The Highway Forums General Discussion Open Forum KJV: the Anti-Calvinist,Counter Reformation Bible?

I gleand this from another forum and wanted to know what those here think. Is this guyright or is he off the mark? Also he is a big fan of the NIV. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/bash.gif" alt="" />

"According to Paul Wegner in Journey from
texts to translations the first principle of the
'authorised version' was to use the 1602
'bishops bible' and the original Hebrew and
Greek texts were simply to be 'examined' for
inconsistency"



Yes, this was a requirement stipulated by
King James himself.

The end result -anyhow- being that approx.
80% of the KJV's NT ended up identical to
the Tyndale NT.


Nevertheless, the Erasmus Greek compilation
was consulted by the KJV translators, as was
the Latin Vulgate, the Geneva Bible, etc.

And, facts are: Erroneous renderings which
can be traced back to the Latin Vulgate were
left in place.

The KJV translators failed to correct their text
on the basis of even the best interpretation of
the limited Greek manuscript base available to
them.

Or, more accurately, the anti-Calvinist doctrinal
bias of the KJV translators led them to retain the
bad readings inherited from the Latin Vulgate
via Tyndale's NT.


The Church of England has always been split
between it's minority Calvinist faction and a
dominant Arminian-Lutheran/pro-Romanist
faction.

In the early-1600's, as today, the latter prevailed
over the former.


Basically, the KJV represents the C-of-E's
anti-Calvinist Bible meant to compete with
and supplant the Geneva Bible of the
English Calvinists.

As such, the King James Version was part of
the Counter-Reformation !