Tag Archives: english

The KJV: Is it THE Bible? Part 5: Linguistic Prejudice

Posted by Caleb Coy on

The KJV: Is it THE Bible? Part 5: Linguistic Prejudice, or “Ritzy Writ? Or Beautiful Word?”

William Tyndale, of the renowned Tyndale Bible, was once challenged by a papal cleric on his belief that the common man should have true access to God’s word, not just priests.  Ironically, many of the clergy did not know much Bible, though they knew papal law like the backs of their bejeweled hands.  To the clergy he said, “If God spares my life, before many years pass I will make it possible for the boy who drives the plow to know more of the Scriptures than you do.”
Continue reading →

The KJV: Is it THE Bible? Part 4: Jacobean English (not thine English)

Posted by Caleb Coy on

The KJV: Is it THE Bible? Part 4: Jacobean English, or “Have It Thine Way”

“Some sentences in the KJV will not be understood without the help of a commentary.  Champions of the use of the KJV forget that they have been conditioned to its oddities by a lifetime of study.  The new reader and the uneducated reader have not had that conditioning.”
-Jack P. Lewis (1)

In our last post we discussed the language issues in translating the King James to English.  The King James Bible is known and used throughout the world, even in foreign-language speaking countries. However, we must understand that the day will come when Jacobian English, the language of the King James Version, will be unreadable to an audience that speaks a language that changes so quickly.
Continue reading →

The KJV: Is it THE Bible? Part 2: A Brief History of a Politically Charged Translation

Posted by Caleb Coy on

The KJV: Is it THE Bible? Part 2: A Brief History of a Politically-Charged Translation

In our first post we introduced varieties KJV enthusiasm, and initial reasons why the KJV-only movement is divisive and counter-intuitive.

And now a brief history of the King James Bible.  The KJV actually wasn’t the first English Bible, nor was it the first produced by the Church of England.  English Bibles that came before it were Cloverdale’s (1535), Tyndale’s (1536), Matthew’s (1537), Taverner’s (1539), the Great Bible (1539), the Geneva (1560), the Bishop’s (1568), and the Rhiems-Douay (1582).

Translation Process
One of the main reasons the KJV came about was to produce a translation that would unify everyone, that would “corner the market” and prevent confusion between translations, two in particular.  The Geneva was the preferred translation among the  public (and the one Shakespeare quoted), while the Bishop’s Bible was used by clergy.
Continue reading →

The KJV: Is it THE Bible? Part I: A Plea to KJV Advocates

Posted by Caleb Coy on

The King James Bible: Is it THE Bible?
Part 1:
A Plea to Advocates that the King James Translation of the Bible is the Only Inspired Translation, to Advocates that the King James Translation of the Bible is the Only Translation To Be Read “In the Pulpit”, and to Advocates that the King James Translation of the Bible is Merely the Best Translation to Use

Folks, we know the Bible is God’s good word. And in God’s good word we are told to avoid stupid arguments over things like endless genealogies and ‘old tales’, things like that. One of these stupid arguments is over what is “THE right Bible translation”.

I must begin by affirming that the “King James” Bible is a beautiful rendition of scripture that has been the delivery of God’s word to generations and generations around the world.  My intention here is not to slam the KJV, decry the KJV, forbid the KJV, or mock the KJV.  God’s word is holy, but we must distinguish between his word and the tradition of rendering his word.  We must not mistake one for the other.  Yes, the KJV has left a profound impact on the English language and religious culture around the world, a translation which resides in the homes of peoples the world over, a translation through which many received scripture.
Continue reading →

Walking the Breath: A Sophomore Greek Tale

Posted by Caleb Coy on

[In 10th grade my English teacher, Mrs. Carter, asked us to write a Greek-style story after reading The Odyssey.  I held on to mine.  The “vicious man-eater Humphries” was named after my 8th grade principal.   If my memory serves me correctly, my companions were named after two friends in my youth group.  In real life they would have surely made it.  It was a pagan tale roughly told in the Greek tradition, assuredly, but I snuck a little Christology in.]

Continue reading →

This is What It’s Like to Be a Teacher: Day 1

Posted by Caleb Coy on

Today is my first day as a public school teacher.

I’ve taught before in universities, and subbed long-term in public schools.  But this is my first time as a full-time teacher in a public school.  I am teaching high schoolers the art of language.
Continue reading →

Why It Ain’t a Crime to Say “Ain’t”

Posted by Caleb Coy on

” ‘Ain’t’ ain’t in the dictionary.”

Ever hear that one?  The colloquial phrase “ain’t” is typically a contracted variation of “am/is/are/was/were not”.

We commonly hear that “ain’t” is improper, is bad grammar, is a sign of ignorance.  Is this true?  And what does the use of “ain’t” say about us?

Conventionally, many people suppose that it is.  After all, in none of the preceding forms of “to be” that ends in the word combination “ain”.  Yet somehow we have ain’t.  This leaves us with the question, “how did this develop?”
Continue reading →

Why There Ain’t Nothing Wrong With Double Negatives

Posted by Caleb Coy on

“I didn’t do nothing,” is a double negative.  The words didn’t and nothing, both being negative, create a sentence in which there are two negatives, when it is otherwise assumed that the speaker meant to enforce a single negation: Nothing was done.

Is this an error?  Is this bad grammar?
Continue reading →