# Why is the New Testement written in Old English? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 25, 2002, 4:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-new-testement-written-in-old-english/129631 "2002-09-25T16:08:31Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![lynn73](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ebca7d/32.png) [@lynn73](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lynn73)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2002, 11:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-new-testement-written-in-old-english/129631/21 "2002-09-26T23:43:56Z")
Here are a few Christian based sites on the authorized King James version for anyone who cares to check it out. Don’t know if they would be of any interest to non Christians. [http://www.jesus-is-lord.com/kjvdefns.htm](http://www.jesus-is-lord.com/kjvdefns.htm) [http://www.icr.org/bible/kjv.htm](http://www.icr.org/bible/kjv.htm) [http://www.av1611.org/kjv/knowkjv.html](http://www.av1611.org/kjv/knowkjv.html) ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2002, 12:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-new-testement-written-in-old-english/129631/22 "2002-09-27T00:40:39Z")
> [@](#): > > Why is this is Great Debates? I’m not sure why it _had been_, but I can see where it might need to go there: From the jesus-is-lord page: > [@](#): > > I now hear Christians attacking it too! I’ve heard preachers and lay people say things like, “it’s too hard to read” or “it doesn’t properly reflect the true meaning of the original Greek”. The issue about the original Greek sets my teeth on edge–which Greek? There are Greek manuscripts galore, including the corrupted manuscripts that the Roman Catholic religion uses. The snide remarks and attacks against this utterly reliable text are unfounded. > [@](#): > > I know that God has the power to preserve His word and that he wouldn’t leave us out in the dark with an “imperfect” translation. In the authorized King James Version God assembled, and moved with His Spirit, a team of some of the world’s best scholars to translate His word into the world’s most popular language, English. Well, first there is the silly exaggeration about “Greek manuscripts galore.” There are a limited number of manuscripts dating to the fourth century with some fragments from the prior centuries. They are nearly all in close agreement, with the differences in text easily explainable according to copyist errors. Then there is the nonsense about “corrupted” Catholic manuscripts which is simply a lie (based on extrapolating some differences in the Vulgate back to the Greek and that a couple of the Greek texts include some of the Apocrypha–not that they change any words in the text accepted by all Christians). I suppose God might not leave us “in the dark with an ‘imperfect’ translation,” but why should anyone believe that the KJV happened to be it? As for the popularity of English (in 2002–certainly not in 1611), that is merely appealing to the emotions of the audience. From the icr site: > [@](#): > > It is almost certain that no group of Bible scholars before or since has ever been as thoroughly fit for their task as was the King James Translation Team. > > The result of their consecrated labor was that the so-called “Authorized” version eventually displaced all those that had gone before and then has withstood the test of wide usage in all English-speaking countries ever since. I doubt that the author of this piece actually knows the level of scholarship that has gone into recent translations. I would never disparage the translators of the KJV, but claiming that they could not be equalled requires more than assertion. As to the notion that the KJV beat out its competitors on its own merits, having a monoploy position in the market does tend to boost one’s sales. The icr author’s statements regarding the Textus Vaticanus and Textus Sinaiticus can be most charitably described as misguided. (A more forthright description would be that he is simply lying, fabricating some comments and exaggerating others.) I won’t bother discussing the av1611 site. It is just silly. ---
**Author:** ![Satyagrahi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/f475e1/32.png) [@Satyagrahi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Satyagrahi)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2002, 6:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-new-testement-written-in-old-english/129631/23 "2002-09-27T06:04:47Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Jabba \* > \*\*As to why it is the translation that has survived best, I have to agree with **Tomndebb** : it is simply because ( judged on purely literary grounds) it _is_ the best. \*\* Thank you, **Jabba** , for elaborating upon the Wyclif translation. I was reading through the thread prepared to do so if no one else did. However, I must nitpick with regard to why the Wycliff translation did not become widespread and traditional. It is certainly true that Wyclif and his few collaboraters did not have the resources available to them that were available to the scholars working under King James’ patronage…however… The primary reasons the Wyclif bible did not become widespread are that 1. It was developed and published before the invention of printing press. 2. The Catholic Church had the unfortunate habit of burning any copy it could find. And, 3. they also burned alive many of the people that were caught with copies. The CC had the idea at the time that allowing the Bible to be published in the local vernacular would allow people to interpret for themselves and perhaps, therefore, loosen the hold of the CC on their minds…and purses. Along came the Reformation and, some 90 years later, the English had the freedom to translate and publish without fear of personal conflagration. The KJV “took off.” 