Don't cut the baby (DCTB) vs Cut the baby (CTB).

[37818]

And there we have the other
OP's 'Variants'!

Textus Receptus New Testament Variants
Textus Receptus (TR),
Byzantine Majority Text (BM),
Alexandrian Text (Ax)

και οτε επλησθησαν αι ημεραι του καθαρισμου TR(1894) αυτης

TR(1550)/BM/Ax αυτων κατα τον νομον Ax μωυσεως

TR/BM μωσεως ανηγαγον αυτον εις ιεροσολυμα παραστησαι τω κυριω


Textus Receptus (Scrivener 1894)
και οτε επλησθησαν αι ημεραι του καθαρισμου αυτης κατα τον νομον μωσεως ανηγαγον αυτον εις ιεροσολυμα παραστησαι τω κυριω

Textus Receptus (Elzevir 1624)
και οτε επλησθησαν αι ημεραι του καθαρισμου αυτης κατα τον νομον μωσεως ανηγαγον αυτον εις ιεροσολυμα παραστησαι τω κυριω

Textus Receptus (Beza 1598)
και οτε επλησθησαν αι ημεραι του καθαρισμου αυτης κατα τον νομον μωσεως ανηγαγον αυτον εις ιεροσολυμα παραστησαι τω κυριω


Reference:

King James Bible 2016
When the days of her purification according to the law of Moses were completed, they brought Him to Jerusalem to present Him to the Lord

King James Bible 1769
And when the days of her purification according to the law of Moses were accomplished, they brought him to Jerusalem, to present him to the Lord;

King James Bible 1611
And when the dayes of her purification according to the law of Moses, were accomplished, they brought him to Hierusalem, to present him to the Lord,

Green's Literal Translation 1993
And when the days of her cleansing according to the Law of Moses were fulfilled, they took Him up to Jerusalem to present Him to the Lord,

Julia E. Smith Translation 1876
And when the days of her cleansing were completed, according to the law of Moses, they brought him to Jerusalem to present to the Lord;

Webster's Bible 1833
And when the days of her purification according to the law of Moses were accomplished, they brought him to Jerusalem, to present him to the Lord;

Bishops Bible 1568
And when the dayes of her purification, after the lawe of Moyses, were accomplished, they brought hym to Hierusalem, to present him to the Lord.

Geneva Bible 1560/1599
And when the daies of her purification after the Lawe of Moses were accomplished, they brought him to Hierusalem, to present him to the Lord,

Wycliffe Bible 1382
And aftir that the daies of the purgacioun of Marie weren fulfillid, aftir Moyses lawe, thei token hym into Jerusalem, to offre hym to the Lord, as it is writun in the lawe of the Lord,

Wessex Gospels 1175
Note: Postquam impleti sunt dies purgationis Marie. Æfter þam þe hire clænsing-dages ge-felde wæren. æfter moyses lage. hyo lædden hine on ierusalem þæt hyo hine gode setton

αυτων. Is the Byzantine Majority Text reading. Tyndale 1534.

The change to αυτης was not until 1560 Geneva Bible.

 

[Alan Gross]

The source website the base information for this thread is a radical KJV website.

Unto You Therefore Which Believe He is Precious!

Isn't that wonderful!?!

I used a handful of sources, each of which I qualified in the text, if I thought it needed to be explained that Ruckmanite KJVOnlyism is out to lunch.

Borrowed and adapted from:
Why I Know The King James Bible Is God's Inspired Word

From: Jot And Title Inspiration

From: 448 Reasons We Cannot Trust Any Modern Bible Version!

Isn't that article great? Wouldn't it be nice if the Word of God hadn't been hacked to pieces by those not beholden to God?

KJV Comparison Page has this

This site has 770 verses treated for the effect the omissions and alterations have on Doctrinal Bible teaching, along with the versions and source texts quoted.

* Synonym translating:

This is a Dean Burgon Society link that is more akin to my beliefs on Bible translation.

Dr. Bob asks us to identify our brand of KJVONLY we are, despite its potential for even more misunderstanding, at Definitions of KJV Only

I've had to put posters on 'ignore' who could only insist I worship the KJV, just because I couldn't despise and reject the 'modern versions' and everything that went into their making any more, which began with the Occult and ended with nothing more than OVs, (Occult Versions, i.e., the NIOV, the whatever else 'OV' their is, etc.), in MHO.

