...step by step
1611 KJV vs 1769 KJV
My Beloved Brother/Sister;
(2 Corinthians 2:17)
3. Punctuation & Capitalization
5. Printing Errors
6. 1611 in Roman Print
***NOTE to MOBILE USERS: THIS PAGE CANNOT BE VIEWED IN MOBILE VERSION, ONLY IN DESKTOP VIEW***
But what went ye out for to see?
A man clothed in soft rainment? Behold,
they that weare soft cloathing, are in
kings houses. (1611)
*** The 1769 KJV is saying that the word "clothing" should not be there, meaning, it was added to give a more clear understanding of the verse. However, a cross reference verse will tell us that the word clothing/rainment should be in the verse. see Luke 7:25.
Now, contrary to what John and Jesus wore, the pope seems to be clothed in soft and gorgeous apparel, and he also wears a crown, like a king.
When any one heareth the word
of the kingdome, and understandeth it
not, then commeth the wicked one, and
catcheth away that which was sowen
in his heart: this is hee which received
seed by the way side. (1611)
*** The word in question is "one". The 1769 obscures the identity of satan. In doing so, one might conclude that the wicked refers to anyone who is ungodly. However, the 1611 gives a more precise affirmation of the wicked one; satan. Also, the word "it" specifically refers to he Gospel. Note: verse 38 also italicizes the word "one" in the 1769.
Then said he unto them, Therefore every Scribe which is instructed unto the kingdom of heaven, is like unto a man that is an householder, which bringeth foorth out of his treasure things new and old.
*** The 1769 KJV italicezes 3 words, which, if omitted (since technically they should not be there), it would diminish the meaning of the verse. This verse compares a Jewish Scribe "which" (who) is instructed in the Gospel. He is then compared to a man who holds his house in order, meaning, he holds "things" (knowledge) of the old and new testament. Thus, he is like a bridge that connects two ends, the old testament scriptures with new testament scriptures.
But in baine they do worship me,
teaching for doctrines, the commandements of men. (1611)
*** This verse in the 1769 is very misleading, by italicizing the word "for" and removing the comma, the verse has a different meaning. What the 1769 is saying is this: But in vain they do worship me, teaching doctrines the commandments of men. The word "for" gives a clear understanding that instead of teaching the doctrines/commandments of God, they were replacing the commandments of God for the commandments of men; or traditions of men.
For they binde heavie burdens, and grievous to be borne, and lay them on mens shoulders, but they themselves will not moove them with one of their fingers.(1611)
*** As you can see, there is plenty of inversion.
And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your father which is in heaven (1611)
*** As we can see, "man" has been italicized in the 1769. But the 1611 eliminates all doubts. The Roman Catholic Church seems to be having a problem with this verse.
More Differences In The : Italics
1611 KJV & 1769 KJV
And when Jesus departed thence, two blinde men followed him, crying, and saying, Thou sonne of David, have mercy on us. (1611)
Wherefore I say unto you, All maner of sinne and blasphemie shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemie against the holy Ghost, shall not bee forgiven unto men. (1611)
When Jesus heard of it, he departed thence by ship, into a desert place apart: and when the people had heard thereof, they followed him on foote, out of the cities. (1611)
And the multitudes that went before, and that followed, cried, saying, Hosanna to the sonne of David: Blessed is he that commeth in the Name of the Lord, Hosanna in the highest. (1611)
And the remnant tooke his servants, and intreated them spitefully, and slew them. (1611)
For many are called, but few are chosen. (1611)
Two women shall be grinding at the mill: the one shall be taken, and the other left. (1611)
***MORE TO COME: UNDER CONSTRUCTION
As you have noticed, I have drawn my focus mainly to the book of Matthew only. Below is a complete list of the 1611 & 1769 Italics of each book of the New Testament. Please take the time to study and verify this information, as some of you may find it useful. Also, please check regularly for updates.