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Walloon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/fbc32d/32.png) [@Walloon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Walloon)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2002, 8:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-new-testement-written-in-old-english/129631/24 "2002-09-27T08:11:12Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by PerrinsAxe \* > **Libertarian…thank you for explaining my intentions. (Sounds sacrcastic but it’s not meant to be) What I meant before about why it was originally done in Old English (Middle English, Anglo-Saxon…whatever)** **PerrinsAxe** , the King James Version is in **Modern** English. Not Old. Not Middle. ---
**Author:** ![tracer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tracer/32/20578_2.png) [@tracer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tracer)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2002, 4:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-new-testement-written-in-old-english/129631/25 "2002-09-27T16:31:36Z")
> [@](#): > > _Originally posted by tomndebb \* > - the belief (as noted by **Drastic** ) that its translation was, itself, divinely inspired (see Jack Chick for this view in the extreme)_ Heh. Ol’ Jack T. Chick argues that the KJV translation is not merely divinely inspired, but that all other translations of the Bible are the work of Satan: [http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/0031/0031\_01.asp](http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/0031/0031_01.asp) ---
**Author:** ![Latro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/a87d85/32.png) [@Latro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Latro)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2002, 5:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-new-testement-written-in-old-english/129631/26 "2002-09-27T17:09:42Z")
All others? Does that include translations into spanish, modern greek, hindi etc etc? Are there translations into other languages that are also inspired or is the old Modern English ‘God’s own language’? What are the criteria for establishing whether a translation is inspired? Verily, I say unto thee: ‘This whole debate is silly.’ ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2002, 6:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-new-testement-written-in-old-english/129631/27 "2002-09-27T18:03:32Z")
> [@](#): > > Are there translations into other languages that are also inspired or is the old Modern English ‘God’s own language’? Governor Miriam “Ma” Ferguson (of Texas, of course) when challenged on the issue of permitting Spanish-speaking students to use their own language bibles in school held up the KJV and announced, “If the King’s English was good enough for Jesus Christ, it’s good enough for the children of Texas!” (Obviously, this pre-dated the various Supreme Court rulings with which most of us are familiar.) ---
**Author:** ![Johanna](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johanna/32/8318_2.png) [@Johanna](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johanna)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2002, 6:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-new-testement-written-in-old-english/129631/28 "2002-09-27T18:09:22Z")
The language used by Shakespeare, Marlowe, Spenser, and the KJV is properly known as **Early Modern English**. It was used from around 1500 until around 1750 (those are arbitrary cutoff dates, because the language was changing very gradually before and after those times). Actual Old English was used from the 5th century until about 1100. You want to see the New Testament in _real_ Old English? Here is Mark 12:1 in Old English… > [@](#): > > **Sum monn him plantode wingeard and betynde hine ond dealf anna seath and getimbrode anne stiepel and gesette hine mid eorþtilium and ferde on elþeodignesse.** Now if the pastor in your church is using this translation, I agree, you should report him to the synod. 😃 Compare the above with the same verse in the KJV… > [@](#): > > \*\*A certain man planted a vineyard, and set an hedge about it, and digged a place for the winefat, and built a tower, and let it out to husbandmen, and went into a far country. \*\* Now compare that with the same passage in the modern Modern English of the New Revised Standard Version… > [@](#): > > **A man planted a vineyard, put a fence around it, dug a pit for the wine press, and built a watchtower; then he leased it to tenants and went to another country.** All right, which of these do you think the KJV language is closer to? Old English or modern Modern English? Further reading: [The Old English Bible](http://cyberbuzz.gatech.edu/catholic/scriptures/saxon-bible.html) [English versions of the Bible](http://cyberbuzz.gatech.edu/catholic/scriptures/articles.htm#english) Georgetown’s [Old English Pages](http://www.georgetown.edu/cball/oe/old_english.html) ---
**Author:** ![Walloon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/fbc32d/32.png) [@Walloon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Walloon)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2002, 6:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-new-testement-written-in-old-english/129631/29 "2002-09-27T18:14:11Z")
The Governor Ferguson quotation is disputed. No one, as far as I know, has found a contemporary reference to her saying it. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2002, 6:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-new-testement-written-in-old-english/129631/30 "2002-09-27T18:17:32Z")