I am a KJVO 2.5, by a modification of Dr. Bob's grading system.

I will take #2, but only the second part of #3. I can't go with the TR being inerrent, etc., as it says in purple, "verbally identical to the original autographs", etc.

KJVO #2 "I BELIEVE THE UNDERLYING GREEK/HEBREW TEXT OF THE KJV IS BEST"

"This group believes that the MT (Majority Text) or the TR (Textus Receptus) -- even though there are obvious differences in the two -- are "superior" to all other Greek documents and more closely reflect the original autographs. They do not believe that the TR or the Majority Text is perfect in any one printed copy. They believe that the King James Version, based on this text, is the clearest and most accurate translation that we have in English today".

KJVO #3 "I BELIEVE IN THE RECEIVED TEXT ONLY"

"This group would consider the TR has either been "supernaturally preserved" or even "inspired" and hence remain inerrant through the providential hand of God. They believe that the TR is verbally identical to the original autographs.

"They consider any English translation from "inferior" Greek texts of W/H (Wescott & Hort) or UBS/Nestle-Aland (United Bible Society) as to be sub-standard and inaccurate."

... bastardized, adulterated, and edited with neverious intentions

...and insufficient for Doctrines and practice, uncertain, and a purely incomplete and fallible "rule of all saving knowledge, faith, and obedience"... 1689 BCF.

Strong's #846 - αὐτός - Old & New Testament Greek Lexical Dictionary - StudyLight.org

Besides BibleHub.org for Strong's Greek, I used StudyLight.org.
...

Skip the;

KJV onlyism nonsense.

And stick with;

@Alan Gross,
FYI, this thread is very useful, even though it is not exhaustive.

Just like when you eat fish, you take 'the meet' (solid info and Bible teaching)
and leave the 'bones' (Ruckmanite-type-ism).
...

αυτων. Is the Byzantine Majority Text reading. Tyndale 1534.

Yep and αυτης is in the following;

Textus Receptus (Scrivener 1894)
και οτε επλησθησαν αι ημεραι του καθαρισμου αυτης κατα τον νομον μωσεως ανηγαγον αυτον εις ιεροσολυμα παραστησαι τω κυριω

Textus Receptus (Elzevir 1624)
και οτε επλησθησαν αι ημεραι του καθαρισμου αυτης κατα τον νομον μωσεως ανηγαγον αυτον εις ιεροσολυμα παραστησαι τω κυριω

Textus Receptus (Beza 1598)
και οτε επλησθησαν αι ημεραι του καθαρισμου αυτης κατα τον νομον μωσεως ανηγαγον αυτον εις ιεροσολυμα παραστησαι τω κυριω

The later of which could have certainly been utilized by the KJV translators.

In other words, it may not be a matter of their highchair tipping over and them bumping their heads.

 

[Logos1560]

The source website the base information for this thread is a radical KJV website.

Unto You Therefore Which Believe He is Precious!

It is clear that website displays unrighteous judgments based on use of divers measures or double standards since it does not apply the same exact measures/standards to the KJV.

The KJV itself omits providing any English rendering for hundreds and thousands of original-language words of Scripture in its underlying original-language texts. The 1611 marginal notes give some examples of these omissions, but those notes do not point out many others. This website fails to list any of those places where the KJV omits words.


1 Kings 13:6 [1611 margin—“Hebr. the face of the LORD”]

besought the LORD [1611 KJV]

appeaseth the face of Jehovah [YLT]

entreated the face of Jehovah [Literal Translation in Interlinear Bible]

appeases the face of YHWH [LSV]


1 Kings 13:33 [1611 margin—“Heb. returned and made”]

but turned back, and made [1568 Bishops’ Bible]

but made again [1611 KJV]

and turneth back, and maketh [YLT]

but turned again, and made [Literal Translation in Interlinear Bible]

and turns back, and makes [LSV]


1 Kings 16:12 [1611 margin—“Heb. by the hand of”]

by the hand of Jehu the Prophet [1560 Geneva Bible; 1602 Bishops’ Bible]

by Jehu the prophet [1611 KJV]

by the hand of Jehu the prophet [YLT] [Literal Translation in Interlinear Bible] [LSV]


1 Kings 17:16 [1611 margin—“Heb. by the hand of”]

by the hand of Elia [1540 Great Bible]

by the hand of Eliah [1560 Geneva Bible]

by the hand of Elias [1602 Bishops’ Bible]

by Elijah [1611 KJV]

by the hand of Elijah [YLT] [Literal Translation in Interlinear Bible] [LSV]


