I could prefer both GB versions -
Since I have a Hard Copy of the 1599 GB
I can understand Melbo's comment that this
version has a certain # of errors .
The errors he writes of most likely refer to
typo's for the most part, although I have read
some difficult to recite sentences here and there .
At times it seems that the protestant editors of
this bible composed their comments in a kind
of shorthand which requires a moment or so
of study to figure out .
I can understand how things might have been
in those early days of printing presses & the
technical challenges & limitations that these
people could have faced .
Yet, I find that I am never disappointed
with my study of the 1599 GB .
If it were the Only version of the GB
available to me I would still be
happy with it .
Regarding formats, when I look at the way
the 1599 GBOT is laid out, I can see how
the 1560 GBNT was originally laid out .
I have read parts of the 1599 GBNT
many times over & I like the annotations
& commentaries that I've read there .
Knowing that there are more
annotations & commentaries from
the 1560 GBNT that I have yet to read,
is just more good reading yet to come .
Did the protestant editors lend their
annotation & commentary to the
Apocrypha ?
If so, they might make
for some interesting reading .
Not that the Apocrypha
books are necessary to be read,
but some of the bibles back in those
days did seem to include them .
Open up a Catholic Bible
sometime & you will find the
Apocrypha .
I have read some of them
& I can see why they are not
considered critical books to
include in a protestant bible .
Someday I suppose
that there will be a Geneva
Bible version that contains a
true & full fusion of annotations,
commentaries & footnotes from
the 1560 & 1599 versions .
~ To God Be The Glory ~
The 1560-1599
Geneva Bible With Footnotes
http://www.genevabible.org/Geneva.html
The Geneva Bible Forum
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Geneva_Bible/messages?o=1
~ God Be Praised ~