yeeeesh, guys! Relax a bit. Clearly, **PerrinsAxe** is not familiar with the terminology used to describe the history and development of the English language. (And I do hope that, in the spirit of the Straght Dope, **PA** _does_ read and absorb the information presented.) However, it is fairly clear that the intention of the OP was to wonder about “old sounding” (to his/her ears) English. Presenting the information is great. Presenting the information as a rebuttal to casually used phrases somewht misses the point. ---
**Author:** ![Dreaming\_of\_Maria\_Callas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f14d63/32.png) [@Dreaming\_of\_Maria\_Callas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dreaming_of_Maria_Callas)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2002, 7:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-new-testement-written-in-old-english/129631/31 "2002-09-27T19:39:00Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Walloon \* > \*\*The Governor Ferguson quotation is disputed. No one, as far as I know, has found a contemporary reference to her saying it. \*\* Not only that, but that quotation was a jab at provincials that has been common since before Ferguson’s time. UnuMondo ---
**Author:** ![partly\_warmer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/bc8723/32.png) [@partly\_warmer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/partly_warmer)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2002, 8:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-new-testement-written-in-old-english/129631/32 "2002-09-27T20:29:39Z")
Apparently, there are still people who say “If the KJV was good enough for granny, it’s good enough for me.” [http://www.catholic.com/library/Bible\_Translations\_Guide.asp](http://www.catholic.com/library/Bible_Translations_Guide.asp) (under "What is the Best Bible?) It’s a _little_ comical. Ones “granny” believed a host of things everyone knows now to be false/unlikely/lies/misunderstanding. One of the frustrating aspects of “defending the faith” (e.g., when you’ve been ambushed at a party or at work) is answering misquoted, out-of-context statements from a version of the Bible which represented so-so scholarship in the first place. It nice that people appreciate poetic language, but that isn’t nearly good enough reason to keep the KJV around. ---
**Author:** ![tracer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tracer/32/20578_2.png) [@tracer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tracer)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2002, 1:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-new-testement-written-in-old-english/129631/33 "2002-09-29T01:48:43Z")
I wrote: > [@](#): > > Ol’ Jack T. Chick argues that the KJV translation is not merely divinely inspired, but that all other translations of the Bible are the work of Satan … to which **Latro** replied: > [@](#): > > All others? > Does that include translations into spanish, modern greek, hindi etc etc? Hmmm … I believe Jack Chick is silent on the issue of Biblical translations into languages other than English. However, I’ll bet you he believes that the U.S.A. is God’s Chosen Country. (I can just see Chick arguing that God most loves the U.S. because God’s chosen spokesman, Pat Robertson, lives here. 😉 ) For all I know, Chick also believes that every other language’s translations of the Bible suffers from the same “Satanic influences” that have tainted every English translation of the Bible other than the KJV. ---
**Author:** ![Dreaming\_of\_Maria\_Callas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f14d63/32.png) [@Dreaming\_of\_Maria\_Callas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dreaming_of_Maria_Callas)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2002, 3:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-new-testement-written-in-old-english/129631/34 "2002-09-29T15:47:03Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by tracer \* > \*\*I wrote: > … to which **Latro** replied: > Hmmm … I believe Jack Chick is silent on the issue of Biblical translations into languages other than English. However, I’ll bet you he believes that the U.S.A. is God’s Chosen Country. (I can just see Chick arguing that God most loves the U.S. because God’s chosen spokesman, Pat Robertson, lives here. 😉 ) For all I know, Chick also believes that every other language’s translations of the Bible suffers from the same “Satanic influences” that have tainted every English translation of the Bible other than the KJV. \*\* There was an article on Jack Chick’s website a while back where he said that the only Spanish translation free of Satan’s influence is the Reina translation. He must be going for that ever growing Latino market :rolleyes: My aunt OTOH, a member of a Pentecostal offshoot, does belief that the KJV translation is the only inspired one, the Hebrew and the Greek are now “out of date”, and consequently only English speakers will be saved. UnuMondo ---
**Author:** ![tracer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tracer/32/20578_2.png) [@tracer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tracer)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2002, 3:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-new-testement-written-in-old-english/129631/35 "2002-09-29T15:52:57Z")
**UnuMondo:** Does your aunt also believe that everyone born before the KJV was written is in Hell now? ---
**Author:** ![Wendell\_Wagner](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/8491ac/32.png) [@Wendell\_Wagner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wendell_Wagner)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2002, 4:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-new-testement-written-in-old-english/129631/36 "2002-09-29T16:31:52Z")
PerrinsAxe, if you’re still around, please memorize this terminology: Old English: 450 to 1000, A.D. Middle English: 1100 to 1500, A.D. Early Modern English: 1500 to 1750, A.D. Modern English: 1750 A.D. to the present If you express your questions in the proper terminology, you won’t be harassed by the regulars here. ---
