Modern Bible Translations and their CORRUPTIONS

Discussion not limited to prophecy.

Re: Modern Bible Translations and their CORRUPTIONS

Postby Abiding in His Word on Fri Aug 11, 2017 1:20 pm

Waaaay off topic, but I can't resist....

Anyone here old enough to remember the 1950's song "One-eyed, One-horned Flying Purple eater?"

:lol:

OK.... :backtotopic:
User avatar
Abiding in His Word
SITE ADMIN
 
Posts: 28616
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2006 4:54 pm
Location: SW Florida

Re: Modern Bible Translations and their CORRUPTIONS

Postby brett on Fri Aug 11, 2017 1:33 pm

Guys I have a day job. There is way too much to respond to for one person. And I don't really think you all need responses, my opening posts made the matter very clear. This matter cannot be determined by the number of posts in a forum discussion, this matter can only be shown to people and then people will decide for themselves.

I've shown you the deception, I've done my job. I might add more corruptions if time permits

Simple point is : Beware of modern bible translations - they have been tampered with and are counterfeits (pirated versions). They are decided by the marketplace, their true motive is money, their existence is not by God's inspiration. You cannot rely upon them, please get a KJV for your own sakes.

Also don't waste your time too much atm. I'm motivated quite strongly to get a major software project completed to bring in some money. I am getting the impression we may not have a lot of time left, I hope we still have at least 2 years before war starts, but who knows really.

God bless

.
KJV ONLY !
The KJV is the only PURE translation. Avoid modern corruptions like the NIV, they have been altered to support the coming Anti-Christ.
"The words of the Lord are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt keep them, O Lord, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever." Psalm 12:6-7
brett
 
Posts: 1988
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2006 2:33 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Modern Bible Translations and their CORRUPTIONS

Postby mark s on Fri Aug 11, 2017 3:23 pm

Hi Brett,

I appreciate what you are saying. This can be a topic about which people can be very strongly decided. I expect as much has been said as needs be said.

One point of view is that the KJV is the only uncorrupted translation. The other point of view is that all translations are just that, translations from one language to another, and none are "divinely inspired translations". Of course, you hold to the former view, and I the latter.

Hm. I wonder what they did before 1611?

Love in Christ,
Mark

PS . . . actually, not meaning to be disingenuous . . . I know exactly what they did before 1611. It's exactly the same thing we do now. And actually . . . what they did in 1612. And 1680. And so on. They used other translations.

Interestingly, it was the Geneva Bible the Puritans brought with them to the New World. I guess they sure missed the boat!
ειπεν αυτη ο ιησους εγω ειμι η αναστασις και η ζωη ο πιστευων εις εμε καν αποθανη ζησεται
. . . saying to her Jesus, I AM the resurrection and the life, the one believing into Me even dying shall live . . .
User avatar
mark s
MODERATOR
 
Posts: 12819
Joined: Tue Oct 17, 2006 11:38 am
Location: Southern California, USA

Re: Modern Bible Translations and their CORRUPTIONS

Postby burien1 on Fri Aug 11, 2017 5:28 pm

Abiding in His Word wrote:Waaaay off topic, but I can't resist....

Anyone here old enough to remember the 1950's song "One-eyed, One-horned Flying Purple eater?"

:lol:

OK.... :backtotopic:


:whaa: I was going to paint some rocks for my sis-in-law and was looking at different pictures.I saw a picture of a rock earlier today that reminded me of that very song. :faint:

And Mark, your analysis is excellent.
Psalm 119:105; Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path.
User avatar
burien1
MODERATOR
 
Posts: 8464
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 7:57 pm

Re: Modern Bible Translations and their CORRUPTIONS

Postby Mark F on Sun Aug 13, 2017 6:21 am

I believe a very good and needed discrimination should be undertaken by every serious Bible student.

Which manuscript source and the type of translation, as in word for word or otherwise, should be very important to every student.

To believe that there is equality among various Bible translations is utter foolishness and a very large number of Christians don't know and don't care about that fact,

I don't disagree with Brett that KVJ should be considered among the best English translations, although I disagree with Brett's reasons for choosing it and his reasons for defending it. KJV has excellent manuscript support and it's troubles in regard to translation errors are of the most noted and documented. Most modern translations do not endure the scrutiny that has been placed upon KJV, and that is a very good thing.

Shortribber posted about Westcott and Hort's evil manuscripts and by and large most Christians haven't got a clue, and don't care either way. A good case can be made that their intensions were to deceive. KJV will keep you from that influence.

I am of the belief that the original writings were the inerrant, flawless, words of God. They have been remarkably preserved through the centuries in a most remarkable level of purity. God alone has seen to it, man can be seen to have tried to destroy those words, that in itself is evidence of their value.

The Bible alone is enough to truly lead men and women to salvation, well, the Bible and the Holy Spirit, but there have been people saved without reading the Bible, so the Holy Spirit can and will demonstrate His mighty power as that is proof of it. Frank Turek will tell you that Christianity isn't true because the Bible says it's true, Christianity is true because of an event in history, Jesus Christ became a Man and died on a cross at Golgatha and was dead, buried, and rose from the dead in power and glory, that is the pivotal event.

There are many proofs of that historical event apart from the Bible, yes, the facts of that event are foretold in Scripture, but the event is the ultimate validation. The words were given so that when the events it foretells come to pass, we know that the rest of the words, (ie: that God placed all sin on Jesus so that He could forgive you of yours) are true and they are trustworthy.

