God promised to preserve His words believers believed they have it

Leatherneck0311

Well-known member
They used what was available to them at the time period!
This is not nor has ever been about anything but what scripture was translated from. What was once rejected as corrupt for good cause ( minority texts) has for many today replaced the majority texts. You do understand the early church and then the reformers both rejected the minority texts as corrupt ?
 

RiJoRi

Well-known member
The added words were italicized to alert the reader they were added. So yes it is a word for word translation.
Dan 8:14 KJV And he said unto me, Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.

Dan 8:14 Tanakh-1917 And he said unto me: ‘Unto two thousand and three hundred evenings and mornings; then shall the sanctuary be victorious.’

😴
 

Leatherneck0311

Well-known member
Dan 8:14 KJV And he said unto me, Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.

Dan 8:14 Tanakh-1917 And he said unto me: ‘Unto two thousand and three hundred evenings and mornings; then shall the sanctuary be victorious.’

😴
Hate to bust your bubble but 2300 days is the same thing as 2300 mornings and evenings since a morning and an evening are one day. I found this in Tanaka 8:14 14And he said to me, "Until evening and morning, two thousand and three hundred, and the holy ones shall be exonerated."
 
Last edited:

RiJoRi

Well-known member
Hate to bust your bubble but 2300 days is the same thing as 2300 mornings and evenings since a morning and an evening are one day. I found this in Tanaka 8:14 14And he said to me, "Until evening and morning, two thousand and three hundred, and the holy ones shall be exonerated."
But you said:
... So yes it is a word for word translation.
Now you're saying "thought for thought" translation is OK, as long as it's in the KJV! Note that many of the hated modern versions have evening - morning 😳, which is closer to word-for-word than the vaunted KJV.
Double standards?


And can you explain how "cleansed" (KJV) is the same as "victorious" (Tanakh-1917) is the same as "exonerated" (Tanaka)?
 

logos1560

Well-known member
The added words were italicized to alert the reader they were added. So yes it is a word for word translation.

In many places, the KJV is not a literal word-for-word translation. According to the KJV translators themselves in the marginal notes, they did not provide any English rendering in their text for many original-language words of Scripture. The KJV translators also added thousands of words for which they had no original-language words of Scripture, many of which they failed to put in a different type [later editions put italics for the different type]. Later editors put many more words in italics that were not in a different type in the 1611 edition. Thus, the KJV translators had failed to alert the reader about many words that they had added.
 

Leatherneck0311

Well-known member
But you said:

Now you're saying "thought for thought" translation is OK, as long as it's in the KJV! Note that many of the hated modern versions have evening - morning 😳, which is closer to word-for-word than the vaunted KJV.
Double standards?


And can you explain how "cleansed" (KJV) is the same as "victorious" (Tanakh-1917) is the same as "exonerated" (Tanaka)?
I am saying MV’s are destroying God’s word by changing ( sodomite to temple prostitute) removing ( Godhead, propitiation) and casting doubt and mistrust in God’s word.? FYI, Tanaka had both exonerated and victorious I will stay with the KJV as cleansed could mean either exonerated or victorious.
 

logos1560

Well-known member
I am saying MV’s are destroying God’s word by changing

Your saying or claiming it is not the same thing as actually proving it. Your unproven allegations depend upon the use of divers measures [double standards] that are not applied justly. Use of divers measures is an abomination to the LORD.
 

RiJoRi

Well-known member
I am saying MV’s are destroying God’s word by changing ( sodomite to temple prostitute) removing ( Godhead, propitiation) and casting doubt and mistrust in God’s word.? FYI, Tanaka had both exonerated and victorious I will stay with the KJV as cleansed could mean either exonerated or victorious.
Just don't forget that part of my response to you was to show that the KJV is NOT "a word for word translation", as you claimed in post 85. Do all the special pleading you want, but "days" is not a word-for-word translation of "evenings and mornings"!
 

RiJoRi

Well-known member
I am saying MV’s are destroying God’s word by changing ( sodomite to temple prostitute) removing ( Godhead, propitiation) and casting doubt and mistrust in God’s word.? .
And the translators of the KJV destroyed God’s word by changing ( 'evenings and mornings' to 'days').

But I guess impugning modern-day translators (a. k. a. "bearing false witness") is perfectly acceptable in your world...
 

robycop3

Well-known member
I am saying MV’s are destroying God’s word by changing ( sodomite to temple prostitute) removing ( Godhead, propitiation) and casting doubt and mistrust in God’s word.? FYI, Tanaka had both exonerated and victorious I will stay with the KJV as cleansed could mean either exonerated or victorious.
WRONG !
The changes in MVs are almost always CORRECTIONS, or better translations than those in the KJV. For example, the Hrbrew rendered 'sodomite' innDeut. 23:17 is "qadash", which means-TEMPLE PROSTITUTE! Those in the temples familiar to the Israelis of that time were male homosexuals. And 'sodomite' has a different meaning now than homosexual.
MVs correct the glaring "Easter" goof in the KJV's Acts 12:4.
MVs correct the glaring goof of "the love of money is THE root of ALL evil" in 1 Tim. 6:10.
MVs correct the poor translation, "Thou shalt not KILL" in Ex. 20:13.
And they correct many more mistranslations & poor renderings as well. And, they're in OUR language, not an archaic, outdated form no longer in use outside of Shakespeare plays.
 

Leatherneck0311

Well-known member
WRONG !
The changes in MVs are almost always CORRECTIONS, or better translations than those in the KJV. For example, the Hrbrew rendered 'sodomite' innDeut. 23:17 is "qadash", which means-TEMPLE PROSTITUTE! Those in the temples familiar to the Israelis of that time were male homosexuals. And 'sodomite' has a different meaning now than homosexual.
MVs correct the glaring "Easter" goof in the KJV's Acts 12:4.
MVs correct the glaring goof of "the love of money is THE root of ALL evil" in 1 Tim. 6:10.
MVs correct the poor translation, "Thou shalt not KILL" in Ex. 20:13.
And they correct many more mistranslations & poor renderings as well. And, they're in OUR language, not an archaic, outdated form no longer in use outside of Shakespeare plays.
I guess many forget that Satan is a master at “ correcting “ God’s word. Seems I remember Eve falling for that same lie “ correcting” God’s word.
 

YeshuaFan

Well-known member
This is not nor has ever been about anything but what scripture was translated from. What was once rejected as corrupt for good cause ( minority texts) has for many today replaced the majority texts. You do understand the early church and then the reformers both rejected the minority texts as corrupt ?
early church used whnat has been called a Proto Alexandriab text, not on the whole the Majority one!
 
Top