AV1611 Translator Sidenotes 2: Matthew

[Ed Edwards]

Matthew 23:18 (KJ21):

And ye say, 'Whoever swears by the altar,
it is nothing; but whosoever swears
by the gift that is upon it, he is bound.'

According to this Holy Bible (translated from
the KJV by the way) Jesus is exampling what
someone else says, not saying what Jesus says.

Matthew 23:18 (Amplified Bible)

You say too, Whoever swears by
the altar is not duty bound; but whoever
swears by the offering on the alter,
his oath is binding.

 

[Precepts]

who added the quotation marks?

 

[Dr. Bob]

You are still missing the big picture. There are two Greek words that mean "guilty".

Neither one of them are used in the text. The word that IS used did not, does not and will not mean "guilty". Sorry. You can't redefine a Greek word to mean something it doesn't mean.

It is not a synonym. Think that through. Not a synonym. It is a 100% different word.

 

[ScottEmerson]

Remember, though, Bob, there are those who believe that the Greek must only be understood through the lens of the KJV. It doesn't matter what is actually in the manuscripts - if it disagrees with the KJV, then the Greek is wrong.

 

[skanwmatos]

Originally posted by Dr. Bob Griffin:
You are still missing the big picture. There are two Greek words that mean "guilty".

Neither one of them are used in the text. The word that IS used did not, does not and will not mean "guilty". Sorry. You can't redefine a Greek word to mean something it doesn't mean.

It is not a synonym. Think that through. Not a synonym. It is a 100% different word.

Once again you have displayed your deplorable ignorance of the English language:

guilty

\Guilt"y\, a. [Compar. Gultier; superl. Guiltiest.] [AS. gyltig liable. See Guilt.] 1. Having incurred guilt; criminal; morally delinquent; wicked; chargeable with, or responsible for, something censurable; justly exposed to penalty; -- used with of, and usually followed by the crime, sometimes by the punishment.

They answered and said, He is guilty of death. --Matt. xxvi. 66.

Nor he, nor you, were guilty of the strife. --Dryden.

2. Evincing or indicating guilt; involving guilt; as, a guilty look; a guilty act; a guilty feeling.

3. Conscious; cognizant. [Obs.] --B. Jonson.

4. Condemned to payment. [Obs. & R.] --Dryden.


Source: Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary, © 1996, 1998 MICRA, Inc.

See that last entry? An obsolete meaning of "guilty" was "condemned to payment." In other words "condemned to pay a debt" or "a debtor."

Dr. Bob, you really should study a bit before making your ridiculous and pompous pronouncements.

 

[Archangel7]

Originally posted by Precepts:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Archangel7:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Precepts:

How does one "see" the wind? I know I can see the effects of the wind, I can see the effects of a boistrous wind, but i have never actually seen the wind.

Presumably one "sees the wind" the same way Moses and the Israelites "saw the thunderings" and "the noise of the trumpet" --

"And all the people SAW THE THUNDERINGS, and the lightnings, AND THE NOISE OF THE TRUMPET, and the mountain smoking: and when the people SAW it, they removed, and stood afar off" (Ex. 20:18, KJV).

NasV: New advancements in storybook visualizations

Then does that make the kjV "Old advancements in storybook visualizations?"

</font>[/QUOTE]Yes they did "perceive"/saw the thundersings, the lightnings, the noise of the trumpet, and the mountain smoking, you fail to understand the English, but we'll forgive your ignorance. </font>[/QUOTE]You've obviously missed my point. If "seeing the wind" is a problem for the NASB, then it's also a problem for "seeing thunderings and noise" in the KJV. However, if "seeing/perceiving thunderings and noise" removes the problem in the KJV, then "seeing/perceiving the wind" also removes the problem in the NASB. You can't condemn one without condemning the other. The KJV and NASB stand together or fall together.

 

[Ed Edwards]

Originally posted by Precepts:
who added the quotation marks?

The translators.
The translators who had their mind on
when they placed the quotation marks
to make the text easier to understand
what God had intended.

