The "original" Autographs

I don't think so - but you're entitled to your opinion.

I may be wrong, but I thought it was common knowledge that "Jesus" and "Joshua" were just different forms of the same name, and that Jesus would have been called "Yeshua" rather that "Jesus". However, it doesn't make it an error to call him "Jesus" - it's the same name, just derived from a different source. Besides, the same Greek word as "Jesus" ("Iesous") is found in Acts 7:45:

Which also our fathers that came after brought in with Jesus into the possession of the Gentiles, whom God drave out before the face of our fathers, unto the days of David;(AV)

But the NIV says:

Having received the tabernacle, our fathers under Joshua brought it with them when they took the land from the nations God drove out before them. It remained in the land until the time of David,

So, if anything, the AV is consistent and the NIV is not! Both "Jeremy" and "Jeremiah" are the same name, so let's stop arguing about such a trivial thing! Besides, I bet that the real name of the prophet was probably pronounced differently from both of these translations!

 

One is Hebrew; one is Greek. There is no great revelation here. Acts 7:45 is clearly talking about Joshua. interestingly enough, in your defense of the KJV, you pointed out a clear error in the KJV translation. They chose the wrong referent.

Which also our fathers that came after brought in with Jesus into the possession of the Gentiles, whom God drave out before the face of our fathers, unto the days of David;(AV)

My point is that if things that are different are not the same, then these two are not the same. You are the one who says this; not me.

 

Johnv,

You said: [The KJV translators altered the doctrine in Daniel 3:25 to imply a reference to Jesus, when that reference is absent from the Hebrew text used by the translators. According to the Hebrew, Shadrach, Meshach, Abendnego were not with a man who looked like "the Son of God", but rather a son of a god (in Hebrew, bar elahh). The fact that Nebuchadnezzar was not a monotheist lends credence to this as well. While the KJV translation does strengthen messianic doctrine, it does so by adding to the OT, something that we're biblically forbidden from doing. This is an error on the part of the KJV translators, albteit possibly unintentional.]

That is the most ridiculous thing I have ever read. Go back and read Daniel chapter 3. In fact, here is my exposition on Daniel 3:8-29.

Daniel 3:8-29
8 Wherefore at that time certain Chaldeans came near, and accused the Jews.
9 They spake and said to the king Nebuchadnezzar, O king, live for ever.
10 Thou, O king, hast made a decree, that every man that shall hear the sound of the cornet, flute, harp, sackbut, psaltery, and dulcimer, and all kinds of musick, shall fall down and worship the golden image:
11 And whoso falleth not down and worshippeth, that he should be cast into the midst of a burning fiery furnace.
12 There are certain Jews whom thou hast set over the affairs of the province of Babylon, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-nego; these men, O king, have not regarded thee: they serve not thy gods, nor worship the golden image which thou hast set up.
13 Then Nebuchadnezzar in his rage and fury commanded to bring Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-nego. Then they brought these men before the king.
14 Nebuchadnezzar spake and said unto them, Is it true, O Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-nego, do not ye serve my gods, nor worship the golden image which I have set up?
15 Now if ye be ready that at what time ye hear the sound of the cornet, flute, harp, sackbut, psaltery, and dulcimer, and all kinds of musick, ye fall down and worship the image which I have made; well: but if ye worship not, ye shall be cast the same hour into the midst of a burning fiery furnace; and who is that God that shall deliver you out of my hands?
16 Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-nego, answered and said to the king, O Nebuchadnezzar, we are not careful to answer thee in this matter.
17 If it be so, our God whom we serve is able to deliver us from the burning fiery furnace, and he will deliver us out of thine hand, O king.
18 But if not, be it known unto thee, O king, that we will not serve thy gods, nor worship the golden image which thou hast set up.
19 Then was Nebuchadnezzar full of fury, and the form of his visage was changed against Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-nego: therefore he spake, and commanded that they should heat the furnace one seven times more than it was wont to be heated
20 And he commanded the most mighty men that were in his army to bind Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-nego, and to cast them into the burning fiery furnace.
21 Then these men were bound in their coats, their hosen, and their hats, and their other garments, and were cast into the midst of the burning fiery furnace.
22 Therefore because the king's commandment was urgent, and the furnace exceeding hot, the flame of the fire slew those men that took up Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-nego.
23 And these three men, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-nego, fell down bound into the midst of the burning fiery furnace.
24 Then Nebuchadnezzar the king was astonied, and rose up in haste, and spake, and said unto his counsellers, Did not we cast three men bound into the midst of the fire? They answered and said unto the king, True, O king.
25 He answered and said, Lo, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God.
26 Then Nebuchadnezzar came near to the mouth of the burning fiery furnace, and spake, and said, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-nego, ye servants of the most high God, come forth, and come hither. Then Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-nego, came forth of the midst of the fire.
27 And the princes, governors, and captains, and the king's counsellers, being gathered together, saw these men, upon whose bodies the fire had no power, nor was an hair of their head singed, neither were their coats changed, nor the smell of fire had passed on them.
28 Then Nebuchadnezzar spake, and said, Blessed be the God of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-nego, who hath sent his angel, and delivered his servants that trusted in him, and have changed the king's word, and yielded their bodies, that they might not serve nor worship any god, except their own God.
29 Therefore I make a decree, That every people, nation, and language, which speak any thing amiss against the God of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-nego, shall be cut in pieces, and their houses shall be made a dunghill: because there is no other God that can deliver after this sort.

