This article is ratedStart-class on Wikipedia'scontent assessment scale. It is of interest to the followingWikiProjects:

BibleLow‑importance This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Bible, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of theBible on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.BibleWikipedia:WikiProject BibleTemplate:WikiProject BibleBible Low This article has been rated asLow-importance on theproject's importance scale. EnglandLow‑importance This article is within the scope ofWikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofEngland on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related Low This article has been rated asLow-importance on theproject's importance scale. AnglicanismLow‑importance Great Bible is part ofWikiProject Anglicanism, an attempt to better organize information in articles related toAnglicanism and theAnglican Communion. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit theproject page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to thediscussion.AnglicanismWikipedia:WikiProject AnglicanismTemplate:WikiProject AnglicanismAnglicanism Low This article has been rated asLow-importance on theproject's importance scale.

"The psalms in the Book of Common Prayer are taken from the Great Bible rather than the King James Bible."

The Book of Common Prayer (and presumably its psalms) would seem to predate the King James Bible. Could this be fixed, or if a subtle point is being made here, could it be further explicated?—Precedingunsigned comment added by131.252.208.85 (talk •contribs) 09:45, 19 February 2007

This article, together with several others on early English Bibles, gave the impression of depending too heavily on the Encyclopedia Britannica of 1911. Some errors seemed to have rippled through from one article to another. The articles in question include those on the Matthew Bible, Jacobus van Meteren, and Early Modern English Bible translations. (The article on the Great Bible is the least affected.)

There has been a lot of Bible research since 1911. A more reliable starting point for research in this area is Herbert's extremely detailed and careful Historical Catalogue of Printed Editions of the English Bible 1525–1961, dating from 1968. I have therefore edited the articles in question so that they at least no longer contradict Herbert, although they still contain unsourced material that is not supported by Herbert. Also it was necessary to create an article on the Coverdale Bible of 1535.

If other authors know of later sources that update or improve on Herbert, those sources should be named.EEye12:57, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The King was becoming impatient with the slow progress, especially in view of his conviction that the Pilgrimage of Grace had been substantially exacerbated due to the rebels' exploitation of popular religious ignorance. With the bishops showing no signs of completing their task, Cromwell gave official approval to the Matthew Bible as an interim measure in 1537, the year of its publication under the pseudonym "Thomas Matthew". The Matthew Bible combined the New Testament of William Tyndale, and as much of the Old Testament as Tyndale had been able to translate before being put to death the prior year for "heresy."

The word heresy in parens is editorializing.72.89.116.229 (talk)16:33, 12 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Start-Class Bible articles
• Low-importance Bible articles
• WikiProject Bible articles
• Start-Class England-related articles
• Low-importance England-related articles
• WikiProject England pages
• Start-Class Anglicanism articles
• Low-importance Anglicanism articles
• Start-Class Christianity articles