2 Kings 5:5 [1611 margin—“Heb. in his hand”]

with him [1611 KJV]

in his hand [YLT] [Literal Translation in Interlinear Bible] [LSV]


2 Kings 8:9 [1611 margin—“Heb. in his hand”]

in his hand [1560 Geneva Bible]

with him [1611 KJV]

in his hand [YLT] [Literal Translation in Interlinear Bible] [LSV]


2 Kings 9:36 [1611 margin—“Heb. by the hand of”]

by the hand of his servant [1602 Bishops’ Bible]

by his servant [1611 KJV]

by the hand of his servant [YLT] [Literal Translation in Interlinear Bible]

by the hand of this servant [LSV]


2 Kings 10:10 [1611 margin—“Heb. by the hand of”]

by the hand of his servant Elias [1602 Bishops’ Bible]

by his servant Elijah [1611 KJV]

by the hand of His servant Elijah [YLT] [Literal Translation in Interlinear Bible] [LSV]

 

[37818]

. . . website . . . .

The textual information from the website used in this thread is mostly New Testament variants as found in the KJV.

 

[Conan]

I see what you're saying and Dr. Pickering.

Luke 2:22 PPro-GM3P
GRK: τοῦ καθαρισμοῦ αὐτῶν κατὰ τὸν
KJV: the days of her purification
INT: of the purification of them according to the

The source I quoted has αυτης as the Textus Receptus.

και οτε επλησθησαν αι ημεραι του καθαρισμου αυτης κατα τον νομον μωσεως ανηγαγον αυτον εις ιεροσολυμα παραστησαι τω κυριω

where that is translated "her" often, of course.
Matthew 1:19 PPro-GF3S
GRK: ὁ ἀνὴρ αὐτῆς δίκαιος ὢν
KJV: Then Joseph her husband, being
INT: the husband of her righteous being

Matthew 2:18 PPro-GF3S
GRK: τὰ τέκνα αὐτῆς καὶ οὐκ
KJV: Rachel weeping [for] her children, and
INT: the children of her and not

Matthew 2:18 PPro-GF3S
GRK: τὰ τέκνα αὐτῆς καὶ οὐκ
KJV: Rachel weeping [for] her children, and
INT: the children of her and not

Matthew 8:15 PPro-GF3S
GRK: τῆς χειρὸς αὐτῆς καὶ ἀφῆκεν
KJV: And he touched her hand, and
INT: the hand of her and left

Matthew 9:25 PPro-GF3S
GRK: τῆς χειρὸς αὐτῆς καὶ ἠγέρθη
KJV: and took her by the hand,
INT: the hand of her and arose

Then, there is the idea of αυτων being a form of αὑτοῦ and how the translators of the KJV, 1568 Bishops Bible, and 1560 Geneva Bible could find their way to go with, "her", in Synonym Translation*.

So, did the KJV translator have αὐτῆς that they went by from an original language manuscript or did they take contextual latitude with a synonym, from the primitive root? Dunno.

WE HAVE an ANSWER:

Textus Receptus (Scrivener 1894)
και οτε επλησθησαν αι ημεραι του καθαρισμου αυτης κατα τον νομον μωσεως ανηγαγον αυτον εις ιεροσολυμα παραστησαι τω κυριω

Textus Receptus (Elzevir 1624)
και οτε επλησθησαν αι ημεραι του καθαρισμου αυτης κατα τον νομον μωσεως ανηγαγον αυτον εις ιεροσολυμα παραστησαι τω κυριω

Textus Receptus (Beza 1598)
και οτε επλησθησαν αι ημεραι του καθαρισμου αυτης κατα τον νομον μωσεως ανηγαγον αυτον εις ιεροσολυμα παραστησαι τω κυριω


Strong's Greek: 1473. ἐγώ (egó) -- I (only expressed when emphatic)
... αυτήν αυτης αυτής αυτο αυτό αυτοί αύτοι αυτοις αυτοίς αυτον αυτόν αυτος αυτός αύτος αυτου αυτού αυτόυ αυτους αυτούς αυτω αυτώ αύτω αυτων αυτών δε εάν εαυτοίς εαυτώ εγω εγώ ἐγώ ἐγὼ εδαφιείς εδρών εμε εμέ ἐμέ ἐμὲ εμοι εμοί ἐμοί ἐμοὶ εμόν εμου ...
Strong's Greek: 1473. ἐγώ (egó) -- I (only expressed when emphatic)