Our responsibility is to discriminate which manuscript is the truest representation of the original, then matter of factly translate to other languages the closest representation of the original WORDS, and rely upon the Holy Spirit to take those word and save men. I do not believe for a moment that men only have good intentions when they translate Scripture, all you have to do is look around, the proof is in the Churches.
Mark

All Scripture from NKJV

Find a seven year covenant Jesus makes with anybody plainly stated in Scripture.
Mark F
 
Posts: 616
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 5:29 pm
Location: North Carolina

Re: Modern Bible Translations and their CORRUPTIONS

Postby shorttribber on Sun Aug 13, 2017 11:27 am

Mark F wrote:To believe that there is equality among various Bible translations is utter foolishness and a very large number of Christians don't know and don't care about that fact,

Mark F wrote:Shortribber posted about Westcott and Hort's evil manuscripts and by and large most Christians haven't got a clue, and don't care either way. A good case can be made that their intensions were to deceive. KJV will keep you from that influence.

Mark F wrote:I am of the belief that the original writings were the inerrant, flawless, words of God. They have been remarkably preserved through the centuries in a most remarkable level of purity. God alone has seen to it, man can be seen to have tried to destroy those words, that in itself is evidence of their value.
(Blue highlighting added by ST)

Absolutely Mark F....thank you.
The Wisest men have changed their Counsels and Resolves upon second thoughts, much more upon experience, and approaching evils not at first discovered. Rev. Herbert Croft, 1675

Where no counsel is, the people fall: but in the multitude of counsellors there is safety.

Find seven years of tribulation plainly stated in the Bible.
User avatar
shorttribber
 
Posts: 4944
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2007 7:42 pm
Location: Not in San Antonio!

Re: Modern Bible Translations and their CORRUPTIONS

Postby shorttribber on Sun Aug 13, 2017 12:22 pm

Mark F, and everyone,
I have posted this following information before. It is so very important to read Carefully and understand the work of Mr Pierpont.
His studies and work are Exceedingly Important in this discussion.

Please note the following words while reading...." He was taught from the Westcott-Hort text by Professor J. H. Langenwalter, and at that time he fully accepted the general theory and underlying principles of that edition
. From that point, he became an ardent student of New Testament Greek for the remainder of his life, and his curiosity and interest regarding the theory, principles, and methodology of New Testament textual criticism began to develop. He devoted thousands of hours of reading and study to this particular field, even while favoring the Westcott-Hort type of critical text and gravitating toward a reasoned eclectic methodology of text-critical praxis.

Now, Please read this Again, Even if you've read it before.

Dear Family here at this forum....I did have a very long phone conversation with this dear saint, a few years before he finished his race. I listened to his wisdom and gleaned so much from him in that conversation, about three or four hours as I remember.

I hope his work can have some influence on this thread.

:praying:



A Faithful Witness...Honored.
http://rosetta.reltech.org/TC/v08/Pierpont2003obit.html

Here are some portions of the link provided above...........

7. William Pierpont began his Greek New Testament study in 1933 while a freshman at Friends University. He was taught from the Westcott-Hort text by Professor J. H. Langenwalter, and at that time he fully accepted the general theory and underlying principles of that edition. From that point, he became an ardent student of New Testament Greek for the remainder of his life, and his curiosity and interest regarding the theory, principles, and methodology of New Testament textual criticism began to develop. He devoted thousands of hours of reading and study to this particular field, even while favoring the Westcott-Hort type of critical text and gravitating toward a reasoned eclectic methodology of text-critical praxis.

8.In the mid-1960s
his views regarding textual criticism begin to change
.
After exploring many issues regarding the underlying theory and praxis of modern eclectic methodology and its resultant critical text, he began to examine the entire matter more deeply
.
As a result of this intense inquiry, he began to abandon certain aspects of the theory and operative principles under which he had functioned during the previous thirty years. His shift in text-critical opinion derived primarily from this independent questioning and detailed analysis of individual variant units. Only later did he become acquainted with those 19th and 20th century writers who had questioned various aspects of the Westcott-Hort theory or the current eclectic critical text

17. With the advent of office computer technology in the 1980s, the original notes were converted into a complete electronic Greek New Testament text. By 1986, this running Byzantine text had become available as a module in the Online Bible computer program. In 1991, the printed edition of The Greek New Testament according to the Byzantine/Majority Textform was published (copies of that edition are no longer obtainable). The electronic form of the Robinson-Pierpont Greek New Testament is openly available in many software packages, including programs such as the Online Bible, BibleWorks, Sword, OliveTree, and Logos; its electronic text remains freely downloadable in ASCII form at numerous internet sites worldwide. A revised edition of the Robinson-Pierpont Byzantine Greek New Testament is currently in preparation and should become available in printed and electronic form sometime during 2003. Even during his last months, William Pierpont continued to work with interest on this forthcoming new edition; his last written communication with Robinson occurred about a month before his death.

19. The 2003 edition of the Byzantine Greek New Testament will be a fitting memorial to the spiritual life and work of William G. Pierpont. In all aspects of this text and edition, William Pierpont's contribution remains primary--the order of the editors' names (Robinson-Pierpont) was that chosen by Pierpont, arranged more for euphony than for any other factor. Over 95% of the Byzantine Textform edition remains that which Pierpont had initially prepared in note form, long before Robinson's association with him. The Byzantine Textform Greek New Testament abides as William Pierpont's tangible legacy, prepared by a committed, loving, and sincere Christian gentleman, to whom all owe a debt of thanks.

................................................................................................................................................

Now, the following words are mine (ST),and these few words sum up the primary problem we face today IMO........

