Featured One more evidence against KJV onlyism.

I'll watch the video sometime.

What are they saying is in error?

This we know about Exodus 12:40, etc.:

The Samaritan Pentateuch reads,

"Now the sojourning of the children of Israel,
and of their fathers in the land of Canaan and in the land of Egypt, was 430 years."

The Alexandrine copy of the LXX. has the same reading;
and the same statement is made by the apostle Paul, in Ga 3:17,
who reckons from the promise made to Abraham to the giving of the law.

That these three witnesses have the truth, the chronology itself proves;

Because it is evident that the descendants of Israel
did not dwell 430 years in Egypt;

while it is equally evident,

that the period from Abraham's entry into Canaan to the Exodus,
is exactly that number.

Thus, from Abraham's entrance into the promised land
to the birth of Isaac, was 25 years;

Isaac was 60 at the birth of Jacob;

Jacob was 130 at his going into Egypt;

where he and his children continued 215 years more;

making in the whole 430 years.

sojourning: Acts 13:17; Hebrews 11:9

four hundred. Genesis 12:1-3; Genesis 15:13; Acts 7:6;
Galatians 3:16; Galatians 3:17.

Treasury of Scripture Knowledge;

Sojourning:

Acts 13:17;

The God of this people of Israel chose our fathers,
and exalted the people when they dwelt as strangers in the land of Egypt,
and with an high arm brought he them out of it.

Hebrews 11:9;

By faith he sojourned in the land of promise, as in a strange country,
dwelling in tabernacles with Isaac and Jacob,
the heirs with him of the same promise:

Four hundred:

Genesis 12:1-3;

Now the LORD had said unto Abram, Get thee out of thy country,
and from thy kindred, and from thy father's house,
unto a land that I will shew thee:

And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee,
and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing:

And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee:
and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.

Genesis 15:13;

And he said unto Abram, Know of a surety that thy seed
shall be a stranger in a land that is not theirs, and shall serve them;
and they shall afflict them four hundred years;

Acts 7:6;

And God spake on this wise, That his seed should sojourn in a strange land;
and that they should bring them into bondage,
and entreat them evil four hundred years.

Galatians 3:16-17;

Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not,

And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.

And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ,

the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul,
that it should make the promise of none effect.

 

This certainly isn't a KJV issue as the title implied.
I'm not going to spend any time watching a video that might say it is.

Most commentaries (at least EVERY ONE I've looked at) simply attempt to explain the difficulty without changing the Hebrew text.

There are a number of DSS copies of Exodus; those that contain the passage include the "430" number (without the plus of Canaan).

Textual Critics of the OT have maintained their support of the MT;
Researchers say the evidence for text of the SamPent and LXX readings being original is not convincing.

Various numbers noted in the OT are often perplexing.
I choose to accept the numbers without a full understanding of how they were originally interpreted by the audience to whom they were written.

Rob

 

Barnes' Notes on the Bible
Who dwelt - Read, which they sojourned.
The obvious intention of Moses is to state the duration of the sojourn in Egypt.

Exodus 12:40
Now the sojourning of the children of Israel, who dwelt in Egypt,
was four hundred and thirty years.

Now the sojourning of the children of Israel, who dwelt in Egypt,.... The Septuagint version adds, "and in the land of Canaan"; and the Samaritan version is,
"the sojourning of the children of Israel, and of their fathers, in the land of Canaan, and in the land of Egypt.''

Agreeably to which are both the Talmuds: in one (o) of them the words are,"in Egypt and in all lands,''and in the other (p),"in Egypt, and in the rest of the lands;''and in the same way Aben Ezra interprets the words.

And certain it is, that Israel did not dwell in Egypt four hundred and thirty years, and even not much more than two hundred years;

but then they and their fathers, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, dwelt so long in Mesopotamia, in Canaan, and in Egypt, in foreign countries, in a land not theirs, as the phrase is, Genesis 15:13 where the place of their sojourning, and the time of it, are given by way of prophecy.

The Jews reckon from the vision of God to Abraham between the pieces to the birth of Isaac thirty years, so the Targum of Jonathan; but that cannot be, though from his coming out of his own native place, Ur of the Chaldeans, to the birth of Isaac, might be so many years, since he was seventy five years of age when he came out of Haran, Genesis 12:4 and if he stayed at Haran five years, as probably he did, then there were just thirty from his coming out of Ur of the Chaldees to Isaac's birth, since he was born when he was one hundred years old; and from the birth of Isaac to the birth of Jacob was sixty years, Genesis 25:26 and from thence to his going down to Egypt was one hundred and thirty, Genesis 47:9 and from thence to the coming of Israel out of Egypt were two hundred and ten years, as is generally computed, which make the exact sum of four hundred and thirty years; of these See Gill on Acts 7:6, Galatians 3:17.

