King James Bible 1722 Greyfriars Church. Photo: Susan Gerbic. Wikimedia Commons.

Print version: pdf

Having just completed his seminary education, a young pastor arrived in a small town to begin his ministry in a small church. Before his first Sunday, several leaders of his congregation approached him to let him know that they wanted to hear the Bible read in the church service “the way that Jesus talked.” He gave this some thought, knowing that the church leaders probably meant that they wanted him to use the King James Version. Before reading the gospel lesson for his first Sunday service, he mentioned the request. He began with an apology that he was unable to read the gospel in Aramaic. The closest he could come to “the way that Jesus talked” was to read it in Greek, which he did. Then he explained his own translation with the possible variations. That began a productive discussion with the congregation about Bible translations and why the King James Version is not the only worthwhile Bible translation

What is the King James Version?

The King James Version (KJV) is a Bible translation commissioned by King James I of England in 1604. He had convened English church leaders at the Hampton Court Conference in an attempt to unify the conflict-ridden church of the English reformation under the monarchy. The translation project was the major result. The conference directed that:

A translation be made of the whole Bible, as consonant as can be to the original Hebrew and Greek; and this to be set out and printed without any marginal notes, and only to be used in all the churches of England in time of divine service.

The translation was completed and published in 1611. The conference stipulated that the translation would be carried out by learned scholars of England’s two universities, reviewed by church officials, and ratified by the king himself. It was the version authorized by King James.

The King James Version became a foundational work of English literature. In many homes in the English-speaking world, it was the only book the family owned and was often the book used to teach children to read.

A Translation?

The King James Version is one of many Bible translations. There were others before and many more afterward. To translate is to interpret. Translations require many choices, and each choice reflects a point of view and assumptions about the meaning of the original language. Languages also encompass world views that translators attempt to communicate as they work. No single version can ever fully translate a text. The King James Version is one version. All are interpretations.

What Language?

The King James Version is an English translation, first of all. The Bible has also been translated into hundreds of languages, not just English. The English of the King James Version is also the English of its time. Contemporary English differs significantly from the language of the early 1600s.

Compare these versions of 1 Corinthians 13:4, for example:

Charity suffereth long, and is kind; charity envieth not; charity vaunted not itself, is not puffed up, (King James Version)

Love is patient; love is kind; love is not envious or boastful or arrogant (New Revised Standard Version)

Love is always patient and kind; it is never jealous; love is never boastful or conceited; (Jerusalem Bible)

Vaunted is a word no longer in common use. Today charity also more clearly emphasizes benevolence of the wealthy toward the poor than the notion of love. For the translators of the King James Version, charity was a choice for the current emphasis as an affirmation of the actions of the powerful rather than the more mutual implications of the word love. Their choice also evoked the word caritas in the Latin translation and resonated with traditionalists. Today it still evokes an archaic tone.

What Was Translated? (Manuscripts)

What we commonly refer to as “The Bible” is a collection of writings. Various religious groups recognize different lists of writings for their versions of “The Bible.” (See the post: Is There Such a Thing as “THE Bible”?) For each writing in the Bible, scholars evaluate the available manuscripts in the ancient languages to determine which are more original.

Some of the manuscripts are preserved in the original languages of the writings. Others are in ancient languages but are themselves translations. For example, an ancient Greek translation of Hebrew scriptures known as the Septuagint is used as a source for some Bible translations. Latin versions were also already translations from Greek and Hebrew. If Jesus spoke Aramaic, as many scholars assume he probably did, sayings quoted from him in the gospels are already translations.

The writings in the Bible were preserved by scribes who copied and recopied them by hand for hundreds of years before the printing press was invented, long before photo-copying and digital data transfers. Original copies of the writings do not exist, only these hand-copied manuscripts. Human scribes made errors, so the manuscripts are not identical. Scholars assess the variations verse by verse to choose what is most plausibly the original reading. Each variation means a choice.

The King James Version translators worked with previous translations and used Hebrew and Greek manuscripts available to them at that time. Additional manuscripts have become available in the centuries since their translation.

Perspectives?

When King James commissioned a new translation of the Bible, two major translations were competing for ascendancy in the churches in England. Other translations were also in use, but the two in contention were the Geneva Bible and the Bishops’ Bible.

A group of Protestant exiles in Calvin’s Geneva republic during the reign of the Roman Catholic Queen Mary I (reigned 1553–8) produced an English translation known as the Geneva Bible. The Geneva Bible was popular with the English Puritans and was widely circulated. The Geneva Bible included study aids like maps and tables as well as explanatory margin notations all intended to make the Bible more accessible for lay people to read, study, and discuss on their own. The margin notes often pointed to anti-monarchical aspects of a verse. For example, notations on Exodus 1 affirm the Hebrew midwives’ disobedience to the Pharoah although not their deception (v. 19) and comment on Pharoah as an example of a tyrant (v. 22). Supporters of the monarchy and hierarchical church structures, including King James, took offense at such comments.

Anglican bishops produced the Bishops’ Bible in 1568 in an effort to counteract the Calvinist and Puritan reformist perspective of the Geneva Bible. The Bishops’ Bible was the one authorized for use in Anglican services, but the Geneva Bible remained more popular.

The popularity of the Geneva Bible was a major impetus for the new translation we now call the King James Version. The new translation was part of the king’s effort to unify the English reformation as the Anglican Church under the English monarchy. The translation committees were directed to use the Bishops’ Bible as a base translation. The King James Version was intended to displace the Geneva Bible. The direction that it would not include marginal notes addressed both the issue of anti-monarchical comments and the Geneva Bible’s accessibility to lay people. The same concern is addressed in the direction that the new translation be the only one used in worship services in English churches where clergy were thus its authorized interpreters.

Who Did the Translating?

The translators of the King James Version were prominent scholars of ancient languages. Almost all of them were aligned with the perspective of the king and the bishops. About fifty translators worked in six groups called “companies,” two companies each at the universities at Oxford and Cambridge and two at Westminster.

A set of rules for the translation guided the translators for their collaborative procedure and specified translation choices that would maintain the political perspective that King James would ultimately approve. The third rule states, for example, that the word church is to be used, not congregation, a word that would be more amenable to a Puritan perspective.

Conclusion

Every translation of the Bible is an interpretation. The King James Version is a translation that reflects the interests of an English king attempting to unify a national church under his monarchical authority, authority understood as divinely ordained. The purpose of this translation was no secret. We can read the King James Version with an awareness of its perspective and intention even as we appreciate its beauty as a masterpiece of English literature.