Every since the Predominant Opinions that the Earlier Alexandrian Textype should be allowed Greater Authority and Acceptance than the Majority/Byzantine, OPINIONS OF MEN have Dishonored and Cast Doubt on the Purity of God's Holy Word.
The Wisest men have changed their Counsels and Resolves upon second thoughts, much more upon experience, and approaching evils not at first discovered. Rev. Herbert Croft, 1675

Where no counsel is, the people fall: but in the multitude of counsellors there is safety.

Find seven years of tribulation plainly stated in the Bible.
User avatar
shorttribber
 
Posts: 4944
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2007 7:42 pm
Location: Not in San Antonio!

Re: Modern Bible Translations and their CORRUPTIONS

Postby brett on Sun Aug 13, 2017 6:54 pm

.
Good posts guys, the last 3 posts, not the ones from the moderators. My short response to the last 3 posts is this. I mostly agree however I personally am 100% satisfied with the final product, because that is in my hands now. The KJV in my hands now, has ZERO errors - that's a miracle of God right there. All other translations have errors, that's proof enough for me.

Anyway it looks like the devil has succeeded in his goals, by creating hundreds of modern translations, he has managed to cement the LIE (in some peoples minds) that there is no perfect Word of God. Apparently God has lost control of His Word and all translations now contain errors (obviously I utterly reject this LIE)........ So according to some we have a faith built on a fallible book, an uncertain foundation, an inferior book open to attack from all other religions. No wonder those who believe such things are not willing to rebuke and reprove, for they are not even certain themselves that their Bible is true and correct. What a terrible lie the devil has spread in these Last Days, taking away peoples confidence in the Word of God and weakening peoples faith. How does that look to the unsaved? Its a terrible witness to the unsaved......"oh by the way the Bible has become corrupted over the centuries......so we're not exactly sure anymore which parts are original and which parts are corrupted". Wow that really inspires faith in our religion. The muslims must already be jumping on this like crazy for this is EXACTLY what they have been arguing for centuries, that their book the Koran is superior, because they claim its 100% perfect and the Bible contains errors............woops...........oh but of course so many christian's today have stopped trying to reach muslims - so that's why they forget about this.

Unfortunately the devils plan has been very effective.....he's successfully deceived and disarmed many.

.
KJV ONLY !
The KJV is the only PURE translation. Avoid modern corruptions like the NIV, they have been altered to support the coming Anti-Christ.
"The words of the Lord are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt keep them, O Lord, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever." Psalm 12:6-7
brett
 
Posts: 1988
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2006 2:33 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Modern Bible Translations and their CORRUPTIONS

Postby Jay Ross on Mon Aug 14, 2017 1:26 am

Brett you made this very bold statement which is not correct: -

brett wrote:.
Good posts guys, the last 3 posts, not the ones from the moderators. My short response to the last 3 posts is this. I mostly agree however I personally am 100% satisfied with the final product, because that is in my hands now. The KJV in my hands now, has ZERO errors - that's a miracle of God right there. All other translations have errors, that's proof enough for me.

<snip>



Brett let me show you TWO errors that are found in one verse of the KJV

Exodus 3:14-15: -

14 And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.

15 And God said moreover unto Moses, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, The Lord God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, hath sent me unto you: this is my name for ever, and this is my memorial unto all generations.
KJV[/quote]

The first error in verse 15 that I am pointing out concerns the translation of the Hebrew word לְעֹלָ֔ם lə·‘ō·lām , Strong N° 5769 which has the following meaning: -

Strong's Exhaustive Concordance
always, ancient time, any more, continuance, eternal, for, everlasting, long time,
Or lolam {o-lawm'}; from alam; properly, concealed, i.e. The vanishing point; generally, time out of mind (past or future), i.e. (practically) eternity; frequentatively, adverbial (especially with prepositional prefix) always -- alway(-s), ancient (time), any more, continuance, eternal, (for, (n-))ever(-lasting, -more, of old), lasting, long (time), (of) old (time), perpetual, at any time, (beginning of the) world (+ without end). Compare netsach, ad.
Source: - http://biblehub.com/hebrew/5769.htm


Please note that this word is of a finite time period which has a defined starting and ending point, even though the end point is outside of our ability to comprehend. As such the translation of לְעֹלָ֔ם lə·‘ō·lām as “for ever” should in reality be translated as “for a fixed period of time”.

The second error is in the translation of the following Hebrew words: - {לְדֹ֥ר דֹּֽר lə·ḏōr dōr , Strong N° 1755 which has the following meaning: -

Strong's Exhaustive Concordance
age, evermore, generation, never, posterity
Or (shortened) dor {dore}; from duwr; properly, a revolution of time, i.e. An age or generation; also a dwelling -- age, X evermore, generation, (n-)ever, posterity.
Source: - http://biblehub.com/hebrew/1775.htm


The translation in the KJV of the Hebrew text, {לְדֹ֥ר דֹּֽר lə·ḏōr dōr, is “unto all generations” has an infinite time span which is contrary to the finite time span of the Hebrew word לְעֹלָ֔ם lə·‘ō·lām , Strong N° 5769, a few words before, and as such, this translation of “lə·ḏōr dōr” becomes an obvious error in its English translation.

I would suggest that the translation for “lə·ḏōr dōr” should perhaps be for the remainder is this age plus another age.” Or with 20/20 hindsight vision, “for one and a half ages.”

This understanding is confirmed for me because when Christ came he introduced a new term for God to be used by people and that term was “Father,” as used within the Lord’s Prayer and the term “I AM” was not used of God.

There is much more that can be written to justify this translation of Exodus 3:15 in this manner instead of the existing English translation which is in my humble is an error contained in all English translations of this verse.