(o) T. Hieros. Magillah, fol. 71. 4. (p) T. Bab. Megillah, fol. 9. 1.

From: Exodus 12 Gill's Exposition

Deacon has my saintly-self ( ) on "ignore", but I really like what he is saying. There is a Spiritual benefit in belief of the Bible, when mixing it with Faith!

Leave it to real saints, like Keil and Delitzsch;

Exodus 12 ►
Keil and Delitzsch OT Commentary.

Institution of the Passover. - The deliverance of Israel from the bondage of Egypt was at hand; also their adoption as the nation of Jehovah (Exodus 6:6-7).

Exodus 12:40
Now the sojourning of the children of Israel, who dwelt in Egypt,
was four hundred and thirty years.

The sojourn of the Israelites in Egypt had lasted 430 years.

This number is not critically doubtful, nor are the 430 years to be reduced to 215 by an arbitrary interpolation, such as we find in the lxx, ἡ δὲ κατοίκησις τῶν υἱῶν Ἰσραήλ ἥν κατῷκησαν (Cod. Alex. αὐτοὶ καὶ οί πατέρες αὐτῶν) ἐν γῇ Αἰγύπτῳ καὶ ἐν γῇ Χαναάν, κ.τ.λ.

This chronological statement, the genuineness of which is placed beyond all doubt by Onkelos, the Syriac, Vulgate, and other versions, is not only in harmony with the prediction in Genesis 15:13, where the round number 400 is employed in prophetic style, but may be reconciled with the different genealogical lists, if we only bear in mind that the genealogies do not always contain a complete enumeration of all the separate links, but very frequently intermediate links of little historical importance are omitted, as we have already seen in the genealogy of Moses and Aaron (Exodus 6:18-20).

For example, the fact that there were more than the four generations mentioned in Exodus 6:16. between Levi and Moses, is placed beyond all doubt, not only by what has been adduced at Exodus 6:18-20, but by a comparison with other genealogies also.

Thus, in Numbers 26:29., Exodus 27:1; Joshua 17:3, we find six generations from Joseph to Zelophehad;

In Ruth 4:18., 1 Chronicles 2:5-6, there are also six from Judah to Nahshon, the tribe prince in the time of Moses;

In 1 Chronicles 2:18 there are seven from Judah to Bezaleel, the builder of the tabernacle;

and in 1 Chronicles 7:20., nine or ten are given from Joseph to Joshua.

This last genealogy shows most clearly the impossibility of the view founded upon the Alexandrian version, that the sojourn of the Israelites in Egypt lasted only 215 years;

For ten generations, reckoned at 40 years each, harmonize very well with 430 years, but certainly not with 215.

(Note: The Alexandrian translators have arbitrarily altered the text to suit the genealogy of Moses in Exodus 6:16., just as in the genealogies of the patriarchs in Genesis 5 and 11.

The view held by the Seventy became traditional in the synagogue, and the Apostle Paul followed it in Galatians 3:17, where he reckoned the interval between the promise to Abraham and the giving of the law as 430 years, the question of chronological exactness having no bearing upon his subject at the time.)

The statement in Exodus 12:41, "the self-same day," is not to be understood as relating to the first day after the lapse of the 430 years, as though the writer supposed that it was on the 14th Abib that Jacob entered Egypt 430 years before, but points back to the day of the exodus, mentioned in Exodus 12:14, as compared with Exodus 12:11., i.e., the 15th Abib (cf. Exodus 12:51 and Exodus 13:4).

On "the hosts of Jehovah," see Exodus 7:4.

 

How are we doing with our grasp of an Epitrechon, or Running along?

There are several other fancy words mentioned below, at first,
to give a gist of how various nuances of expressing figures of speech
can be and are articulated and specifically defined and differentiated.

The Epitrechon needs to be out focus, to appreciate its use
and application in Exodus 12:40, among many other passages,
in which it is employed.

Pronounce επιτρέχων, Epitrechon,
1994. epistrephó Strong's Concordance
to turn, to return

As simply as it can be put is that
an epitrechon (which means “running along”)
is a short parenthetical insertion placed in the text
as an explanatory remark.


