Does this collection include the 1611 KJV NT or not?
The blurb says yes, the included volumes - no.
King James Version 401 Collection (2 vols.) by James Swanson
The KJV401 Study Edition includes both the 401 and 1611 editions of the KJV.
The blurb is a bit confusing:
[quote]This is a faithful reconstitution of the 1611 KJV’s Early Modern English language into Modern English.
If it is reconstituted into Modern English, then it is not the 1611 Edition.
If it is reconstituted into Modern English, then it is not the 1611 Edition
Would be interested in the 1611 edition.
This 1611 Bible as far as I can determine from Amazon includes only the New Testament. It also does not include the original spelling so I can compare to other bibles such as tyndale.
This includes all the original notes, preface and old spellings.
Which 1611 KJV version are you guys interested in?I can't find off hand where I first came across the problems but WikiP gives a reasoinable account. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_James_Version . The following is an interesting summation. I wonder if FIRST edition and SECOND edition are intended to imply that one was produced before the other or just that they were different? In addition it is worth noting that every edition differed from every other as each one tried to correct the previous ones but succeed in introducing its own errors. What a pity they did not have computers for producing a master copy [:D]:- "Two editions of the whole Bible are recognized as having been produced in 1611, which may be distinguished by their rendering of Ruth 3:15; the first edition reading "he went into the city", where the second reads "she went into the city.";[64] these are known colloquially as the "He" and "She" Bibles.[65] However, Bibles in all the early editions were made up using sheets originating from several printers, and consequently there is very considerable variation[dubious – discuss] within any one edition. It is only in 1613 that an edition is found,[66] all of whose surviving representatives have substantially the same text.[67]"
Does this collection include the 1611 KJV NT or not? The blurb is a bit confusing: [quote]This is a faithful reconstitution of the 1611 KJV’s Early Modern English language into Modern English.
I think some editing of the product page is in order.
It includes both the reconstituted version prepared by the author as well as the 1611 edition not prepared by the author.
Can we get some screen shots please?
Here you go.IntroductionKJV 401
KJV 1611
Matthew here is what I am looking for.
Lynden,That's quite a bit more than these books from Swanson offer. They don’t provide a replica of the 1611 KJV, it just contains the New Testament text.
https://www.logos.com/product/16808/english-bible-collection This collection contains Matthew's, Bishop and Tyndale's Bible, all older than 1611 KJV. Why not go for it?
I've been on pre-pub for this since it was 1st offered, The collection is a little slow in coming, but parts of it have been released in base packages. :-)
Here is what you and I am looking for: The King James 1611 with original spelling and marginal notes.
http://www.amazon.com/The-Holy-Bible-Edition-Version/dp/0840700415 I am sure Logos could consult with Thomas Nelson Publishers to get this into print. As I stated earlier the original spellings help compare the difference between the Geneva, Tyndale and other older English translations in the Text Comparison Tool.
Also can anyone verify that this King James Version 401 contains more than just the New Testament?
Here you go.
Note that the spelling in the KJV 1611 Matthew genealogy does not match the spelling of the reprint of the First Edition of the 1611 King James Version published in 1982 by Thomas Nelson (I have this resource in dead tree format). So it still appears that this is not the KJV 1611.
So your saying that the King James Version 401 edition is not the 1611.
Note that the spelling in the KJV 1611 Matthew genealogy does not match the spelling of the reprint of the First Edition of the 1611 King James Version published in 1982 by Thomas Nelson (I have this resource in dead tree format). So it still appears that this is not the KJV 1611. So your saying that the King James Version 401 edition is not the 1611.
All I checked was the spelling. Either Thomas Nelson or KJV 401 is incorrect, most likely both of them as not true to the original. The title page of the Thomas Nelson edition reads—
[quote]A Word-for-word reprint of the First Edition of the Authorized Version presented in roman letters for easy reading and comparison with subsequent editions
It seems that Thomas Nelson would then be claiming to have the original spelling of the First Edition. Don't know what 401 is claiming.
As a resident of a county saturated with KJV KJB 1611 only advocates, I would like to have an authentic reproduction of the original edition to have them attempt to read [8-|].
As a resident of a county saturated with KJV KJB 1611 only advocates, I would like to have an authentic reproduction of the original edition to have them attempt to read
And as a multiple canon advocate, I want them to have the entire publication - not their favored subset. [8-|]
As a resident of a county saturated with KJV KJB 1611 only advocates, I would like to have an authentic reproduction of the original edition to have them attempt to read And as a multiple canon advocate, I want them to have the entire publication - not their favored subset.
And as a multiple canon advocate, I want them to have the entire publication - not their favored subset.
I'd go along with both.
How dare you read my mind? [:D]
Perhaps I should have mentioned that the Thomas Nelson edition does contain all the books found in the 1611 First Edition, including those labeled as Apocrypha. They also need to know that their beloved KJB has been mutilated [:D]
Behave yourself, Jack. You're getting close to the edge of the forum guideline cliff [:S]
King James Version 401 Collection
Where can I find this?
To the best of my knowledge, it is not available in Logos. The NT only is available from Amazon.