The understanding of the translator when the KJV was compiled was not there to understand that it was possible to have a finite span of time which was difficult for people to comprehend and because the timespan was large, it was translated as “for ever” and “many generations/ages.”

These two errors are in all English translations, so to make the sweeping statement that “the KJV has no errors” as you did in your post, is an error of the facts on your part.

Because these types of errors have continued over the years through the “Tradition” of translating, many errors continue to be found within ever English translation.

For this very reason, to claim that one particular translation is superior to all other translations because it has no errors in it is a false statement on your part.

Shalom
Jay Ross
 
Posts: 1338
Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2011 12:11 am

Re: Modern Bible Translations and their CORRUPTIONS

Postby brett on Mon Aug 14, 2017 3:20 am

.
What a mine field ..... sorry but I do not agree with you at all !! This is exactly a perfect illustration why this kind of approach is SO FULL OF PROBLEMS ! Look at the sheer number of DIFFERENT words given in Strong's Concordance. What a disaster ! Are you kidding me ?! Anyone could make the scriptures say ANYTHING they wanted with that huge selection of different words to choose from. Just pick the words you want and off you go !

Sorry but I'm not going to take your choice of words (opinion) over the KJV. The Strong's Concordance let's men chose the words (meaning) they want - which is exactly what you are doing. Oh and one other thing, Strong's Concordance is NOT the Word of God. You don't test the KJV against the Strong's Concordance - you've got it backwards - You would be better to test Strong's Concordance against the KJV.

And have you forgotten? You pointed this out to me before. We had a significant disagreement about this scripture already before in another thread. I wasn't agreeing with you then and I'm not agreeing with you now. In fact the length of time I won't agree with you on this scripture is "for ever" & "unto all generations" - Strong N° 1755 & Strong N° 5769 !

Jay Ross wrote:This understanding is confirmed for me because when Christ came he introduced a new term for God to be used by people and that term was “Father,” as used within the Lord’s Prayer and the term “I AM” was not used of God.


I will answer you with scripture (KJV)
John 8:58 Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.

The King James Version IS without error.

Health Warning : Attacking the King James Version will eventually lead to this :twoheadbang:

.
KJV ONLY !
The KJV is the only PURE translation. Avoid modern corruptions like the NIV, they have been altered to support the coming Anti-Christ.
"The words of the Lord are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt keep them, O Lord, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever." Psalm 12:6-7
brett
 
Posts: 1988
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2006 2:33 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Modern Bible Translations and their CORRUPTIONS

Postby Jay Ross on Mon Aug 14, 2017 2:00 pm

brett wrote:.
What a mine field ..... sorry but I do not agree with you at all !! This is exactly a perfect illustration why this kind of approach is SO FULL OF PROBLEMS ! Look at the sheer number of DIFFERENT words given in Strong's Concordance. What a disaster ! Are you kidding me ?! Anyone could make the scriptures say ANYTHING they wanted with that huge selection of different words to choose from. Just pick the words you want and off you go !


Yes, you are right, Brett, the Hebrew words with the embedded Hebrew Root word H:5769 has been translated many different ways in the KJV as Strong illustrates, and as you say, what a disaster.

brett wrote:.
Sorry but I'm not going to take your choice of words (opinion) over the KJV. The Strong's Concordance let's men chose the words (meaning) they want - which is exactly what you are doing. Oh and one other thing, Strong's Concordance is NOT the Word of God. You don't test the KJV against the Strong's Concordance - you've got it backwards - You would be better to test Strong's Concordance against the KJV.

And have you forgotten? You pointed this out to me before. We had a significant disagreement about this scripture already before in another thread. I wasn't agreeing with you then and I'm not agreeing with you now. In fact the length of time I won't agree with you on this scripture is "for ever" & "unto all generations" - Strong N° 1755 & Strong N° 5769 !


Brett, that is your choice to make, not mine, but because it is your choice, that does not make it right. It is your choice how you see the “honesty" of the various English translations. Others have differing opinions to yours and can see “errors” where you are not able to, but that does not make their opinions “wrong” because you disagree with them.

brett wrote:
Jay Ross wrote:This understanding is confirmed for me because when Christ came he introduced a new term for God to be used by people and that term was “Father,” as used within the Lord’s Prayer and the term “I AM” was not used of God.


I will answer you with scripture (KJV)
John 8:58 Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.


Brett, you are taking this verse out of context. It was a discussion in which Jesus told his audience that he existed before Abraham was born, not about the divinity of Christ Himself. The reaction of the audience shows that they had understood that Jesus had told them that He existed before Abraham existed and was not talking about His divinity as God.

brett wrote:The King James Version IS without error.

Health Warning : Attacking the King James Version will eventually lead to this :twoheadbang:



Again Brett, you are right, it is like banging one’s head against a brick wall, but the Brick stumbling block is not the KJV. It does not have to defend itself. It exists and provides a valuable source of the theologians’ understanding of who God is of those who compiled the KJV, within its limitations. This is also true for every other translation of the original Greek or Hebrew texts on which our various translations have been compiled from.