While, Parenthetical additions are often complete in themselves;

when the addition is thrown in, as it were, casually,
and is not complete in itself,
the Greeks called it Epitrechon, or Running along.

The true Parenthesis is an addition by way of explanation,
and is complete in itself.

When it is not by way of explanation,
but is an independent additional statement, complete in itself,
the Greeks called it Parembole or Insertion;
because it is more in the nature of a digression.

When it was by way of feeling they called it Interjection
(Psa 42:2; Eze 16:23,24).

When it was by way of a wish or prayer,
they called it Ejaculation (Hosea 9:14).

When it was by way of apology or excuse
they called it Hypotimesis, or under-estimating (Rom 3:5; 2 Cor 11:23).

When it was by way of detraction they called it Anæresis.

When it was by way of sudden exclamation
they called it Cataploce (Eze 16:23,24; Rom 9:3).

All these parenthetical additions are complete in themselves.

But when the addition is thrown in, as it were, casually,
and is not complete in itself,
the Greeks called it Epitrechon,
or Running along.

From: How to Enjoy the Bible
E. W. Bullinger, 1916

In many instances the Structures of Scripture
practically place the member in a parenthesis
between the two corresponding members;
and this, whether it be a large complex member,
or whether it be a single sentence.

For example:—

In Genesis 15:13, the words:
"(and shall serve them; and they shall afflict them)"
should be in a parenthesis, as is clear from the Structure.

a. "Know of a surety that
thy seed shall be a stranger in a land that is not theirs;"

b. "and shall serve them;"

b. "and they shall afflict them;"

a. "four hundred years."

Here, in the extremes, "a" and "a"
we have the sojourn and strangership as a whole,

while in "b" and "b" we have the servitude in Egypt.

It is this servitude which is thrown in parenthetically
("Epitrechon"; i.e., running along);
so that the sense reads on from "a" to "a";
and the time is not affected by the addition
of what will happen to them in any part of that time.


Example:

Genesis 46:26, "All the souls that came with Jacob into Egypt
Epitrechon = (which came out of his loins) besides Jacob's sons' wives,
all the souls were threescore and six."

This Epitrechon is thrown in to explain
the difference between this number (66)
and the number 75 in Acts 7:14,
which included "all his kindred,"
and was necessarily a larger number
than that of Jacob's direct descendants.


O.P. as an example of an Epitrechon:

Exodus 12:40,
"Now the sojourning of the children of Israel
Epitrechon = (who dwelt in Egypt) was four hundred and thirty years."

(who dwelt in Egypt) is an Epitrechon
or remark thrown in as an additional fact
to explain exactly who these people were.

It thus saves us from
making the mistake of thinking
that they were in Egypt during all those 430 years.


Another example:

Joshua 6:1 is a true parenthesis
or an independent statement complete in itself,
conveying an additional fact;

1 Now Jericho was straitly shut up because of the children of Israel:
a true parenthesis = none went out, and none came in.

but inserted in order to explain
and introduce the words of the Captain of Jehovah's host,
which are continued in verse 2.

2 And the LORD said unto Joshua,
See, I have given into thine hand Jericho,
and the king thereof, and the mighty men of valor.

Etc.

 

From:
AN EXAMINATION OF THE ALLEGED DISCREPANCIES OF THE BIBLE.
by JOHN W. HALEY, M.A., HISTORICAL DISCREPANCIES, pg. 418-419.

Here are Two Diverse Theories that are advocated by critics
with regard to the duration of the servitude in Egypt,
for reference and thoughts;

Contrasting:
Israelites' bondage 400 years. Gen. xv. 13.
verses;
Apparently Israelites' bondage involved less time than 400.
Gen. xii. 4; xxi. 5; xxv. 26; xlvii. 9.

1st. Many (1.) hold that its actual length
was less than two hundred and fifteen years.

(1.) Bengel, Baumgarten, Mr. Browne
( Kitto, i. 509, and Ordo Saeclorum, pp. 295-316),
and Mr. R. S. Poole ( Smith's Bible Dict., i. 442-444), and others.

They maintain generally that the "four hundred years"
begin with the birth of Isaac, and the "four hundred and thirty," (2.)
with the call of Abraham.

(2.) Exodus. xii. 40.

Isaac was born in the twenty-fifth year of Abraham's sojourn in Canaan;
Jacob was born in Isaac's sixtieth year and was one hundred and thirty
when he descended to Egypt.

This would leave but two hundred and fifteen years
for the whole sojourn in Egypt; only a portion even of this latter period
being spent in actual servitude.