Take special note of the usage of the word “god” or “God” here. In verse 12 Meshach, Shadrach and Abednego (MSA) are accused by the Chaldeans of not serving Nebuchadnezzar’s “gods”. In verse 14 the king accuses them in person of not serving his “gods”. In verse 15 the king’s threat of the furnace is followed by a taunt that their “God” could not save them. Then, in verse 17, MSA proclaim that with certainty their “God” can and will save them from the furnace. In verse 18 MSA reaffirm that they will not serve the king’s “gods”. Once they are cast into the furnace the king immediately saw a fourth person in the furnace and was astonished. Now, in verse 25, MSA are saved from the furnace by a man, and that fourth man’s form was like the Son of “God”. Directly in the following verse, verse 26, Nebuchadnezzar affirms that this miracle proves that MSA serve the most high “God”. In verse 28 the king blesses “God” and commands that no one worship any “god” except the “God” of MSA. In verse 29 the king makes his decree about the penalty for worshipping any god except the “God” of MSA, and declares that there is no other “God”. Nebuchadnezzar is converted in verse 25, which is obvious from the context. He knew that he saw the Son of “God” in the furnace. The extent of his epiphany is expounded upon the 4 verses that follow. It is clear from context that the king knew exactly what he was seeing. The Aramaic word elahh is the word used in each instance here. It is only translated as “God” or “god” by the context. Yes, you can only know if it is referring to the true “God” or some false “god” by spiritual discernment. This discernment is present in the KJB, and not in the MVs.

 

Most people just call this interpretation because that it what it is. One of hte most hated things about some translations (its interpretations) is practiced regularly in the KJV, as demonstrated here. And then someone comes along with a solid exegetical method: "We have discernment; you don't."

Your arguments up to that point were good exegetical arguments. They can be countered to be sure, and have been. But it is a matter of exegesis, not discernment.

 

It is only translated as “God” or “god” by the context. Yes, you can only know if it is referring to the true “God” or some false “god” by spiritual discernment. This discernment is present in the KJB, and not in the MVs.

Really? I came to my conclusion by reading it in the Hebrew context. I then emailed the rabbi of my local Jewish synagogue, who concurred with my opinion.

So now we're calling alteration of scriptures by the KJV translators "scriptural discernment". I see no place in the OT or NT that says "you shall not add or subtract from scriptures, unless given scriptural discernment".

Scriptural discernment is reserved for the reader, not the translator.

 

Well, if you and Jewish Rabbi's agree, who could argue with that? No one except a born-again believer I guess. I believe my argument is sound as it stands Jewish Rabbi agreement or not.

Your comment that scriptural discernment is reserved for the reader is wrong at best. How can anyone reasonably say scriptural discernment is necessary for the reader of scripture, and not the translator? I take it one further, I say *spiritual discernment* is necessary. Spiritual discernment for the translator is equally if not more important. Human reasoning and logic will only get you so far. There are literally thousands if not tens of thousands of verses in the Bible that require spiritual discernment for correct translation. I believe we will see the fruits of this lack of spiritual discernment in MVs more and more in the future. In fact, I believe we are already seeing much of it now.

 

How far down this rabbit trail do you really want to go? Who were the KJV translators? What did they think of our Baptist, Separatists, and Independent forebearers? How were these forebearers treated at the Star Chamber? Why did the CoE see fit to outlaw their chosen version, the Geneva? Why would the head of the KJV translating effort (Archbishop Andrewes) preach that communion was both sacriment and sacrifice?

By whose hands was the religious persecution inflicted that led to the earliest colonists to flee England... in the 1600's no less?

Enough of that, why did the KJV translators appeal to reason and tolerance when they wrote their forward? You say that human reasoning and logic will only get you so far but that is exactly what the KJV translators attributed their work to.

 

Scott,

My view of the rabbit trail is one of big picture spiritual fruits and not granules of dirt around the roots. The King James Bible was produced in an hour of spiritual revival and blessing. Our day, however, is an hour of horrendous apostasy and incredible spiritual compromise and confusion. Even many of the “evangelical” scholars today do not believe that Jonah was actually swallowed by a whale or that Job was a real man or that the flood of Noah’s day was worldwide. The Christian world is literally awash in unbelief and rationalism today. My view of the relevance of certain facts is different than yours because of my perspective. Your perspective is different than mine. I respect you and your perspective, but I disagree with it with every fiber of my being. Scripture tells me that things will wax worse and worse in the last days. We are certainly closer to the second coming of our Lord than ever before. Many on this board may not believe the prolific last days prophecies in the NT, but I do, and I see it coming to fruition in a day of the zenith of the wisdom of mankind.