Woe unto you Scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites; for yee pay tithe of mint, and annise, and cummine, and have omitted the weightier matters of the Law, judgement, mercie and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone. (1611)
Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone. (1769)
*** The word in focus here is the word "matters". What Christ was saying is that there are more important things in the Law (notice the capital "L") than just external obedience to rites, festivals, circumcisions, sabbaths, sacrifices, and other things that the Law required. These "matters", that Jesus made reference to were: judgement, mercie, and faith. Italicizing the word "matters" is just as another way of saying: it is not in the Greek manuscripts. Although, the 1568 Bishops bible was used as a reference by the KJV 1611 translators, it too does not italicizes the word "matters" (see 1568 Bishop bible verse on the left side).
Wherefore behold, I send unto you Prophets, and wisemen, and Scribes, and some of them yee shall kill and crucifie, and some of them shall yee scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from citie to citie: (1611)
Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city: (1769)
*** Perhaps, some would find it useful to know that the words "some, some, them" are necessary to give a full understanding of the amount; as it could had been misunderstood for: most, all, every, few, etc. Again, brothers, in no wise am I saying that this words are not found in the 1769, but the greater matter is: are they inspired by God or not, do the majority Greek manuscripts reflect these changes.
*** As we can see, both the Bishop Bible (left side) and the KJV 1611 (right side) are in agreement as to not italicizing "it were". Because in doing so, then it gives it a different meaning, otherwise the context of this verse is saying that there is a possibility to deceive the very elect. Did you notice the wisdom of the KJV translators, they parenthesized the words "if it were possible". Try reading it without the parentheses and the context of the verse will assert that the elect will be deceived, but the translators of the 1611 were smart by placing a strong emphasis in the words: (if it were possible), meaning, it is not possible. This is how the 1769 reads without the italics: if possible, they shall deceive the very elect.
*** It seems that the 1769 made an error in italicizing the word "man", since the verse makes no sense if you omit the word "man". It is said, that in the presence of two witnesses, the truth shall be establish, well, both, the 1568 Bishop and 1611 KJV are in agreement.
*** The meaning changes if the word "him" is italicized.
And he went a little further, and fell on his face, and prayed, saying, O my father, if it be possible, let this cup passe from me: nevertheless, not as I will, but as thou wilt. (1611)
*** Both, the 1568 Bishop (upper left) and the 1611 (upper right) agree that the word "wilt" is part of the text.
However, it must be noted that the 1769 does not italicize the word "will" in the cross reference found in mark 14:36.
Watch and pray, that yee enter not into temptation: The spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weake. (1611)
***As we can see, the 1568 Bishop bible (to the left) and the 1611 KJV (to the right) have different stands. But we also need to remember that it was for this reason that the 1611 KJV was made, to polish and edify the work of the previous bibles. Now, both the 1568 and the 1611 are in harmony with: (the spirit indeed is willing). And both the 1611 and the 1769 are in harmony with: (but the flesh is weak.)
Saying, I have sinned, in that I have betraied the innocent blood. And they said, What is that to us? see thou to that. (1611)
***Much can be said about this verse. First, the (What "is that" to us) has reference to Judas betrayal of the innocent blood of Jesus; the sin of Judas. And (see thou "to that") makes it clear that the Pharisees did not want to have anything to do with Juda's guilt or confession. Aside form the various applications that we can learn from this verse, we can also see that the Pharisees spoke a great truth without realizing it, by saying "see thou to that", meaning, do not come to us (mere man) for forgiveness. In other words, we can learn that we should not confess our sins to a man, but rather to God. This we can learn from Peter when he denied the Lord Jesus, but then he wept bitterly and repented to God, and not to men. Again, I think the 1611 and the 1568 are correct.
***Both, the 1568 Bishop and the 1611 KJV do not italicize the word "Thy", but the 1769 does.
For I say unto you, That except your righteousnesse shall exceede the righteousnesse of the Scribes and Pharisees, yee shall in no case enter into the kingdome of heaven.
***This verse is of high importance, as it clearly teaches that unless we receive the righteousness of Christ; which is greater than our own righteousness and necessary for our salvation, then we, in no case will enter the kingdom of heaven. Keep in mind, that these Scribes and Pharisees thought they could enter heaven by their own righteousness, that is, without Christ. And as you can see, both, the 1568 and the 1611 are in agreement. However, the 1769 italicizes the most crucial words in this verse.