This hypothesis is open to weighty objections, some of which are:

1. That the free, independent, nomad life of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob,
previous to the descent into Egypt,
does not properly come under the head of servitude and affliction
predicted in Gen. xv. 13;

2. That a large portion of the period was spent in Canaan,
(See Gen. xxvi. 2, 3.) while but one land, that of Egypt,
is mentioned in the prediction;

3. That the former country could not,
in view of the Divine promise to Abraham,
be characterized as a "land not theirs";

4. And that, on this hypothesis,
the grandfather of Moses must have had in the lifetime
of the latter 8600 male descendants, of whom 2750
were between thirty and fifty years of age! (Num. iii. 27, 28; iv. 36.
Compare Green's "Pentateuch Vindicated," p. 129;
Kurtz, Vol. ii. 144, 145; Smith's Bible Dict., i. 450, 451.)

2nd. It is maintained by the majority of modern critics: (Delitzsch, Ewald,
Gesenius, Hävernick, Hengstenberg, Hofmann, Jahn, Kalisch, Keil,
Knobel, Kurtz, Lange, Michaelis, Ranke, Reinke, Rosenmüller, Tiele,
Tuch, Winer, etc.)

1. That the sojourn in Egypt occupied the whole four hundred
or four hundred and thirty years.

This theory, which allows ample time for the increase of the Israelites,
and which meets the demands of the case in other respects,
encounters the following objections:

2. That Paul (Gal. iii.17.) reckons "four hundred and thirty years"
between the promise to Abraham and the giving of the law

(here, however, since the precise length of time
did not affect his argument, we may suppose that he follows
the commonly received view of his day, or, as Lange says,
he may have regarded the death of Jacob
as "the closing date of the time of the promise");

3. That the time was but four generations (Gen. xv.16)
(we have seen that this is equivalent to four hundred years);

4. And that not enough names are given in the genealogy
to cover so long a period (it has been conclusively shown
by Kurtz and others,

5. That the omission of several names in a genealogy was common;

6. And that the words "bear" and "beget"
are used with reference to somewhat remote ancestors.

Hence it is inferred that in Ex. vi. 18-20
several generations have been omitted).

 

It says an error in the KJV and other versions.

Most commentary's are not experts in textual criticism. Glad they take a stab at it though.

It is a plain fact that the LXX has original readings vs the Hebrew in 1&2 Samuel. The Hebrew has not come down to us perfect and the Septuagint was translated before some of the errors came into the Massoretic Text.

 

You do not offer a responsible view of biblical inerrancy.

Biblical inerrancy is a characteristic of Scripture.
It can be protected by the proper application of textual criticism.
But it is not obtained by our correcting perceived discrepancies.

Inerrancy does not imply that modern technological precision in reporting statistics and measurements, that conformity to modern historiographic method in reporting genealogies and other historical data, or that conformity to modern scientific method in reporting cosmological matters, can be expected from the biblical writers.
Carl F. H. Henry, God, Revelation, and Authority, vol. 4 (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 1999), 201.​

Rob

 

...which deals with the inspiration of Scripture.

 

This is what Exodus 12:40 states in the KJV;

Exodus 12:40; "Now the sojourning of the children of Israel,
who dwelt in Egypt, was four hundred and thirty years."

What's wrong with that?

I have to guess and assume that in order to misconstrue
and misinterpret this verse, a little illiteracy of the English language
could do it, although I would have really hoped that to not be the case.

Is it?

In order to screw up this passage, to come out with an impression
that the verse in the KJV is supposed to be read, as if it is saying,

"Now the sojourning of the children of Israel, in Egypt,
was four hundred and thirty years,"

the two words "who dwelt" would have to be edited out and removed,
which totally changes the meaning, from what was intended.

To take away and leave out "who dwelt" as an unmitigated omission
is the only way to make it say something wrong,
but the interesting thing is that the verse DOES NOT say
anything about the length of time anyone was, or wasn't, in Egypt at all.

Now, does it?

This isn't a KJV issue, or whatever you're saying
is a KJV onlyism claim and has nothing to do with
the inspiration of scripture (other than being a denial
of the inspiration of scripture, by a simple inability to correctly read,
what? = our mother tongue.)