**Author:** ![Dreaming\_of\_Maria\_Callas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f14d63/32.png) [@Dreaming\_of\_Maria\_Callas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dreaming_of_Maria_Callas)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2002, 5:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-new-testement-written-in-old-english/129631/37 "2002-09-29T17:10:24Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by tracer \* > \*\ ***UnuMondo:** > > Does your aunt also believe that everyone born before the KJV was written is in Hell now? \*\* I don’t want to ask her, because doing so will simply invoke another long barrage of nonsense, but I assume that people born before the KJV had the Hebrew and Greek which weren’t yet “out of date.” Of course, who could read the Bible back then anyway. UnuMondo ---
**Author:** ![partly\_warmer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/bc8723/32.png) [@partly\_warmer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/partly_warmer)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2002, 5:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-new-testement-written-in-old-english/129631/38 "2002-09-29T17:54:45Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by UnuMondo \* > \*\* > > I don’t want to ask her, because doing so will simply invoke another long barrage of nonsense, but I assume that people born before the KJV had the Hebrew and Greek which weren’t yet “out of date.” Of course, who could read the Bible back then anyway. > > UnuMondo \*\* I wouldn’t ask her either. Not if she evokes that kind of reaction. A point – without barraging – the problem is NOT that the language is old fashioned. People read Shakespeare and don’t complain too much about that same language. The problem is that it’s WRONG in many places, and in many ways. Wasn’t right then, isn’t right now. The KJV translators were excellent, but misunderstood many words. This wasn’t the Internet – people’s learning was largely limited to their university’s library, and what other people told them. Imagine a library with a total of a couple thousand books. (Most of which we’d consider unreliable, today.) That was a BIG library in 1611! ---
**Author:** ![JRDelirious](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jrdelirious/32/9531_2.png) [@JRDelirious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JRDelirious)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2002, 3:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-new-testement-written-in-old-english/129631/39 "2002-09-30T15:12:52Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by UnuMondo \* > \*\* > > There was an article on Jack Chick’s website a while back where he said that the only Spanish translation free of Satan’s influence is the Reina translation. He must be going for that ever growing Latino market :rolleyes: > > UnuMondo \*\* That would be also known commonly as the Reina-Valera version, a translation directed by Casiodoro de la Reina and Cipriano de Valera assembled [between 1569 and 1602](http://www.amen.net/lb/english/rvdream.htm) with most of the work done … surprise, surprise, surprise … in Elizabethan England. That is, probably with the aid of many of the same scholars using the same references (heck, it was finished BEFORE the KJV!). Thing is, virtually all the Spanish-speaking world was _officially_ Catholic for at least 3 more centuries after that, so there was no tradition of the R-V being an “authorized” or “standard” version; and by the time the countries opened up to other denominations, modern scriptural translation had been well established even among the RCC. It was, though, for many, many years, the only complete Protestant Spanish Bible there _was_, and its link to the KJV’s milieu makes for a great deal of acceptance among conservative Spanish-speaking Protestant congregations. Interestingly, the modern RCC has no trouble with the faithful reading the 1909 and 1960 Reina-Valera editions (equivalent of the RSV or NKJV?) for personal use. And most of the mainstream Protestant churches use them. This has led some would-be “Juan Chick” types to claim that these are “corrupted” versions and even that the RCC gets a royalty. One has gone even further (off the deep end, I say) and decided that what we need is a translation [from the English KJV into Spanish](http://amen.net/lb/english/everything.htm) :rolleyes: BTW, I saw my first translated-into-Spanish Chick Tract back in the late 1970s here in San Juan, so we can’t say he has been behind the curve… ---
**Author:** ![kniz](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/c37758/32.png) [@kniz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kniz)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2002, 6:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-new-testement-written-in-old-english/129631/40 "2002-10-10T06:42:19Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Skip \* > \*\*Also in old English it just sounds so much more epic! \*\* **Skip** has a good point here. The language of myth (religion is a type of myth) is poetry; the language of the secular world is prose. Translations which try and say it in everyday language therefore are breaking the rule. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-new-testement-written-in-old-english/129631.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-the-new-testement-written-in-old-english/129631.md?page=3)