Likewise, we should let the Holy Spirit
influence our mind when we study the
Written Word of God: the Holy Bible.
Recall i believe the KJV1611 to be
one of the books which contains and
is the KJV1611. But God's proces
of getting the Holy Written Word of
God to a person is incomplte if
the reader does not DO THE WORD.

Here is God's process of getting
His Holy Written Word accomplished:
1. Holy Men (with their mind intact)
of old wrote as the Holy Spirit prompted.
2. Men with their mind intact
translated the words into the language
some group of people could understand
3. Persons with their mind intact
read the words that were in their own
language.
4. Persons with their mind intact
lived the words of God.

Now if the Holy Spirit is not present
at each step, if the minds of the
persons doing each step are not present,
then the process is aborted.
Note that half the steps are done by
the individual reader.

May the Blessed Holy Spirit of God
guide you this very day as you read and apply
the blessed holy written word of God,
which He has provided in multiple
English versions. Amen.

 

[Precepts]

Originally posted by Archangel7:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Precepts:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Archangel7:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Precepts:

How does one "see" the wind? I know I can see the effects of the wind, I can see the effects of a boistrous wind, but i have never actually seen the wind.

Presumably one "sees the wind" the same way Moses and the Israelites "saw the thunderings" and "the noise of the trumpet" --

"And all the people SAW THE THUNDERINGS, and the lightnings, AND THE NOISE OF THE TRUMPET, and the mountain smoking: and when the people SAW it, they removed, and stood afar off" (Ex. 20:18, KJV).

NasV: New advancements in storybook visualizations

Then does that make the kjV "Old advancements in storybook visualizations?"

</font>[/QUOTE]Yes they did "perceive"/saw the thundersings, the lightnings, the noise of the trumpet, and the mountain smoking, you fail to understand the English, but we'll forgive your ignorance. </font>[/QUOTE]You've obviously missed my point. If "seeing the wind" is a problem for the NASB, then it's also a problem for "seeing thunderings and noise" in the KJV. However, if "seeing/perceiving thunderings and noise" removes the problem in the KJV, then "seeing/perceiving the wind" also removes the problem in the NASB. You can't condemn one without condemning the other. The KJV and NASB stand together or fall together. </font>[/QUOTE]Arch, learn English before you trash it. The conjunctive comma "," joins the thunderings with the lightniongs, and also joins the "noise" of the trumpet with the "smoke". Learn to deal with the simple rules of English before you try to smash it to smithereens.

 

[ScottEmerson]

Doesn't matter. It's like if I wrote: "I ate a computer, a hamburger, and New York." Saw relates to both the thunderings and the lightenings. You still have the idea that they "saw the thunderings." It is not Archangel who is trashing the English language.

I'm going to go take a shower now so I can pay down the national debt, get ready for work, and feed my cat. Doesn't make sense in that sentence, either.

 

[robycop3]

The whole point is, that if one reads ONLY the KJV w/o a thorough understanding of the archaic English it's written in, one can be confused or misled by not knowing the meanings of words used in 1611 as compared to their meanings now. The example of "guilty" above is just such a case.

 

[Precepts]

Nice try, Ed, but somebody failed to see that all too common semi-colon separating the thoughts and thier Originator. Christ revealed the Truth that a person who vows a vow is better off not to make a vow then break it. The ruling factor is the "gift" upon the "altar" that demands fulfillment of the vow, when the vow is broken, the sacrifice is then in vain and the loss of life is then under the penalty of law/ "Thou shalt not kill". The "gift" has then become the element of a "killing" wasteful and useless, the one making the vow and offering is then become "GUILTY" for breaking the vow.

Study awhile and stop doting about words and unlearned questions, the Lord will bring thee to the knowledge of the Truth concerning sacrifices according to O.T. Law, then you will get the perfect picture of Calvary and Christ's Eternal and Supreme Sacrifice as outting an end to all penalty of the Law, we call it Grace for each need.


Learn the "parable", then learn to judge the context of the words used.

The death of any of God's creation is only for the specific purpose to either provide food, rid a harmful perpetrator, sacrifice(which is now no longer recognized since Jesus died on Calvary), or the penalty for murder.