Have a nice day now
Jay Ross
 
Posts: 1338
Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2011 12:11 am

Re: Modern Bible Translations and their CORRUPTIONS

Postby mark s on Mon Aug 14, 2017 2:45 pm

brett wrote:.
Anyway it looks like the devil has succeeded in his goals, by creating hundreds of modern translations, he has managed to cement the LIE (in some peoples minds) that there is no perfect Word of God. Apparently God has lost control of His Word and all translations now contain errors (obviously I utterly reject this LIE)........ So according to some we have a faith built on a fallible book, an uncertain foundation, an inferior book open to attack from all other religions. No wonder those who believe such things are not willing to rebuke and reprove, for they are not even certain themselves that their Bible is true and correct. What a terrible lie the devil has spread in these Last Days, taking away peoples confidence in the Word of God and weakening peoples faith. How does that look to the unsaved? Its a terrible witness to the unsaved......"oh by the way the Bible has become corrupted over the centuries......so we're not exactly sure anymore which parts are original and which parts are corrupted". Wow that really inspires faith in our religion. The muslims must already be jumping on this like crazy for this is EXACTLY what they have been arguing for centuries, that their book the Koran is superior, because they claim its 100% perfect and the Bible contains errors............woops...........oh but of course so many christian's today have stopped trying to reach muslims - so that's why they forget about this.

Unfortunately the devils plan has been very effective.....he's successfully deceived and disarmed many.



:eek:


:dropjaw:

Man! I'm so glad I don't think and feel like you've just described! Wow! My faith in God's Word is unshakable.

And . . . you'll find this in your KJV . . . there is one reason in particular given in Scripture why men do not come to God, and that is not because of "the poor witness of Christians" or "we don't even know what God's Word is!".

John wrote that men did not come to the light because they were doing evil, and the light would expose them.

Paul wrote to the Roman church that people don't want to know God, they want things their own way, so they forget about God.

People reject God because they want their sin.

And who says the Bible has become corrupted? I think you've been the one saying that. I haven't been saying that.

Hm. Doesn't the KJV say, "Thou shalt not kill."? And then go on to command the killing of animals for sacrifice? And didn't God command them to kill their enemies, sometimes completely?

Shouldn't the verse be translated, "Thou shalt not murder."? Does not "Thou shalt not kill" have a much broader meaning, and therefore change the meaning of the verse? Seems to me this is speaking of unjustified killing, that is, murder. Justified killing is accepted.

So therefore the translators, in this writer's view, failed to properly express the intent contained within the 10 Commandments.

The 10 Commandments.

Do any of us believe that God really told them that they cannot kill anything, anywhere, under any circumstance?

Those who study the Hebrew tell me there are different words for killing, one referring to slaughter, another to the hunt, another to murder. They say that the one for murder appears here. I don't know enough about Hebrew to say. I just know what they say.

I don't rely on any man whatsoever for me to know God's Word. Not anyone alive now (including myself), or 400 years ago writing in a form of speech no one uses anymore.

I've heard it expressed that if there is one error, omission, misspelling, any least little thing at all, then Divine Inspiration cannot be claimed, because it attaches God to error. I think that is logically sound.

As I'm thinking about it, every time I see a footnote which reads, "The meaning of the Hebrew is uncertain in this passage", that lets me know that the translators felt none too confident in their translation, admitted ignorance, but gave it their best.

John 1:12 footnote in the 1611 KJV reads, "Or, the right or privilege". This was in reference to "But as many as receiued him, to them gave hee power to become the sonnes of God, euen to them that belieue on his Name:"

It seems they weren't certain whether this should speak of 'power', that is, the ability bring it about, or 'right', that is, something justly theirs, or 'privilege', that is, something graciously theirs. Each of these are different things, each of these would change the meaning of the verse.

By the translator's own words they didn't know for certain. Does that sound like divine inspiration?

By the way . . . do you actually use the original 1611 KJV? Or are you using one of the revisions?

Love in Christ,
Mark


Love in Christ,
Mark
ειπεν αυτη ο ιησους εγω ειμι η αναστασις και η ζωη ο πιστευων εις εμε καν αποθανη ζησεται
. . . saying to her Jesus, I AM the resurrection and the life, the one believing into Me even dying shall live . . .
User avatar
mark s
MODERATOR
 
Posts: 12819
Joined: Tue Oct 17, 2006 11:38 am
Location: Southern California, USA

Re: Modern Bible Translations and their CORRUPTIONS

Postby Jericho on Mon Aug 14, 2017 3:42 pm

Brett wrote:The KJV in my hands now, has ZERO errors


A bold statement indeed. How is such a thing proven given that the original manuscripts no longer exist? There is nothing to compare them to. All the known manuscripts we have today are copies of copies. The ancient scribes were meticulous about copying manuscripts, and did their best to avoid errors. Still, to err is human and mistakes will happen. Just to give one example. If you study 1st Samuel you will find that verses in Chapters 16-18 are not in chronological order. I wrote a post about it here: viewtopic.php?f=33&t=68870&p=572045#p572045

Long story short, the Masoretic text, which the KJV is based upon, appears to contain two separate accounts that were poorly combined together, which created inconsistencies. Obviously some scribe messed up. So, its impossible to say the KJV is error free. However, that doesn't make the words it contains any less inspired. And what errors that may exist through transcribing are minor, and don't effect core doctrine. Nor does it imply that is has been corrupted. If you have a bible that explicitly denies (and not implied through subjective interpretation) that Jesus is the Son of God, was born of a virgin, and was raised from the dead then you can say it's corrupted.
Last edited by Jericho on Mon Aug 14, 2017 4:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Formerly SwordOfGideon
User avatar
Jericho
 
Posts: 4403
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2008 5:05 am
Location: Tx

Re: Modern Bible Translations and their CORRUPTIONS

Postby Abiding in His Word on Mon Aug 14, 2017 4:33 pm

Jericho wrote: If you have a bible that explicitly denies (and not implied through subjective interpretation) that Jesus is the Son of God, was born of a virgin, and was raised from the dead then you can say it's corrupted.


