Errors in the Bible

This topic is to discuss charges of "error" in the Bible (any version). If you believe any version has either a textual or translational error, please post the verse and why you think it is in error. Please do not post "Such and such is an error and should read such and such." Post the reading, and why you think it should read differently and post the Hebrew/Greek words, and/or the textual evidence to support your charge of error.

This can be enlightening and educational if done in the right spirit after a bit of personal study.

Snide and ugly remarks will be deleted by the moderator, so let's keep this on a Christian level.

The Moderator

 

The answer us quite simple. (I know there are some on the BB who have an irrational fear of dictionaries, but . . . ) The Oxford English Dictionary states on page 19 of the "E" volume: Easter; 1. One of the great festivals of the Christian church, commemorating the resurrection of Christ, and corresponding to the Jewish passover, the name of which it bears in most of the European languages. 2. The Jewish Passover. Obsolete

In 1611 when the KJV was translated, "Easter" also meant "The Jewish Passover."

 

Chris, if, as you say, "Easter and Passover are not the same" then you will not only have to update the KJV, but virtually every bible in a European language, as well as Forever Settled's Bible (BIS), which uses Paska/Paskah for both Easter and Passover. As was said on another thread, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it!"

 

That is a good question, Dr. Bob. What I find interesting is that English is one of the few languages which distinguishes between Easter and Passover. The Spanish word for Easter is Pascua; French: Pâques; Portuguese: Páscoa; Dutch: Pasen; Italian: Pasqua. In fact, the only European language that I know of which does make a distinction (other than English, of course) is German which translates Easter as Ostern and Passover as Passah. I suspect the similarity is due to English being a member of the Germanic Cognate Language group.

 

I am bringing this topic back to the top so Kiffin can post his opinions and evidences to support them concerning his charge of errors in the KJV. Remember, this forum is not for arguments based on "It is wrong because I say it is wrong", or "It is right because I say it is right", or "The translators of my bible were more spiritual than the translators of your bible" etc., etc., etc. This forum is to evaluate the evidence regarding the charges of error. Have fun and rememgber, this is not a place for anger or name calling, but for honest and intelligent discussion of the issue at hand.

 

I cannot agree that "LORD" is an incorrect translation of the Tetragrammaton. The four letter hebrew word (YHWH) indicates that God is timeless and infinite, for the letters of this Name are those of the words "He was, He is, and He will be." This Name appears in some Hebrew texts with the vowel points taken from Adonai. The Jews traditionally read this word aloud as "Hashem" which literally means "The Name."

No English bible which I am aware of translates this Name as "Lord" but as "LORD" in all caps. This Name also appears several times in the Hebrew text with a prefix and is usually pronounced as a form of Adonai, I.E., badonai, Haadonai, vadonai, kadonai, ladonai, maadonai, and sheadonai.

As it is a translation of a proper name, and not of the literal words meaning "He was, He is, and He will be", either "Jehovah", or "LORD" seems fine to me, just as the word for God, "Elohim" is the plural intensive of a form of the Hebrew word "el" meaning literally "to twist" with the idea of "made strong." When we read any bible we don't see "made strong" as a translation of God.

[ May 01, 2001: Message edited by: Thomas Cassidy ]

 

RE: Acts 19:37

The AV reading follows that of the earlier English Versions, including Tyndale and the Geneva. In former times the word "church" was used in a broader sense than it is now.

"It was not unusual for the writers of the Elizabethan age to apply the term which we confine to Christian buildings, to heathen temples. They would speak of the 'church' of Diana, or the 'chapel' of Apollo" (E.H. Plumtre, Acts, Ellicotts N.T. Commentary).

See the commentaries of Poole and Henry as an example of this.

Nevertheless, it is remarkable that in the 71 New Testament occurrences of hieron, the AV always translates it "temple," including verse 27 of this same chapter -- "the temple of the great goddess Diana." But here, and in Romans 2:22 where it is also combined with sulos, 'temple" does not come into the translation.

"Thou that sayest a man should not commit adultery, dost thou commit adultery? Thou that abhorrest idols, dost thou commit sacrilege?"

In two other instances, hieros (the closely related masculine form) is found in combination:

-- hierourgeo, "To labour in sacred things."

" ... I should be the minister of Jesus Christ to the Gentiles, ministering the gospel of God ... " (Rom. 15:16).

-- hieroprepees, "That which befits the sacred."

"The aged women likewise, that they be in behaviour as becometh holiness" (Titus 2:3).

Therefore, it is not unlikely that a broader meaning is intended for hierosulos then strictly "robbers of heathen temples." Indeed, "The noun is more common than the verb for sacrilege in general ... In later comedy the word is used very loosely and generally with great exaggeration as a term of abuse" (Kittel, Theological Dictionary of the New Testament). Though this silversmith's trade had fallen on hard times, no one was suggesting for a moment that Paul and his associates actually stole from the Temple of Diana. The point the townclerk made was that they were not robbers of churches, i.e. "religious robbers," in the more general sense. Paul did not enrich himself through "religion," nor were the churches, which by this time were springing up throughout Asia Minor, a source of enrichment. The KJV wording highlights what has been the chief accusation (whether justified or not) of the unconverted from that day to this present day: "The preacher is in it for the money!"

"And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you" (2 Pet. 2:3). "Did I make a gain of you by any of them whom I sent unto you?" (2 Cor. 12:9).

This, Paul most certainly did not do! Yet, ponder the wording in 2 Corinthians 11.

"Have I committed an offence in abasing myself that ye might be exalted, because I have preached to you the gospel of God freely? I robbed other churches, taking wages of them, to do you service" (2 Cor. 11:7, 8).



[ May 01, 2001: Message edited by: Thomas Cassidy ]

 

RE: Lk 18:12

The Greek here reads "ktaomai" meaning to acquire, get, or procure a thing for one's self, to possess. It is a Present, Middle, Deponent, Indicative.

It is the same word used in Luke 21:19, "In your patience possess ye your souls." and 1 Thess 4:4 "That every one of you should know how to possess his vessel in sanctification and honour;"

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Kiffin:
Are You claiming Inerrancy for the KJV?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I have made no such claim in anything other than the derivative sense. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Claiming the KJV has no errors?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I have made so such claim. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Do you hold as many Ruckmanites do that the KJV is perfect?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Only in the sense of it being "telion" or complete, mature. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>If so you are making a claim the KJV translators didn't claim.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I have made no such claim.

[ May 01, 2001: Message edited by: Thomas Cassidy ]

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Kiffin:
So, Thomas you agree with me that the KJV has errors?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I am still waiting for you to point out a confirmed error. Until you can come up with one, "deponent further sayeth not."