Did Shakespeare Contribute to the King James Bible?

[Rhondazvous]

It’s possible that the King James Bible is actually the King James by Bill.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psalm_46#S...nvolvement

Shakespeare was in King James' service during the preparation of the King James Bible, and was generally considered to be 46 years old in 1611 when the translation was completed.

[Aliza]

It’s possible that the King James Bible is actually the King James by Bill.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psalm_46#S...nvolvement

Shakespeare was in King James' service during the preparation of the King James Bible, and was generally considered to be 46 years old in 1611 when the translation was completed.

The question would have to be asked whether or not the KJV backs into the original Hebrew and Aramaic texts. As far as I know, it does mostly back in. The key differences are translation errors introduced in the KJV to artificially (and quite deliberately) paint jesus into the Hebrew bible.

If there are additional psalms in the Christian texts, then maybe. Or maybe Shakespeare assisted with the shoddy translation.

[Minimalist]

We actually know the names of the men on the committee who wrote up the KJV.

http://www.christianity.com/church/churc...30052.html

Consider how preposterous it was to have a team of elite scholars writing for a largely illiterate public. We can only stand back in amazement at their achievement. Think how ludicrous the translation mandate was. It called for a product commissioned to reinforce a clear-cut royal political agenda, to be done by elite scholarly committees, reviewed by a self-serving bureaucracy, with ultimate approval reserved to an absolutist monarch. The final product was intended primarily for public and popular consumption. It was to be read orally -- intended more to be heard in public than to be read in private. How many works of literary genius do you recall that were done by committee?

Yeah... the divine right of kings.  You know, one of those "xtian values" that America was allegedly founded upon!

[Drich]

It’s possible that the King James Bible is actually the King James by Bill.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psalm_46#S...nvolvement

Shakespeare was in King James' service during the preparation of the King James Bible, and was generally considered to be 46 years old in 1611 when the translation was completed.

https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/psa/...onc_524007

there is only one problem with the shakespear/psalms 46 fake fact theory....

selah denotes a pause in music not the word spear. not even pronounced 'spear.'

Pronounced S'eh-leh.

[GUBU]

It’s possible that the King James Bible is actually the King James by Bill.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psalm_46#S...involement

The question would have to be asked whether or not the KJV backs into the original Hebrew and Aramaic texts. As far as I know, it does mostly back in. The key differences are translation errors introduced in the KJV to artificially (and quite deliberately) paint jesus into the Hebrew bible.

If there are additional psalms in the Christian texts, then maybe. Or maybe Shakespeare assisted with the shoddy translation.

There was a lot of stuff added into the KJV, most of it there to justify James VI & I's claims to having a divine right to rule without recourse to parliament, and to limit puritan and calvinist (or Knoxian) influences on the coe. They went so far as to use an older version of English that hadn't been spoken for over a hundered years by the reign of James VI & I in order to lend the version an aura of age and authenticity.

Earlier versions such as the unfinished Tyndale bible, or Henry VIII's great bible, or the bishop's bible, were more accurate translations, for all that's worth given the fact the bible we know today was largely written between 200CE and 325CE with major additions subsequent (like inserting the resurrection into Matthew to make it agree with the later written gospels).

Edit: I always get a kick out of American religitards coming on here extolling the KJV, seeing as it extolled a political principle their ancestors may have rebelled against.

[Minimalist]

Not Dripshit.  He'd have been a Tory fighting for God and Country.

[Rev. Rye]

Also, looking at the Geneva Bible, the words "Shake" and "Spear" are in the same position, and that was published in 1560, a full four years before Shakespeare was born.

Besides, this plan doesn't seem to fit with what I know of Shakespeare. For one thing, when he hid little tidbits like that, they were usually references to things like genitalia and sex (Country Matters, anyone?) I don't think I can remember him making reference to his own name in any of his plays. Also, there's a lot of discussion about Shakespeare's religious views, but, as is common with Shakespeare, there isn't a lot of disagreement, but given how he A) repeatedly showed a preference for allusions to mythology to Christianity (which appears to be a combination of constraint by the theatrical censors and him really not being that devout), and B) may have had some Catholic sympathies, it's not terribly likely King James would have considered Shakespeare for it even if he was proficient in Greek and Hebrew enough to translate (which there's no evidence he was).

[Succubus]

It’s possible that the King James Bible is actually the King James by Bill.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psalm_46#S...nvolvement

The question would have to be asked whether or not the KJV backs into the original Hebrew and Aramaic texts. As far as I know, it does mostly back it.

Where can I find the original Hebrew and Aramaic texts?

[Minimalist]

You can't.  The originals seem to have been in Greek.  At least, fragments of the 3d century BC Greek Septuagint are the earliest written pieces of bible bullshit we have.

[Succubus]

I knew that. o