However, the inspired word of God actually does say, in effect:

"Now the sojourning of the children of Israel" (12:40a),

"was four hundred and thirty years" (12:40c),

(and to clarify who those "children of Israel" were
The Bible says that those individuals were "the children of Israel"):

"who dwelt in Egypt" (12:40b),

(so, "who dwelt in Egypt" was added, by The Lord,
as a typical Epitrechon usage, as explained below;

Per the O.P., in Exodus 12:40, the words "who dwelt in Egypt"
are an example of an Epitrechon FIGURE of SPEECH.

Exodus 12:40,
"Now the sojourning of the children of Israel"
Epitrechon = "(who dwelt in Egypt) was four hundred and thirty years."

"(who dwelt in Egypt)" is an Epitrechon
or a remark thrown in as an additional fact
to explain exactly who these people were.

It thus saves us from
making the mistake of thinking
that the children of Israel were in Egypt during all those 430 years.

The verse does not say anything about how long anyone stayed in Egypt
nor does it have the intention of indicating the length of time
that anyone "dwelt" in Egypt, etc.

 

I need to know if you are saying that
the ENTIRELY of THE SOJOURNING of the CHILDREN of ISRAEL,
anywhere and everywhere that they WENT and SOJOURNED,
WHICH IS SAID IN EXODUS 12:40,
TO HAVE BEEN THREE HUNDRED AND FORTY YEARS,

"Now the sojourning of the children of Israel" (12:40a),

"was four hundred and thirty years" (12:40c)

is What you are saying "is not true"
COMPARED to GALATIANS 3:17...?:

"...the covenant,
that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law,
which was four hundred and thirty years after..."

Because Exodus 12:40 ONLY SAYS THIS:
"Now the sojourning of the children of Israel" (12:40a),

that
the ENTIRELY of THE SOJOURNING of the CHILDREN of ISRAEL,
anywhere and everywhere that they WENT and SOJOURNED;

"was four hundred and thirty years" (12:40c).
...

Do you see where I am saying that Exodus 12:40
IS NOT SAYING ANYTHING ABOUT THE CHILDREN of ISRAEL
"SOJOURNING IN EGYPT", AT ALL,
or FOR ANY PERIOD of TIME MENTIONED, for example?

Exodus 12:40 IDENTIFIES "the children of Israel"
as being those people "WHO DWELT IN EGYPT";

when it says,

"the children of Israel" (12:40a)
= "who dwelt in Egypt"(12:40b)

But Exodus 12:40 DOES NOT SAY;
"the children of Israel" (12:40a)
≠ "who SOJOURNED in Egypt"
four hundred and thirty years" (12:40c).
...

Do you see where Exodus 12:40
Does Not Indicate that:
"the children of Israel" "were in Egypt"
FOR ANY PERIOD of TIME NOTED ANYWHERE WHATSOEVER???

 

When reading Exodus 12:40;
"Now the sojourning of the children of Israel,
who dwelt in Egypt, was four hundred and thirty years,"

in my experience, any individual
who is literate in the English language, as their Mother Tongue,
can not and, therefore, will not read Exodus 12:40, to say,

"Now the sojourning of the children of Israel in Egypt,
was four hundred and thirty years."

They can't do it, in English, or Hebrew.

Matthew Poole's Commentary
GETS IT in ENGLISH and HEBREW:

I have their words in Bold Black, AS WELL AS:
their words ALSO that are with my emphasis are in Bold Bright Red.

"My words" that are added in are in the Bold Darker Red Brick color.

Here begins Matthew Poole's Commentary

& THE FIRST KEY
TO THE IMPORTANT RUDIMENTARY READING
of Exodus 12:40, in Larger Type:

"These four hundred and thirty years
are not by the text confined to Egypt,

"but may be extended to any place
where they (the children of Israel) were "sojourners";

"and the Hebrew word asher"

Strong's 834 [e]
’ă·šer
1a) which, who;
אֲשֶׁ֥ר
"who"
Pro‑r

THIS IS ANOTHER IMPORTANT KEY
TO A RUDIMENTARY READING
of Exodus 12:40, in Larger Type:

Is again that, "the Hebrew word asher";
"is not to be rendered, as relating to the time
of their (the children of Israel's) "sojourning",

"but who, as belonging to the persons sojourning,
= "the children of Israel,"

as our KING JAMES BIBLE translation well renders it;

"and the sense is, that the children of Israel were "sojourners",
or, which is all one, strangers, or dwellers in a land that was not theirs,
as it is said Genesis 15:13;

"And He said unto Abram, Know of a surety
that thy seed shall be a stranger in a land that is not theirs,
and shall serve them; and they shall afflict them four hundred years,"

with "four hundred years" there being a Prophetic rendering
which has been rounded out to "four hundred years",
but equates to the actual number of "four hundred and thirty years,"

with "His seed should sojourn in a strange land"
and "entreat them evil four hundred years,"
both also seen in Acts 7:6;

"And God Spake on this wise,
That His seed should sojourn in a strange land;
and that they should bring them into bondage,
and entreat them evil four hundred years."
...