Respectfully,

FFF

 

Well, if you and Jewish Rabbi's agree, who could argue with that? No one except a born-again believer I guess. I believe my argument is sound as it stands Jewish Rabbi agreement or not.
A born again believer, such as myself, does not have a right to add to scripture. Neither did the KJV translators in this verse.

Your comment that scriptural discernment is reserved for the reader is wrong at best.
Really, then why is discernment a spiritual gift?

How can anyone reasonably say scriptural discernment is necessary for the reader of scripture, and not the translator?
Hmmm. That's the first time I've ever heard anyone imply that scripture is to be read, but not understood".

 

With all due respect, that is not what you said. You said that their choice of how to translate a certain passage was because of spiritual discernment. Your comment has nothing to do with modern times, scholars, or translations. It has everything to do with how spiritually discerning these men were- especially in the light of their hatred for and persecution of our forebearers.

First, that has nothing to do with the spiritual discernment of the scholarly translators.

Second, you have no way of knowing what the future holds. The spiritual fruit that you would attribute to the KJV would not show up for about 150 years. Perhaps in 150 years, someone will look back and marvel at how God providentially gave us the ESV for a special time of renewal.

Or more probable still, some foreign language Bible translated from a modern text that helps spark an spiritual explosion in some 3rd world area. God may never use America or the English language again in the way He did in the past. Think of the area where the 1st and 2nd century church flourished. What are those places like religiously today?

This is your opinion based on your unique spin of history. There are without much doubt more people saved today in the US than were living in the US in 1800. The gospel is reaching more people by more modes than ever before. I am not denying that there are incredible problems in society and in Christianity but there were problems in 1620 England also... like Baptists being thrown in jail for following their conscience on religion.

Yes. But many if not most do believe these things.

And the Christian world of 1600 was awash in state-church union and persecution of dissenters- even to the point of death.

I believe that the second coming will be soon. Some scoff but I believe the signs are obviously present. However, I do not believe that God stopped providentially working through scholars in 1611 nor that the closeness of Christ's coming in any way suggests that He did. In many ways, we see a growing chasm between what is good and what is evil. Millions are being saved and sanctified by modern English and foreign language Bibles (that use modern critical texts)- this is NOT evil.

The world certainly is waxing worse and worse. But the solution isn't condemning translations of God's Word into the vernacular of those who are perishing. The world needs the Word in a form that they can understand. As offensive as that may be to some, it is what God demonstrated to be His will when He chose the language of the people for the originals.

 

Even many of the “evangelical” scholars today do not believe that Jonah was actually swallowed by a whale

If you want to be literal, Jonah wasn't swallowed by a whale, he would have been swallowed by a fish.

 

Johnv,

In your opinion, who was that in the furnace with MSA as recorded in Daniel 3? Was it a son of the gods, or the Son of God? What thinkest thou?

 

My $.02 is that is was either an Angel of the Lord, or the Holy Spirit. But, since SM&A never say, we don't know for sure. It's speculative.

 

Johnv,

How about the Son of man in Daniel 7:13?

 

The identification of the "one like a son of man" figure in 7:13 is a bit of an enigma. I understand this to refer to a human being. It is consistent with the usage similar to the phrase "son of man" in the book of Ezekiel (2:1; 3:1; etc.), where it refers to a human being. Also, in the first book of Enoch (37-71), the Enoch of Genesis 5:24 will return to earth as "son of man" at the end of time and establish the rule of God. In none of these appearances does it refer to a Messiah, but rather a man.

The phrase used in Dan 7:13 is k'var enash, which is the equivalent of the Hebrew phrase k'ven adam, which is properly translated into English as "like a man". k' is the Hebrew preposition "like" or "as". The Hebrew term ben adam, which literally transaltes as "son of Adam", really means a man, and the same is true for it's Aramaic equivalent bar enash.

The human-like figure is a symbol for the collective people of God, just as the individual beasts each stood for an empire. The "holy ones," as they are called, come to possess the kingdom of God for all time.


(In the NT, Jesus referrs to himself as the son of man (seemingly preferring it), because it seems to bolster Jesus' humanity without separating himself from His divinity).

 

These verses are an enigma?? It may refer to Enoch??? They do not refer to the Messiah???? This refers to the collective people of God????? Read these verses:

Daniel 7:13-14
13 I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him.
14 And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed.

This clearly refers prophetically to the second coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and His pre-millennial rein.

 

I choose to take the word of the One who created Jonah and the whale.
Mt 12:40 For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly ; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth. (KJV)

 

</font>[/QUOTE]The KJV translated it "Jesus" when it clearly refers to "Joshua" of OT fame.

 

i thought jesus = joshua = yehoshua = yeshua, all the same name

others:

judas = judah = yehuda

john = jonah = yonah

james = jacob = yaacov

[ March 11, 2003, 02:10 AM: Message edited by: timothy 1969 ]