Public Pastes
Pastebin PRO Accounts EASTER SPECIAL! For a limited time only get 40% discount on a LIFETIME PRO account! Offer Ends Soon!
SHARE
TWEET

Untitled

a guest Jul 28th, 2015 209 Never
  1. Possessives
  2. We added apostrophes for possessives (which were not used in the English of that day), because these were determined not to be changes in meaning. For instance, where the source text read “God his mercy,” this edition reads “God’s mercy.” Proper Names  We have also changed the
  3. spelling of the proper names in the Bible to that of the NKJV, since this can greatly help the contemporary reader, and does not compromise the meaning of the original edition. If, however, the NKJV used a completely different word than the source text, we retained the word from the source text, since to change would be to make a different choice than the original translators made. For example, we did not substitute “Syria” for “Aram.”
  4.  
  5. Changes in Meaning
  6. What seems like a spelling difference sometimes indicates a distinction in meaning that the original translators intended. If we were unable to discern whether that was the case, we retained the language of the source text. For example, we accepted both “bewray” and “betray,” “shamefaced” and “shamefast,” “astonied” and “astonished.” If, however, 16th-century spellings were freely interchanged with no distinction in meaning – and if that is not the case today – we adjusted the text based on current meaning. For example, the source uses “beside” and “besides” interchangeably, yet through the subsequent years of English usage there has developed a distinction in meaning between the two words; so we used “beside” for “by the side of,” and “besides” for “in addition to.”  
  7. Other such examples include: “whiles” and “while,” “other” and “others,” “then” and “than.” In such instances the original word no longer gives the original meaning. We have referred above to philological challenges and typographical errors. Occasional words or passages in the original source Geneva Bible are beyond the realms of subtle ambiguity or theological debate. For example, in Matthew 3:16, the source Geneva reads that John saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and “lightning” upon Jesus. Because the intended word is so clearly “lighting,” we made the change; but were yet concerned to place that word in brackets, indicating that it was a change from the source edition. Also, as has been noted above, if we have been unable to read our source book and have consulted another Geneva edition, we have enclosed that text in brackets. Withal, there are very few words in brackets in this edition.
  8.  
  9. Archaic Words
  10. If a word is archaic, obsolete, colloquial, such that the meaning is now inaccessible or completely changed, we were careful to retain the original word; to completely change one word to another supersedes a spelling correction and compromises authenticity. Instead we have provided a glossary with short definitions in the back of this edition to help the modern reader. Again, to quote Norton, “The English of the KJB has many archaic words that present… challenges to the understanding, but… it is obvious that changing them is translating them” [A Textual History of the King James Bible, 138]. The Geneva Bible of 1560, being even earlier than the King James Bible of 1611, has many archaic words. The purpose of this edition is to let the reader see what they are, not to see how we decided to translate them.
  11.  
  12. Indiscernible Text
  13. There have been occasions when we simply could not discern the meaning of a word, or the intent of the original translators, either from our original source or from any other resource available to us. In those few cases, we have used ellipses to indicate omitted text.
RAW Paste Data
Top