I agree, Jericho. I think Paul nicely summed up the gospel when he testified of these truths:

1Co 15:1  Now I make known to you, brethren, the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received, in which also you stand, 
1Co 15:2  by which also you are saved, if you hold fast the word which I preached to you, unless you believed in vain. 
1Co 15:3  For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 
1Co 15:4  and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, 

1Co 15:5  and that He appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. 
1Co 15:6  After that He appeared to more than five hundred brethren at one time, most of whom remain until now, but some have fallen asleep; 
1Co 15:7  then He appeared to James, then to all the apostles; 
1Co 15:8  and last of all, as to one untimely born, He appeared to me also. 


Again, Jesus Christ is central in both the OT and the NT. That truth is the foundation of our faith...in other words, our faith is in the person of Jesus Christ first and foremost.

For I am convinced that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor things present, nor things to come, nor powers,  nor height, nor depth, nor any other created thing, will be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord. Rom 8:38-39 
User avatar
Abiding in His Word
SITE ADMIN
 
Posts: 28616
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2006 4:54 pm
Location: SW Florida

Re: Modern Bible Translations and their CORRUPTIONS

Postby brett on Mon Aug 14, 2017 6:32 pm

Jericho wrote:
Brett wrote:The KJV in my hands now, has ZERO errors


A bold statement indeed. How is such a thing proven given that the original manuscripts no longer exist? There is nothing to compare them to. All the known manuscripts we have today are copies of copies. The ancient scribes were meticulous about copying manuscripts, and did their best to avoid errors. Still, to err is human and mistakes will happen. Just to give one example. If you study 1st Samuel you will find that verses in Chapters 16-18 are not in chronological order. I wrote a post about it here: viewtopic.php?f=33&t=68870&p=572045#p572045

Long story short, the Masoretic text, which the KJV is based upon, appears to contain two separate accounts that were poorly combined together, which created inconsistencies. Obviously some scribe messed up. So, its impossible to say the KJV is error free. However, that doesn't make the words it contains any less inspired. And what errors that may exist through transcribing are minor, and don't effect core doctrine. Nor does it imply that is has been corrupted. If you have a bible that explicitly denies (and not implied through subjective interpretation) that Jesus is the Son of God, was born of a virgin, and was raised from the dead then you can say it's corrupted.


Sorry Jericho but I do not agree with this hasty conclusion. To jump so quickly from not understanding the scripture to concluding an error in the Bible is unwise. Below I have pasted a good response - and I believe you already know this explanation anyway. Note there are other possible explanations too. Jericho you don't at any time need to attack the accuracy of Gods Word because of this scripture, that is a hasty and completely unnecessary jump. Have more faith in Gods word please.


Key Point: The question in 17:55-56 is not "who is he?" but "whose son is he?"

And when Saul saw David go forth against the Philistine, he said unto Abner, the captain of the host, Abner, whose son is this youth? And Abner said, As thy soul liveth, O king, I cannot tell. And the king said, Enquire thou whose son the stripling is.

Note that David never says (anywhere in chapter 17), "I'm David" or "I'm David, son of Jesse," he only names his father when prompted (after the killing of Goliath).

And Saul said to him, Whose son art thou, thou young man? And David answered, I am the son of thy servant Jesse the Bethlehemite.

Nowhere does it say that Saul didn't recognize David. Saul knew who he was. David had served Saul as a player and armorbearer (1 Samuel 16:17-23), but that doesn't mean Saul had any interest in his family. Why would he? This changes in chapter 17 because of the promises Saul had made to whoever would kill Goliath:

And the men of Israel said, Have ye seen this man that is come up? surely to defy Israel is he come up: and it shall be, that the man who killeth him, the king will enrich him with great riches, and will give him his daughter, and make his father's house free in Israel. (17:25)

The matter of David's family has now become very important, hence the question in 17:55-56.

Regarding David's whereabouts between chapters 16 and 17:
Verse 17:15 states that David returned (or had returned) from Saul to his father's land.

But David went and returned from Saul to feed his father's sheep at Bethlehem.
After killing Goliath, verse 18:2 says that David no longer goes back and forth between his father's home and Saul's court.

And Saul took him that day, and would let him go no more home to his father's house.
David was a servant of Saul (player, armorbearer) but was not a permanent fixture at Saul's court. After killing Goliath his position elevated quickly and he did not return home again.

The chronology holds together fine as recorded:
1 Samuel 16:17 - Saul calls for a player
1 Samuel 16:21 - David comes to Saul and becomes his armorbearer
1 Samuel 16:22 - Saul requests that David stay for an extended period
1 Samuel 16:23 - David plays for Saul
1 Samuel 17:8 - Goliath challenges Israel
1 Samuel 17:15 - David returns home (or had returned home)
1 Samuel 17:20 - David arrives at the battle with food for his brothers
1 Samuel 17:26 - David makes public comments regarding Goliath
1 Samuel 17:31 - Saul sends for David after hearing his words through the grapevine
1 Samuel 17:32 - David agrees to fight Goliath
1 Samuel 17:55 - Saul asks Abner about David's lineage while David is facing Goliath
1 Samuel 17:58 - Saul asks David about his lineage directly
1 Samuel 18:2 - Saul takes David and David does not return home again

Note: There are no contradictions recorded here. There is nothing to be glossed over or explained away. It all follows as a straightforward story if you can accept the fact that Saul didn't memorize the family history of all his servants.


Health Warning : Attacking the King James Version will eventually lead to this :twoheadbang:

.
KJV ONLY !
The KJV is the only PURE translation. Avoid modern corruptions like the NIV, they have been altered to support the coming Anti-Christ.
"The words of the Lord are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt keep them, O Lord, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever." Psalm 12:6-7
brett
 
Posts: 1988
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2006 2:33 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Modern Bible Translations and their CORRUPTIONS

Postby mark s on Tue Aug 15, 2017 8:04 am

Hi Brett,

Good response on the David/Saul thing! I think you've nailed it on this explanation.

