Friday, April 05, 2002

in the beginning

I recently finished a rather fascinating book titled "In the Beginning," about the origins of the King James Bible. It's a rather well-written book and although the author -- Alister McGrath of "Christianity Today" -- doesn't really get into all the controversy generated in some circles today, he does give a rather interesting description of the blatantly political manuevering that went into making sure the "right" scholars translated the Scriptures so that it would reflect a pro-Anglican, pro-monarchy bias.

He also touches briefly on some of the problems they had translating the Bible, such as the translators' infamiliarity with koine Greek and a few other difficulties to boot.

What is the silliest explanation you have ever heard as to why the King James Bible is the only one Christians should use? My personal favorite: Contemporary Bibles like the NIV have removed 4,000 verses from the Bible and actually assign divine titles to Satan and vice versa.

No comments: