GORVI; 16 January

KING JAMES’ BIBLE

Back in the 17th century, Dr. John Reynolds of Corpus Christi College in Oxford came up with a proposal for a new English version of Bishop’s Bible. King James I liked the idea. To achieve this, he convened a conference at Hampton Court on 16 January 1604. Scholars would do the translation and ecclesiastics would check for accuracy. There would be no commentaries. This was the starting point of what was published seven years later under the imposing title:

The Holy Bible, containing the Old Testament and the New: Newly translated out of the original tongues & with the former translations diligently compared and revised, by his Majesties speciall commandement. Appointed to be read in Churches.  

This is referred to more briefly as the Authorised Version. It was based on manuscripts, at a time when there was not yet serious critical scholarship as to authenticity or accuracy of language. So, as the years rolled by, it was subjected to scholarly criticisms. In the 17th and 18th centuries revisions and other translations were attempted. By the 19th century, the need for a more careful edition had become considerable. So, with the collaboration of numerous scholars, a Revised Version appeared in 1895.  

By this time, not only had the public gotten accustomed to the King James version, but there were also many more scholars and educated readers. With more alert readers there were more criticisms and objections. Therefore, it took much more time for the Revised Version to be accepted. Towards the close of the 20th century, yet another version of the Bible came out. Some traditionally inclined people have felt that removing the ye and the thou from the Bible takes away some of its ancientness which contributes to its dignity. Language is important in the collective experience of religion.

The goal in all these undertakings was to make the sacred work of the tradition intelligible to the practitioners, and to be as faithful as possible to the original. Even slight changes and minor mistranslations could lead to misunderstanding and misinterpretation. This may not matter much to the devout and the faithful. But for scholars and students, for those who probe and analyze, every word and statement must be appropriately rendered and properly evaluated. For example, it has been pointed out that whether the Greek metanoia is to be translated as going beyond or repent could make a big difference in what Jesus was saying in Mark 1:14: “The time is fulfilled, and the Kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe in the gospel.”  

Thus, it is no doubt true that the precise meanings of whatever is written in the scriptures of various religions are extremely important when it comes to analyzing and accepting its doctrines and the statements of its prophets. However, once someone becomes affiliated to a tradition by virtue of birth or early upbringing, this might not be all that important for that person.  

Perhaps that’s why in some traditions, especially in those which are not as eager to proselytize, reverential repetitions of ancient verses, with appropriate intonations, are far more important for the religious experience than understanding the meanings of passages, at least for the practitioners. Generally speaking, in the context of religion meaning is important when one does theology; serene sounds and reverential moods are all that one needs at the experiential level. Ultimately, religion is for merging the core of our being with the Cosmic Whole, and if a sacred book assists us in this, its purpose is served.