaning?

You all for the plural, and you for the singular would be close.

Thanks for that...it seems like it might be the only route, unless some footnote system or accent mark is created.

 

[JML]

Thanks for that...it's been noted. Do you feel that there's basic universal consensus over the issue in reformed circles?

Even the Trinitarian Bible Society says it is wrongly translated. So if they, being very staunch KJVers, say that it is wrong, that is a telling sign. Here is a quote from their website:

Passover is certainly to be preferred to Easter

The full article can be found on their website under articles:

Trinitarian Bible Society - The Word of God Among All Nations

 

[LeeJUk]

Theres the KJV for the 21st century and also D.a. Waite I think made a version of the KJV just by doing what you are planning to do without reinterpreting the TR.

 

[moral necessity]

Even the Trinitarian Bible Society says it is wrongly translated. So if they, being very staunch KJVers, say that it is wrong, that is a telling sign. Here is a quote from their website:

Passover is certainly to be preferred to Easter

The full article can be found on their website under articles:

Trinitarian Bible Society - The Word of God Among All Nations

Yeah, that seems pretty telling. Thanks for the link!

 

[StrictBaptist]

I wasn't interested in any re-translation of the text.

I agree...but you might want to make sure you correct Acts 12:4. AKA, the Easter verse.

The easter verse I believe to be correct. Peter Ruckman wrote a great comment in his book "errors" in the KJV showing why it is translated easter because it is in the context of a pagan celebration by herod I believe... I'm on my phone at wrk so I can't access it.

 

[TimV]

Peter Ruckman wrote a great comment in his book "errors" in the KJV showing why it is translated easter because it is in the context of a pagan celebration by herod I believe... I'm on my phone at wrk so I can't access it.

Easter is the old English word for Passover. There's no more heathen association in the KJV than we have in using the name of a Norse god for the fifth day of the week. It just means the fifth day of the week, and that's all.

If I am, I'd like to stop. I thought the NKJV was a re-translation of the TR, and had many variances somehow because of that.

Which one? There have been about a hundred editions of the TR between 1611 and now, and they're all different.

 

[JML]

Easter is the old English word for Passover. There's no more heathen association in the KJV than we have in using the name of a Norse god for the fifth day of the week.

If that is the case, then it definitely should be updated because it doesn't mean that now.

 

[moral necessity]

Theres the KJV for the 21st century and also D.a. Waite I think made a version of the KJV just by doing what you are planning to do without reinterpreting the TR.

Thanks for this. I was not aware of it. It sounds like the main problem then with KJ21 could be the copyright and the typeface. My efforts are of no help with that. Do you think they did a sufficient job with text?

I didn't know about the Defined KJV either. Nothing seems changed here, except the footnotes to explain antiquated terms.

---------- Post added at 11:17 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:57 PM ----------

If I am, I'd like to stop. I thought the NKJV was a re-translation of the TR, and had many variances somehow because of that.

Which one? There have been about a hundred editions of the TR between 1611 and now, and they're all different.

Good point...that probably explains why it varies from the KJV in certain places.

 

[StrictBaptist]

Peter Ruckman wrote a great comment in his book "errors" in the KJV showing why it is translated easter because it is in the context of a pagan celebration by herod I believe... I'm on my phone at wrk so I can't access it.

Easter is the old English word for Passover. There's no more heathen association in the KJV than we have in using the name of a Norse god for the fifth day of the week. It just means the fifth day of the week, and that's all.

If I am, I'd like to stop. I thought the NKJV was a re-translation of the TR, and had many variances somehow because of that.

Which one? There have been about a hundred editions of the TR between 1611 and now, and they're all different.

Gonna have to disagree. The greek word pasch is found 29 times in the NT and the KJV translates it as passover 28 times. Easter came from a pagan festival for the god Ishtar. And it was held in late april.

Passover was in mid april, and in the ot after passover is the days of unlevened bread.
According to verse 3he wwas arrested during the days of unlevened bread, which would be after the jewish passover, so I believe herod killed him during the pagan festival of ishtar (easter)