[sword-devel] English Bible Versions

[Chris Little]

I think certain revisions are significant enough to be identified 
separately. Examples that come to mind include the KJV 1611 vs. KJV 1769 
or the original NASB vs. the NASB 1995 Update.

The Caedmon manuscript should really be labeled MS Junius 11 or Codex 
Junius 11 or such. No one seriously calls it the Caedmon manuscript 
anymore, since one of the few definite facts about its authors is that 
none of them were Caedmon. It's also not clear that it's a translation 
of the Vulgate. First--it's not a translation, but a paraphrase into 
heroic Germanic alliterative verse. Second--it's got a lot of 
non-Biblical material. The only certain source document was Vatican MS 
Palatinus Latinus 1447, an Old Saxon alliterative verse fragment of 
Genesis. The whole text is quite extensive (much more than a few 
verses), with the first poem (Genesis) extending for about 3 thousand 
lines. (I did a translation & analysis of a couple hundred lines of this 
MS in my Old English course.)

Also, I didn't spot one of my favorite new translations: 
http://www.lolcatbible.com/index.php?title=Genesis_1 -- just an 
oversight, I'm sure. ;)

--Chris


Troy A. Griffitts wrote:
> Steve DeRose has started to compile a comprehensive list of English 
> Bible.  If anyone has time to review and comment, it would be most 
> appreciated:
> 
> http://derose.net/steve/Bible/EnglishBibleTranslations.html
> 
> _______________________________________________
> sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel at crosswire.org
> http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel
> Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page