Love in Christ,
Mark
ειπεν αυτη ο ιησους εγω ειμι η αναστασις και η ζωη ο πιστευων εις εμε καν αποθανη ζησεται
. . . saying to her Jesus, I AM the resurrection and the life, the one believing into Me even dying shall live . . .
User avatar
mark s
MODERATOR
 
Posts: 12819
Joined: Tue Oct 17, 2006 11:38 am
Location: Southern California, USA

Re: Modern Bible Translations and their CORRUPTIONS

Postby Jericho on Tue Aug 15, 2017 9:47 am

Brett wrote:Sorry Jericho but I do not agree with this hasty conclusion. To jump so quickly from not understanding the scripture to concluding an error in the Bible is unwise. Below I have pasted a good response - and I believe you already know this explanation anyway. Note there are other possible explanations too.


Yes, and I have already posted two possible explanations in the thread I linked to. However, my intent is not to argue the chronology of 1st Samuel. The point is the Masoretic Text (MT) has its problems. As I noted in my other thread, the Septuagint is over 1,000 years older than the MT, but the 1st Samuel account is 44% smaller. Makes you wonder where all the extra text came from in the MT. Also, every translation has its problems, including the KJV.

Brett wrote:Jericho you don't at any time need to attack the accuracy of Gods Word because of this scripture, that is a hasty and completely unnecessary jump. Have more faith in Gods word please.


Brett, my intent is not to attack the accuracy of God's Word. I am questioning your bold claim the KJV has no errors when you have no original manuscripts to compare them to. I'm also questioning how fallible men can be capable of not making any transcription errors. When you say the KJV has no errors, that is the only inspired English translation, you are not exalting the KJV so much as the manuscripts behind them. You have no way of knowing which manuscripts are superior, you are just going on blind faith. Anyways, the point I've been trying to make several times now is that whatever variations exist between manuscripts doesn't change the message. So there is really nothing to fuss about. But you have already made up your mind, so there is really no point in continuing this discussion.
Formerly SwordOfGideon
User avatar
Jericho
 
Posts: 4403
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2008 5:05 am
Location: Tx

Re: Modern Bible Translations and their CORRUPTIONS

Postby mark s on Tue Aug 15, 2017 11:53 am

Without exception . . .

All quotes from the Old Testament which appear in the New Testament are from the Septuagint. Some verses quoted are unrecognizable in the Masoretic Text, and some do not even appear.

Draw from this such conclusions as you will.

But apparently the Septuagint is the OT text preferred by God, I would suppose. Since that's what He used.

Love in Christ,
Mark
ειπεν αυτη ο ιησους εγω ειμι η αναστασις και η ζωη ο πιστευων εις εμε καν αποθανη ζησεται
. . . saying to her Jesus, I AM the resurrection and the life, the one believing into Me even dying shall live . . .
User avatar
mark s
MODERATOR
 
Posts: 12819
Joined: Tue Oct 17, 2006 11:38 am
Location: Southern California, USA

Re: Modern Bible Translations and their CORRUPTIONS

Postby mark s on Tue Aug 15, 2017 12:08 pm

It seems to me a few questions may have been overlooked, I'd like to make sure these are considered.
But again I ask . . . where is God's declaration that KJV is the only true one?

About authority . . . I'm not talking about something subjective, something that is "true for you, but not for another", I'm talking about an objective, external reality, that there is a set of writings, and this is the authoritative Word of God. Would that be found in the Greek manuscripts, the KJV, both? Which is superior. Again, objective reality.



https://bible.org/article/changes-kjv-1611-illustration

I don't know the numbers, but I do know there have been revisions. Isn't that your argument against the others? They've been changed?


In verse 14, "handwriting of ordinances" was translated from the Greek word "cheirographon" or "handwriting", and "tois dogmasin", and declares this "handwriting of ordinances" is against us, or more literally, undermines us.

Without the true understanding of what the "cheirographon" is, one must conclude from this passage in the KJV that the Law was against us, hostile to us, and Jesus removed the the Law from the way, nailing to his cross.

One of the discoveries made from the Oxyrhynchus papyri is that when someone purchased on credit, or owed a bill, they would give the creditor their cheirographon, their handwriting, which served as a promissory note. When the debt was paid, the creditor would write across it tetelestai, paid in full.

The Law was not nailed to the cross. It was our sin debt which was nailed to the cross.

Even the NIV is more accurate:


Let me ask you this:

Did the KJV translators receive a translation word for word prophetically from God, that is, verbatim, just sit down and write as God speaks? Or did they compare their 5 or 6 manuscripts, and pick one reading over another where there was a difference, and select one translation over another where there is a range of possible meanings? Isn't this the "scientific process" which you denigrate?

There was a question I had asked, that I don't believe has been answered.

I always get curious why, when there is a question fundamental to the discussion, that is not responded to.

Hi Brett,

I'm curious, how does faith that God can preserve His Word relate to the notion that the King James translation is the only true preservation of that Word?

Love in Christ,
Mark


The full post is found Here.

Love in Christ,
Mark
ειπεν αυτη ο ιησους εγω ειμι η αναστασις και η ζωη ο πιστευων εις εμε καν αποθανη ζησεται
. . . saying to her Jesus, I AM the resurrection and the life, the one believing into Me even dying shall live . . .
User avatar
mark s
MODERATOR
 
Posts: 12819
Joined: Tue Oct 17, 2006 11:38 am
Location: Southern California, USA

Re: Modern Bible Translations and their CORRUPTIONS

Postby mark s on Tue Aug 15, 2017 4:45 pm

Jericho wrote:
Mark S wrote:If I remember correctly, the word is translated, at least in certain instances I checked, from a word meaning "one horn", so unicorn is a reasonable translation in my opinion.


