KJB1611reader
Active Member
Hello,
2 Kings or 4th booke of the kings 25:3 have an inspired italic that is not in the Hebrew.
Shawn
2 Kings or 4th booke of the kings 25:3 have an inspired italic that is not in the Hebrew.
Shawn
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
2 Kings 25:3 - inspired italic
- Thread starter KJB1611reader
- Start date
KJB1611reader
Active Member
You are really saying he is right, your pride will not allow it.
25:3
On the ninth day of the fourth month: Instead of the reading adopted by RSV [Revised Standard Version] and GNT [Good News Translation], the traditional Hebrew text has simply “on the ninth day of the month.” CTAT states that “Although Jer 39:2 and 52:6 explicitly state which month it was, the present text of Kings, where this indication is lacking, should not be assimilated to these passages.” CTAT gives a {B} rating to the reading without the word fourth. Nevertheless, most English versions include mention of the fourth month. Those translations that do not include the numeral are few (TOB, NBS, Hobbs). SEM encloses the word “fourth” in square brackets, indicating that it is not in the best texts (similarly NJPSV, Osty). This may be a good solution for other languages. Even versions like KJV and NASB, which usually adhere very closely to the MT, include the word fourth in italics. The fourth month is equivalent to mid-June to mid-July.
Slager, Donald. 2008. “Part 3, D.1. The City of Jerusalem Falls” In A Handbook on 1 & 2 Kings, edited by Paul Clarke, Schuyler Brown, Louis Dorn, and Donald Slager, 1–2:1338. United Bible Societies’ Handbooks. New York: United Bible Societies.
Everett Fox's translation reads:
On [day] nine of the [fourth] month, hunger becomes strong in the city;
NOTE: [fourth]; See Her. 52:6, filling out the date.
~~~~~~~~~~
I do not like the tendency of the NIV to "correct" the Hebrew Scriptures with the NT Greek rendition of the text (cf. Heb. 11:21 & Gen. 47:31).
I'm a bit surprised that the KJV is also quite guilty of correcting the MT.
I wonder how many times the AV (and other translations) adjust the Masoretic Text.
Rob
On the ninth day of the fourth month: Instead of the reading adopted by RSV [Revised Standard Version] and GNT [Good News Translation], the traditional Hebrew text has simply “on the ninth day of the month.” CTAT states that “Although Jer 39:2 and 52:6 explicitly state which month it was, the present text of Kings, where this indication is lacking, should not be assimilated to these passages.” CTAT gives a {B} rating to the reading without the word fourth. Nevertheless, most English versions include mention of the fourth month. Those translations that do not include the numeral are few (TOB, NBS, Hobbs). SEM encloses the word “fourth” in square brackets, indicating that it is not in the best texts (similarly NJPSV, Osty). This may be a good solution for other languages. Even versions like KJV and NASB, which usually adhere very closely to the MT, include the word fourth in italics. The fourth month is equivalent to mid-June to mid-July.
Slager, Donald. 2008. “Part 3, D.1. The City of Jerusalem Falls” In A Handbook on 1 & 2 Kings, edited by Paul Clarke, Schuyler Brown, Louis Dorn, and Donald Slager, 1–2:1338. United Bible Societies’ Handbooks. New York: United Bible Societies.
Everett Fox's translation reads:
On [day] nine of the [fourth] month, hunger becomes strong in the city;
NOTE: [fourth]; See Her. 52:6, filling out the date.
~~~~~~~~~~
I do not like the tendency of the NIV to "correct" the Hebrew Scriptures with the NT Greek rendition of the text (cf. Heb. 11:21 & Gen. 47:31).
I'm a bit surprised that the KJV is also quite guilty of correcting the MT.
I wonder how many times the AV (and other translations) adjust the Masoretic Text.
Rob
Last edited:
KJB1611reader
Active Member
Fourth month is right, also previous versions also had no month attached but now is divinly added to the Bible. Another time KJB corrects the Hebrew.
David Lamb
Well-Known Member
Sorry but how can any translation "correct the Hebrew"? Do you really believe that God gave His word in an imperfect form when it was originally written in Hebrew and Greek, and that Jesus, the apostles and all Christians prior to 1611, made the best of a bad job with an imperfect bible?
KJB1611reader
Active Member
Well, it could be getting it from the Latin or somewhere else. Yes, the Hebrew is in perfect such as here, also in Goliath. Many others too.
KJB1611reader
Active Member
Hello David,
Hope all is well, I will make a list later of the correction of the original langauges.
Shawn
David Lamb
Well-Known Member
But the Old Testament was originally written in Hebrew, so any Latin version had to be translated. How can "getting it from the Latin or somewhere else" correct the Hebrew, that is the Old Testament as originally written?
What does, "Yes, the Hebrew is in perfect such as here" mean please? In perfect what? Or did you mean "imperfect?"
David Lamb
Well-Known Member
Yes I am well thank you.
Do you really believe that the bible as God originally caused it to be written, in Hebrew and Greek, had mistakes in it which need correction by a translation into English?
KJB1611reader
Active Member
Well, I need to make a correction: Its likely corrected by the Latin or some other language manuscript.
Also, the new versions also do this with the LXX and others... don't they?
Shawn
KJB1611reader
Active Member
Well, maybe the Latin had the original words that got accidently got lost in the Hebrew.
So, why is fourth missing here? Why is 'brother of' missing in other verse.
Should the italized text stay or no?
Shawn
David Lamb
Well-Known Member
What, the Hebrew Old Testament as originally inspired by God was "likely corrected by the Latin or some other language manuscript?" So you seem to be saying that God gave something with mistakes in it.
KJB1611reader
Active Member
I do wish to note; this is not just kjb and the niv also have four.
David Lamb
Well-Known Member
But that doesn't make any sense. The Old Testament was originally written in Hebrew, so how could the Latin version, which came much later, include "original words that got accidently got lost in the Hebrew?"
Italicised words are words inserted by the translators of some English translations to show where they had inserted English words which don't actually translate something in the original language, but which are necessary in order to make it make sense in English. Take a verse like Acts 16:40, for example. Without the words in italics, it would say:
"And they went out of the prison, and entered into Lydia: and when they had seen the brethren, they comforted them, and departed."
As Lydia is a person, that doesn't make sense in English, so the translators added "into the house of" in italics.
KJB1611reader
Active Member
I didn't mean every italics is like that.
David Lamb
Well-Known Member
But all the italicised words in our English translations are there for the same reason, that the translators decided to put them in, even though the equivalent words weren't in the original.
KJB1611reader
Active Member
Those are to make language make sense but the 'four' here is taken from Jeremiah.
KJB1611reader
Active Member
And on the ninth day of the fourth month. — The text is supplemented from Jeremiah 39:2; Jeremiah 52:6. The Syriac, however, has, “And in the eleventh year of King Zedekiah, in the fifth month, on the ninth day of the month, the famine prevailed,” &c.; which may be original. (Comp. 2 Kings 25:1.)
Found this....
Found this....