An Original King James Bible Found!

It's awsome, I'm going to go see it this weekend. It was found in our University archives in our modest city...Winnipeg, Canada. There was a note inside possibly written by the King himself...they say he may of actualy used this one in particular. There are only 50 originals in the world. I thought it was interesting.

That is pretty cool. I wonder what differences it has from the bibles we use today.

If anything that Bible is more inaccurate than the Bibles we use today. Translators have gone back to the oldest manuscripts available. Most are in Aramaic, Greek, and Hebrew. Whereas, the KJV was taken from the Latin translations. Meaning that the TNIV, NIV, & NLT are translations from the original or near original texts vs. the KJV being a translation of a translation. With the knowledge of context and translation techniques that we know now which one(s) are going to be more accurate?

Any idea how old it is?

If it's true, I'd be MUCH more interested in the story of how it got to "The Peg"...

What do you mean..."if its true"? What you think I just made up a dumb story? Anyway. I believe they said it is from the year 1611.
Here is one of the articles...
http://myuminfo.umanitoba.ca/index.asp?sec=2&too=100&eve=8&dat=12/21/2005&npa=9728

"think I just made up a dumb story?"
Until provided with a source, that's exactly what I figured. It goes with being a sceptic. I don't immediately believe potentially disreputable things I read just because I read them.

"The Bible was part of a collection donated to St. John?s College in 1897 by Rev. Daniel Greatorex."
That's very interesting... I'm sure there's a hell of a tale behind that sentence.

they told a bit of the story on the radio...it was interesting but I can't recall the details. If I come across them I'll be sure to pass it along.

Actually, the KJV is based on the 'Textus Receptus'.
And almost all of the other versions were taken from the trash found around the fake Mt. Sinai in the Sinai Peninsula. What I'm saying is if you check into it, the KJV is the most accurate English version of the Bible, short of pulling out the Hebrew and Greek. However, there are a huge amount of KJV fans that say that it is perfect, and of course, this is not true, as if you check the KJV against the Hebrew or Greek, there are variations of words that cannot possibly be perfect every time. Still, It's the one I use, unless I do go back to the original texts.

Wow, a real 1611! I have a copy of a 1611 King James, but the real thing!

It of course uses the 'f' style 's', and has several other peculiarities that would be expected of the time.

I'm not going to see it for its inaccuracies...I'm going to see it because its an original and there was an inscription in it believed to be from King James himself. As for myself, I use a parallell Bible, and then I look up the key word meanings in the greek and hebrew dictionary...I'd say this is the best way to get the full picture.

IndyJohan said:

I'm not going to see it for its inaccuracies...I'm going to see it because its an original and there was an inscription in it believed to be from King James himself. As for myself, I use a parallell Bible, and then I look up the key word meanings in the greek and hebrew dictionary...I'd say this is the best way to get the full picture.

Click to expand...

A 'Strongs Concordance' is also very nice.

However, I use a program called Logos, and although very expensive, you can pull up the 'strongs numbers' on any word, and it will give you a Greek, or Hebrew readout of the actual word.

Tennessee R said:

A 'Strongs Concordance' is also very nice.

However, I use a program called Logos, and although very expensive, you can pull up the 'strongs numbers' on any word, and it will give you a Greek, or Hebrew readout of the actual word.

Click to expand...

There is a free program you can download that does the exact same thing. If you want it I can give it to you. I use it often.

BibleGateway.com is a good site that has different translations of the Bible.

Tennessee R said:

Actually, the KJV is based on the 'Textus Receptus'.
And almost all of the other versions were taken from the trash found around the fake Mt. Sinai in the Sinai Peninsula. What I'm saying is if you check into it, the KJV is the most accurate English version of the Bible, short of pulling out the Hebrew and Greek. However, there are a huge amount of KJV fans that say that it is perfect, and of course, this is not true, as if you check the KJV against the Hebrew or Greek, there are variations of words that cannot possibly be perfect every time. Still, It's the one I use, unless I do go back to the original texts.

Click to expand...

I'm both amazed and slightly disappointed in you Tenn. I think you need to do some further research as to what the folks at IBS do.

Tennessee R said:

taken from the trash found around the fake Mt. Sinai in the Sinai Peninsula

Click to expand...

I was just curious where you think it is. Jebal Al Lawz in Saudi Arabia?

Johan: Isn't that where the Bible says (Arabia)? Don't the bedouins know it as the mountain of Moses? Isn't the whole top of that mountain blackened, unlike those around it? Haven't the government officials put up a chain link fence all the way around the mountain? Isn't there a pile of stones with petroglyphs of Hathor and Aphis, the Egyptian pagan Cow and Bull gods (i.e. golden calf) painted on the stones?
Yes, that's where I believe it to be. (By the way, until a few months ago, you couldn't even get a visitors permit into Saudi Arabia, but now, they have started issuing visitors permits)

And, thank you, yes, a link would be great. I already have acess in the aforementioned program, but for those who don't, please post the link.

Thank you, Henry Jones, Sr. for that link.

Aaron H: I'm not sure that I fully understand what your point is on this?
Are you saying that the KJV is more perfect, or that the other versions are more correct? IBS seems to not care either way, but simply states that the NIV is easier to read, and the KJV more literal.
Please explain further.

From IBS:
"So which is the best translation?
Are you seeking a literal translation or one that provides a thought-for-thought presentation? Do you prefer the historic dignity of the King James Version, the widely accepted and respected New International Version, or the very readable and contemporary New Living Translation? Consult a knowledgeable Christian and then immerse yourself in God's Word!"

"....a literal translation (the venerable King James Version)
and a thought-for-thought translation (the New International Version)...."

Hey, man. I'm not arguing about where Mt. Sinai is either. I believe the same thing. I read the Cornuke books and a few others. Have you tried to "Google Earth" Jebal Al Lawz...Pehaps I'll check it out. ANd the link is
http://www.e-sword.net/
You can download parrallell bibles and concordances ect....

Tenn., what I am saying is that the KJV is not as accurate as it could be in compairison to the some of the newer translations.

I like the newer versions for thier clarity and ability to look up other translations. I like the KJV for its poetic sounding language. It's like song or an art.

I'll respond to your bump, Johan.

I've read a good book about some of the translation problems that exist with the Bible we have today, some of which are accidental, some otherwise. It's called Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why, by Bart Ehrman.

I know that the debate about the best Bible translation is endless, but I want to put forward the New Revised Standard Version as a version that can be trusted for its accuracy. It came about through an effort of scholars led by the recently deceased Bruce Metzger.

As for the KJV... I come from a background where a lot of people, including my relatives, believe that just as the Bible is the literal, inerrant word of God, the KJV is God's inspired English version, which means that any subsequent versions are a deviation on what God has inspired. It's not that these folks believe that the earliest English version of the Bible just so happened to be the best translation--for them, it's a matter of faith. In another 400 years, I suspect that conservative Christians will still be using it.