Strong's Greek: 848. αὑτοῦ (hautou) -- her own, his own, their own, themselves, they.
... heautou Forms and Transliterations αυτην αὐτὴν αὑτὴν αυτης αὑτῆς αυτοις αὑτοῖς αυτον αὐτὸν αὑτὸν αυτους αὐτούς αὐτοὺς αὑτούς αὑτοὺς αυτω αὐτῷ αὑτῷ αυτων αὑτῶν ἑαυτῆς ἑαυτοῖς ἑαυτὸν ἑαυτῷ ἑαυτῶν auten autēn auto autō auton autous eautes eautēs eauto eautō eautois eauton eautōn hauten hautēn ...
Strong's Greek: 848. αὑτοῦ (hautou) -- her own, his own, their own, themselves, they.

Strong's Greek: 846. αὐτός (autos) -- (1) self (emphatic) (2) he, she, it (used for the third pers. pron.) (3) the same
... αὐτό αὐτὸ αυτοι αὐτοί αὐτοὶ αυτοις αὐτοῖς αυτον αὐτόν αὐτὸν αὑτὸν αυτος αὐτός αὐτὸς αυτου αὐτοῦ αὑτοῦ αυτους αὐτούς αὐτοὺς αυτω αὐτῷ αυτων αὐτῶν ἑαυτοῦ ἑαυτούς ἑαυτοὺς ἑαυτῶν σου auta autá autà autais autaîs autas autás autàs aute autē autḕ autêi autē̂i auten autēn ...
Strong's Greek: 846. αὐτός (autos) -- (1) self (emphatic) (2) he, she, it (used for the third pers. pron.) (3) the same

* Synonym translating: Synonyms chosen to translate an original-language word accurately and faithfully can be considered without translational error, but not so perfect that another word might not possibly be used (see equivalence** above).

One must be careful, however, with synonymous translating, which may or may not be accurate, because all synonyms do not carry the same “signification” or meaning. A translator could be guilty of semantics.[ii]

The King James Bible translators were superior skilled linguists, but they expressed the possibility that another word with the same “sense” (e.g. a synonym) might be possible to use in translating an inspired Word and even included some of them in the margin of the KJB.[iii]

In an accurate, faithful translation in any language, a synonym substitution or change could possibly be found to be better in future revisions. This is the reason for some revisions. This author does not know of ANY translation that has not undergone either a revision or another edition.[iv]

Your sources decieve you. As already pointed out
S Stephens 1550 TEXTUS RECEPTUS reads like the Majority Text and all critical Texts, seeing how it is supported by the Greek. The Textus Receptus here is devided .

 

[Logos1560]

Luke 10:22 "Then he turned to his disciples" [these words in 1560 Geneva Bible from an edition of Stephanus are not in 1611 KJV's text] [see 1611 marginal note] (see also Backus, pp. 85-86)

Did the makers of the KJV remove words from the text of a pre-1611 English Bible and put them in a marginal note?


Luke 15:13

So not long after [1560 Geneva Bible]

And not many days after [1611 KJV] [Latin—non post multos dies]

[Daniell maintained that the “KJV followed the Latin” (Bible in English, p. 363)]


Luke 17:36 [this verse in the KJV is not in the 1560 Geneva Bible and some other pre-1611 English Bibles]
The 1560 Geneva Bible has a verse 36 but it is what is verse 37 in the KJV. [see 1611 marginal note] (see also Backus, p. 88)


John 8:6 "as though he heard them not" [these words in KJV are not in 1560 Geneva Bible and some other pre-1611 English Bibles]


John 8:42

Therefore Jesus said [1560 Geneva]

Jesus said [1611 KJV]

John 8:59 "going through the midst of them, and so passed by" [these words in KJV are not in 1560 Geneva Bible and some other pre-1611 English Bibles]


John 14:1

And he said to his disciples [1560 Geneva Bible] [Erasmus]

[these words found in several of the pre-1611 English Bibles are omitted in the KJV]


John 14:6

and the Truth [1560 Geneva Bible] [Textus Receptus]

the truth [1611 KJV] [many KJV editions from 1638 Cambridge, including the 1769 Oxford, and until 1800 and even till the 1844 Cambridge had “and the truth”]