THEN, THE FINAL IMPORTANT KEY
TO A RUDIMENTARY READING
of EXODUS 12:40:

is that: "the emphasis lies in the Hebrew word moshab,
which is here fitly rendered "sojourning";

Exodus 12:40;
HEB: וּמוֹשַׁב֙ בְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל
KJV: "Now the sojourning of the children..."

Hebrew;
"Now the duration"
וּמוֹשַׁב֙ (ū·mō·wō·šaḇ)
Conjunctive waw | Noun - masculine singular construct

Strong's 4186: assembly, dwell in, dwelling-place,
wherein that dwelt in, inhabited place, seat,

Or moshab {mo-shawb'}; from yashab; a seat;
figuratively, a site; abstractly, a session;
... seat, sitting, situation, sojourning.

Englishman's Concordance;
ū·mō·wō·šaḇ —
Exodus 12:40;
HEB: וּמוֹשַׁב֙ בְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל
KJV: "Now the sojourning of the children of Israel..."

Interlinear Hebrew;
ū·mō·wō·šaḇ
וּמוֹשַׁב֙
"Now the sojourn"; in Exodus 12:40;
Conj‑w | N‑msc

THE ANSWER TO WHO THE "SOJOURNERS"
"WHO DWELT IN EGYPT" AT ONE TIME,
SHOULD BE IDENTIFIED AS WOULD BE: "THE CHILDREN of ISRAEL".

("A LENGTH of TIME", OR "THE LENGTH of TIME", etc.,
THAT "THE CHILDREN of ISRAEL" "DWELT IN EGYPT" IS NOT ASKED!!! )

con't

 

So again, with the emphasis lies in the Hebrew word moshab,
in the post above: One more evidence against KJV onlyism.
which is in The King James Version fitly rendered "sojourning";

is just like "toshab that is
coming from the same root", as moshab,
and toshab "is also commonly used for a sojourner,"
or one that lives in a place or land which is not his,

toshab: a sojourner
Original Word: תּוֹשָׁב
Part of Speech: Noun Masculine
Transliteration: toshab
Phonetic Spelling: (to-shawb')
Definition: a sojourner

That Hebrew word, toshab, is seen five verses down from 12:40,
in Exodus 12:45; where then, in context,
toshab is used in talking about "a foreigner"

"A foreigner and an hired servant shall not eat thereof."

or as used in Leviticus 22:10;
"There shall no stranger eat of the holy thing:
a sojourner of the priest, or an hired servant,
shall not eat of the holy thing."

also in Leviticus 25:35, 40; Number 35:15; & Psalm 39:12.



With THERE BEING NO INDICATION
THAT THE PASSAGE IN EXODUS 12:40
IS REFERRING TO ANYONE'S "LENGTH OF TIME IN EGYPT"

BUT THAT THE PASSAGE IS REFERRING TO
"WHO" THE PERSONS WERE THAT WERE "SOJOURNING",
AND THAT WOULD BE: "the children of Israel,"
"WHO" WERE TO BE IDENTIFIED
AS THOSE PEOPLE "WHO" HAD "DWELT IN EGYPT",

as our KING JAMES BIBLE translation
well renders that exact sense in the passage
that "the children of Israel"
were THE ONES "WHO DWELT IN EGYPT" AT ONE TIME,
AND WHICH IDENTIFIED THEM
AS TO "WHO" THE "SOJOURNERS" WERE.

THAT'S IT.

THAT'S ALL.

 

You provide no sound documented evidence for your unsupported claim.

Would you suggest that KJV translator George Abbot was supposedly a Roman Catholic Jesuit agent?

Probably aimed at the copies of the Geneva Bible being bound without the Apocrypha, Archbishop George Abbot, who had been one of the KJV translators, issued in 1615 an order forbidding the sale of Bibles without the Apocrypha (Simms, Bible from the Beginning, p. 198). KJV-only advocate Jack Moorman also acknowledged that Abbot "in 1615 forbade anyone to issue a Bible without the Apocrypha on pain of one year's imprisonment" (Forever Settled, p. 183).