The one who breaks the vow when the sacrfice has been made is then become guilty and indebted to face the penalty for sin which is death. We all are become guilty in the sight of God and need to turn to Jesus Christ for salvation.

Skan, I'm glad we agree on this one, we're beginning to make some progrees.

 

[Precepts]

My 4 year old just told me he can't see thunder, why do yall suppose we need to try and tell those who know how to read they can't?

 

[Orvie]

Originally posted by Precepts:
Good. I hope you're not getting your jollies watching the "Emporer" in the nude.

Why is thy mind in the gutter? are you being like a certain king who "enjoyed" those young men around him?

 

[ScottEmerson]

Originally posted by Precepts:
My 4 year old just told me he can't see thunder, why do yall suppose we need to try and tell those who know how to read they can't?

Then one must wonder why you posted a few pages ago, in complaint to a mv, "How does one "see" the wind?" So the question goes back to you, why do we need to try to tell those who know how to read they can't.

Yet another double standard.

 

[Archangel7]

Originally posted by Precepts:

My 4 year old just told me he can't see thunder, why do yall suppose we need to try and tell those who know how to read they can't?

Yet the KJV says "all the people SAW the thunderings" (Ex. 20:18). Who's right, I wonder -- the KJV or your four year old?

 

[Ed Edwards]

Originally posted by robycop3:
The whole point is, that if one reads ONLY the KJV w/o a thorough understanding of the archaic English it's written in, one can be confused or misled by not knowing the meanings of words used in 1611 as compared to their meanings now. The example of "guilty" above is just such a case.

Amen, Brother Robycop3 -- Preach it!

 

[Ed Edwards]

Scott Emerson: "I'm going to take a shower
now so I can pay down the national debt,
get ready for work, and feed my cat.

Thank you Brother ScottEmerson, thank
you very much. You have done something
important - the cat was hungry

 

[Precepts]

Originally posted by Archangel7:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Precepts:

My 4 year old just told me he can't see thunder, why do yall suppose we need to try and tell those who know how to read they can't?

Yet the KJV says "all the people SAW the thunderings" (Ex. 20:18). Who's right, I wonder -- the KJV or your four year old?

</font>[/QUOTE]Since I cannot tell you anything w/o your bias running wildly away with your mind, maybe you'll accept John Gill's explanation:"Ver. 18. And all the people saw the thunderings, and the lightnings, &c.] That is, they heard the one, and saw the other; they heard the dreadful volleys of thunder, and saw the amazing flashes of lightning, which were like lamps and torches, as the word used signifies; by a communication of senses, one sense is put for another, and the sense of sight being the principal, as Ben Melech observes, it is put for the rest, and so in the following. It is an observation of Austin’s {o} that to "see" is used of all of the five senses, seeing, hearing, tasting, smelling, and feeling"

In the sense of the inclusion of all the happenings in one sentence, the things seen are understood as such, the things not seen are understood as only heard, uh, anyone, uh, except yall, uh, Scott, uh, it is silly to think the writer is saying the things heard were seen or anything else.


Do yall always act so uneducated and having less comprehension than a 4 year old in your attempts to disannul the KJB?

 

[Ed Edwards]

S.Matthew XXIIII:51 (KJV611)

And shall cut him ||asunder, and
appoint him his portion with the
hypocrites : there shall be weeping
and gnashing of teeth.

Sidenote: || or, cut him off.

S.Matthew XXIIII:51 (KJV611alt)

And shall cut him off, and
appoint him his portion with the
hypocrites : there shall be weeping
and gnashing of teeth.

NIV and NASB select the primary reading.
But i've never seen a KJBO applaud them
for doing so. Seems most KJVOs are more
intersted in dissing MVs than in understanding
them or the users of them.

 

[Precepts]

A stopped clock is right twice a day, I've heard. Never watched one long enough to know that for a fact, but I usually do fix it so it will at least be right more often, others will leave it stopped just so they can be right twice a day too.

It must be they couldn't change the time when it is "asunder o'clock" because the clock was violently cut in half?