Modern 1611 KJV

The New Cambridge Paragraph Bible with the Apocrypha, rev. ed.

""Although it is the most important book in the English-speaking world’s religious life and culture, the King James Bible (or Authorized Version of 1611) has never been as perfectly represented in print as the translators intended. Standard editions currently give, with little variation, the text as established by the Blayney edition of 1769. This leaves the reader with a seventeenth-century text in mid-eighteenth-century clothes—clothes neither original nor modern.

Edited by David Norton, The New Cambridge Paragraph Bible is an important scholarly edition that presents a revised KJV text based on a thorough evaluation of the textual variants present in current renderings. It includes the extant notes of the 1611 translators. The text itself is presented in paragraph form, with marginal notes, and it adopts modern spelling and punctuation conventions to make it easy to read and use.""

How did the REAL 1611 KJV read? And with today's spellings! $24.95

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Graham Owen

The New Cambridge Paragraph Bible with the Apocrypha, rev. ed.

Does anyone know how this revised version compares with:

http://www.logos.com/product/16102/the-cambridge-paragraph-bible-of-the-authorized-english-version

DMB

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/473009#Comment_473009

Don't know you read the comments on the logos page you ref'd?

I typed in about 4 verses from Genesis and compared them word for word (interlinear!!). In the tiny sample, '1769' Cambridge didn't have quote marks where someone was speaking, while the '1611' one did (terribly minor but interesting; the 1769 version removed them?). Actually the latter is a 'who knows' since Logos emphasizes 'an electronic edition' on the 1769 version. So one would probably need the 'real' 1769 version!

Personally the apparatus that precedes the 1769 Cambridge seems more useful (but just my 1 cent).

Dan Cleghorn

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/473009#Comment_473009

I used the text comparison feature from Logos 5 to compare the AV1769, the AV1873 Cambridge, and the KJV1900.

The 1769 version and the 1900 version are pretty much the same. The Cambridge edition has a few differences - names spelled differently, and a few different words like "a" instead of "an," a "you" instead of "ye," etc. Comparing the three different versions in the book of Genesis, not counting capitalization or grammar, the 1900 is 2% different from the 1769 and the Cambridge is .4% different from the 1769. I use the 1900 for study since it has the interlinear, but if you are concerned with getting the closest to the 1611, the 1769 would probably be the one you would prefer. I think it only came with older editions of Logos though.