This word "unicorn" in the KJV was an animal called a re'em in Hebrew. The writers of the Septuagint did not know what a re'em was, so they translated the word to be "monocerous," meaning "one-horned." Thus the KJV called it a unicorn. http://castlelyons7.blogspot.com/2008/0 ... icorn.html


Hi Mark. It may have been an animal with one horn, some think it could have been a rhino. I don't know, and apparently the scribes of the Septuagint didn't know either. My point is the original Hebrew authors of the Old Testament would not have known what a unicorn was, and probably were not thinking of a horse with a horn on its head. I think we agree on this.

From what I have gathered, the earliest account of unicorns comes from ancient Greece. In particular the writings of Greek physician Ctesias in the 5th century B.C. Unicorn mythology became apart of European culture and eventually found its way into the KJV bible, as unicorn lore and symbolism were popular in the middle ages. Maybe it would have been a reasonable translation in their day, but today it just sounds silly.


Hi Jericho,

Just an aside, the idea of dragons seems silly to some but there's an excellent case to show them in modern times.

Love in Christ,

Mark

PS . . . Dragon = Dinosaur
ειπεν αυτη ο ιησους εγω ειμι η αναστασις και η ζωη ο πιστευων εις εμε καν αποθανη ζησεται
. . . saying to her Jesus, I AM the resurrection and the life, the one believing into Me even dying shall live . . .
User avatar
mark s
MODERATOR
 
Posts: 12819
Joined: Tue Oct 17, 2006 11:38 am
Location: Southern California, USA

Re: Modern Bible Translations and their CORRUPTIONS

Postby Jericho on Tue Aug 15, 2017 7:28 pm

mark s wrote:Hi Jericho,

Just an aside, the idea of dragons seems silly to some but there's an excellent case to show them in modern times.

Love in Christ,

Mark

PS . . . Dragon = Dinosaur


Hi Mark,

I don't have any problems with dragons in the Bible. I don't think its a coincidence that Satan is called a dragon and a serpent. There may be a connection between Satan and the reptile kingdom, in particular dinosaurs. I have some crazy ideas about this, but it would be way off topic.
Formerly SwordOfGideon
User avatar
Jericho
 
Posts: 4403
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2008 5:05 am
Location: Tx

Re: Modern Bible Translations and their CORRUPTIONS

Postby brett on Tue Aug 15, 2017 7:51 pm

mark s wrote:It seems to me a few questions may have been overlooked, I'd like to make sure these are considered.
But again I ask . . . where is God's declaration that KJV is the only true one?

About authority . . . I'm not talking about something subjective, something that is "true for you, but not for another", I'm talking about an objective, external reality, that there is a set of writings, and this is the authoritative Word of God. Would that be found in the Greek manuscripts, the KJV, both? Which is superior. Again, objective reality.



https://bible.org/article/changes-kjv-1611-illustration

I don't know the numbers, but I do know there have been revisions. Isn't that your argument against the others? They've been changed?


In verse 14, "handwriting of ordinances" was translated from the Greek word "cheirographon" or "handwriting", and "tois dogmasin", and declares this "handwriting of ordinances" is against us, or more literally, undermines us.

Without the true understanding of what the "cheirographon" is, one must conclude from this passage in the KJV that the Law was against us, hostile to us, and Jesus removed the the Law from the way, nailing to his cross.

One of the discoveries made from the Oxyrhynchus papyri is that when someone purchased on credit, or owed a bill, they would give the creditor their cheirographon, their handwriting, which served as a promissory note. When the debt was paid, the creditor would write across it tetelestai, paid in full.

The Law was not nailed to the cross. It was our sin debt which was nailed to the cross.

Even the NIV is more accurate:


Let me ask you this:

Did the KJV translators receive a translation word for word prophetically from God, that is, verbatim, just sit down and write as God speaks? Or did they compare their 5 or 6 manuscripts, and pick one reading over another where there was a difference, and select one translation over another where there is a range of possible meanings? Isn't this the "scientific process" which you denigrate?

There was a question I had asked, that I don't believe has been answered.

I always get curious why, when there is a question fundamental to the discussion, that is not responded to.

Hi Brett,

I'm curious, how does faith that God can preserve His Word relate to the notion that the King James translation is the only true preservation of that Word?

Love in Christ,
Mark


The full post is found Here.

Love in Christ,
Mark


Mark I'm going to try to answer each one of these over time. I want to give solid answers because solid answers do exist. This will require some thought and consideration, as well as research. So for now I'm gonna have a little break and do other work (software programming), but just letting you know that I haven't forgotten these, I think this is an important topic and I want others to experience what I have experienced. So far every time I have found something about the KJV that hasn't immediately been apparent (caused me to doubt or question the KJV) I have always found a solid answer or explanation. It has proved itself to be the perfect Word of God.......in English.

So .... I will get back to you on these eventually, thanks for your patience. Also if anyone else wants to answer them feel free.

Brett

.
KJV ONLY !
The KJV is the only PURE translation. Avoid modern corruptions like the NIV, they have been altered to support the coming Anti-Christ.
"The words of the Lord are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt keep them, O Lord, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever." Psalm 12:6-7
brett
 
Posts: 1988
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2006 2:33 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Previous

Return to Whatever (Almost)

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron