Differentiation

Deafening silence from the opposing view...

 

Benaiah...

Your poster boy Dr. Ruckman immediately starts off on the wrong foot by denying the existence of an ancient LXX, contrary to the views of the AV translators who used it!

Before me is my repro of the AV 1611, and here's what its translatoes had to say concerning the LXX, and concerning its antiquity:

While God would be known only in Jacob, and have his Name great in Israel, and in none other place, while the dew lay on Gideon's fleece only, and all the earth besides was dry; [See S.August.lib.12. contra Faust.c.32.] then for one and the same people, which spake all of them the language of Canaan, that is, Hebrew, one and the same original in Hebrew was sufficient.
But when the fullness of time drew near, that the Sun of righteousness, the Son of God, should come into the world, whom God ordained to be a reconciliation through faith in his blood, not of the Jew only, but also of the Greek, yea, of all them that were scattered abroad; then, lo, it pleased the Lord to stir up the spirit of a Greek prince (Greek for descent and language), even of Ptolomy Philadelph, King of Egypt, to procure the translating of the Book of God out of Hebrew into Greek.(emphasis mine)
This is the translation of the Seventy interpreters, commonly so called, which prepared the way for our Saviour among the Gentiles by written preaching, as Saint John Baptist did among the Jews by vocal.
For the Grecians, being desirous of learning, were not wont to suffer books of worth to lie moulding in kings' libraries, but had many of their servants, ready scribes, to copy them out, and so they were dispersed and made common.
Again, the Greek tongue was well known and made familiar to most inhabitants in Asia, by reason of the conquest that there the Grecians had made, as also by the colonies, which thither they had sent.
For the same causes also it was well understood in many places of Europe, yea, and of Africa too.
Therefore the word of God being set forth in Greek, becometh hereby like a candle set upon a candlestick, which giveth light to all that are in the house, or like a proclamation sounded forth in the market-place, which most men presently take knowledge of; and therefore that language was fittest to contain the Scriptures, both for the first preachers of the Gospel to appeal unto for witness, and for the learners also of those times to make search and trial by.

Ptolemy Philadelph lived from 308 to 246 BC, and was of the line of Ptolemies founded by Alexander The Great's general Ptolemy. That line ruled Egypt for several hundred years. Unlike Dr. Ruckman's stuff, what I wrote above is easily verified in any good encyclopedia or history book.

Believing Ruckman's statements about the KJV and the KJVO myth is akin to believing the accountants' statements in defense of the Enron execs. I hope you take the time to investigate the veracity of Ruckman's stuff for yourself, Benaiah!

 

bump


Does any KJVO care to answer Logos' questions?

 

Granny Gumbo: Y'all keep scurrying around looking for answers and it's right before your eyes-and many of you know it, but won't admit it!

Yes...That would be the KJVOs who won't admit their doctrine is wrong.


I believe God gave us this final Bible for today, tomorrow, and forever.

Then you believe incorrectly. God didn't retire in 1611. The British already had a perfectly-good, valid Bible, the Geneva Bible, as well as several other perfectly-good, valid versions, written in the English of their day. The KJV wasn't really necessary for them to have God's word in their own language, and the "Geneva-onlyists" resisted the new kid on the block vigorously. After all, the GB was only some 51 years old at the time.

Same thing today...There are some people resisting the new Bibles, using a false doctrine about an older version as the basis of their argument. It's their right to use any BVs they wish, but when they chide someone for using other versions, THEY'RE WRONG!


I don't have any belief in a "ism" but I do believe the kjBible is the true & perfect word of God; don't you?

Nope...Just another version of it. Its imperfections are well-documented, both on this board and in many other works.


Of course you do...or else the devil wouldn't be so busy trying to attack it.

Seems as if the NIV is the most-attacked English Bible today. Don't believe the devil is behind that? The proof is simple...the LEADERS of those attacks are believers in a PROVEN FALSE DOCTRINE...the KJVO myth.

 

Granny Gumbo: But roby...I'm not the one scurrying around, nor do I start all these many threads.

That's because you're not involved in the fight against the proven-false KJVO myth. No one's saying you hafta be, but for those of us who are, it sometimes involves stepping on some toes.

I have a peace that passeth all understanding that I have a "straight stick"

So do I...with a quiver full of straight sticks.


...imo, it don't even need defending, so why bother? My Bible is pure and not fool's gold...no doubt about it.

We haven't been secretive about calling attention to the booboos in the KJV. It's no more perfect than any other valid version.

 

kjv66: Please provide evidence that they actually used the lxx as a preferred source. If you don't, I'll take it that your only purpose is to discredit the KJV by any means.

Logos 1560 has saved me the trouble...Thanx, Logos!

Now, KJV66, try THIS one on for size: Please compare what JESUS READ ALOUD in Luke 4:16-21 as written in the KJV, with the KJV's Isaiah 42:7 and Isaiah 61:1-3, and with the Septuagint, to see which version agrees most with what JESUS read.

Not good enuff? Well, please compare the KJV's Acts 8:30-33 with Isaiah 53:1-10, especially verse 7, and with the Septuagint to see which one agrees most with what the Ethiopian was reading.

If you're coming here to try to defend the false KJVO myth, you're gonna hafta do a LOT better than you've done so far. And taking up for Ruckman isn't gonna help your cause one iota, as even most KJVOs believe he's a loose cannon.

 

Logos...KJV66...A rabbi whom I'd contacted phoned me the following info, after I'd posted above:


Here are s'more OT examples where the AV followed the LXX instead of the Masoretic Text...

Judges 16:26, the Hebrew MT reads "touch the pillars," while the KJV/LXX read "feel the pillars."

1 Kings 22:48, the Hebrew MT reads "Jehoshaphat had ten ships of Tharshish to go to Ophir," while the KJV/LXX reads, "Jehoshaphat made ships of Tharshish to go to Ophir."

2 Kings 20:4, the Hebrew MT reads "the city," while the KJV/LXX read "the middle court."

Isaiah 10:32, the Hebrew MT reads "the mount of the house of Zion," while the KJV/LXX reads "the mount of the daughter of Zion."

Isaiah 65:4, the Hebrew MT reads "pieces of," while the KJV/LXX reads "broth of."


Isaiah 7:14, the Hebrew MT reads "Behold, a young woman shall conceive" while the KJV/LXX reads "Behold, a virgin shall conceive" The rabbi told me there's a specific Hebrew word for 'virgin', and it's "bethulah"(sic...I'm guessing at the English spelling) and is NOT in the MT in this verse!

Let me make a few remarks about Isaiah 7:14...The Hebrew word in this verse is "almah", which was a virtuous young unmarried Israeli woman, whose virginity was a no-brainer. The Greek word in the LXX for this verse is "parthenos", which means "virgin" and nothing else.(The Parthenon is thus named, as it's a temple to Pallas Athene, who's described as a perpetual virgin.) Most people who don't speak Hebrew nor know the traditions & laws of Old Israel don't know what an almah was. And there were virgins among Israel who were not almahs. So, the AV men followed the LXX here, as the same word, parthenos, is used in Matthew 1:23, twice in Luke 1:27 to describe Mary.

There you have it, KJV66...Several KJV uses of the LXX as supplied by Logos 1560 and a rabbi who reads both Greek & Hebrew. Please take time to check his facts out for yourself.

What sayest thou to the APOSTLES' quoting the LXX, as you'll see they did if you compare their quotes with both the Hebrew Masoretic Text and the LXX? Still think ole Rucky is right?

Once again we have KJVO guesswork & fishing stories versus PROVEN FACT!