John 7:8-10 Did Jesus lie or tell the truth?

[Will J. Kinney]

John 7:8-10 Did Jesus lie or tell the truth?


John 7:8-10 KJB (Revised Version 1881, NIV 1973, 1978 and 1984 editions, Legacy Standard Bible 2021)- "Go ye up unto this feast: I go not YET unto this feast; for my time is not yet full come. When he had said these words unto them, he abode still in Galilee. But when his brethren were gone up, THEN went he also up unto the feast, not openly, but as it were in secret."

The old NIVs of 1973, 1978 and 1984 also read this way saying: "I am NOT YET going up to this Feast".

However now the 2011 has once again changed its underlying Greek texts and now has Jesus lying to His brothers by saying: "You go to this festival. I AM NOT GOING up to this festival, because my time has not yet fully come."

ESV (NIV 2011 edition, NASB) - "You go up to the feast. I AM NOT GOING up to this feast, for my time is not yet fully come. After saying this he remained in Galilee. But after his brothers had gone up to the feast, the HE ALSO WENT UP, not publicly but in private."

Revised Version 1881 - "Go ye up unto the feast: I go NOT YET unto this feast".

ASV 1901 - "Go ye up unto the feast: I go NOT up unto this feast"

The reading of "not yet" (ουπω ) is that found in the vast Majority of all Greek texts including P66, P75, Vaticanus, L,T, W, Delta and in some Old Latin copies and in the Syriac Peshitta, Harclean, Palestinian and the Coptic Sahidic and Boharic ancient versions.

The reading of "NOT going" is ouk as opposed to oupw "not yet", and is the reading found in the Sinaitic manuscript and D.

Even Westcott and Hort and the previous Nestle Aland critical texts (4th edition 1934) used to follow the Greek reading found in the King James Bible an in all Reformation bibles - "not YET going", but later on the Nestle Aland, (21st and 27th editions) and UBS (United Bible Society - the Vatican/Evangelical "interconfessional text") changed their minds and have now gone with the other reading that is not even the oldest reading, and the result is that many of these new "Catholic versions" have Jesus LYING to His disciples by saying that He is NOT going to the Feast and then turning around and going to the Feast.


This textual change is not due to any "new manuscript discoveries" at all. It's the same information they have always had. They just happened to change their minds, and introduced a new text so you can buy the late$t in $cholar$hip Advance$.

ALL Catholic versions have our Lord saying He is NOT GOING to the feast, in verse 8, and then He GOES to the feast in verse 10, thus making Him a liar. The Douai-Rheims bible of 1582 says: "Go you up to this festival day: but I GO NOT UP TO THIS FESTIVAL DAY, because my time is not accomplished." Then in verse 10 it says: "But after his brethren were gone up, then HE ALSO WENT UP TO THE FEAST, not openly, but, as it were, in secret." So also read the Catholic Douay 1950, the St. Joseph New American bible 1970 and the New Jerusalem bible 1985.

Remember, the Vatican has a formal agreement with the UBS/Nestle-Aland Critical Text group to create an "inter confessional" text to help unite "the separated brethren" and the UBS text is under the Vatican's supervision.

If you don't believe it, then see the documented proof in my article "Undeniable Proof the ESV, NIV, NASB, Holman Standard, NET etc. are the new "Vatican Versions" -

http://brandplucked.com/realcatholicbibles.htm

"NOT YET going"

Bible translations that agree with the KJB reading that Jesus said He was NOT YET going, and then later on He DID go, are Tyndale 1534 - "I will NOT GO UP YET vnto this feast", Coverdale 1535, The Great Bible 1540, Matthew's Bible 1549, Bishops's Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1587, Beza N.T. 1599, John Wesley 1755, Worsley Version 1770, Thomas Haweis N.T. 1795, the Alford N.T. 1870, Revised English Bible 1877, the Revised Version 1881, Youngs 1898, Rotherham 1902, Goodspeed N.T. 1923, J.B. Phillips 1962, New Life Version 1969, The New Berkeley Version 1969, the NKJV 1982, The Word of Yah 1993, God's Word Translation 1995, Interlinear Greek N.T. 1997 (Larry Pierce), Complete Jewish Bible 1998, New International Readers Version 1998, The Koster Scriptures 1998, Lawrie Translation 1998, The Common N.T. 1999, The Last Days N.T. 1999, The World English Bible 2000, Tomson N.T. 2002, The Apostolic Polyglot Bible 2003, The Pickering N.T. 2005, Resurrection Life N.T. 2005, New Century Version 2005, Easy to Read Version 2006, The Christogenea N.T. 2009, the Faithful N.T. 2009, the Holman Standard of 2009, English Majority Text Version 2009, Jubilee Bible 2010, Hebraic Transliteration Scripture 2010, Names of God Bible 2011, Expanded Bible 2011, Biblos Interlinear Bible 2011, Conservative Bible 2011, World English Bible 2012, the ISV 2014 (International Standard Version) - "I am NOT GOING to this festival YET", Modern English Version 2014, The Far Above All Translation 2014, The Open English Bible 2014, The Hebrew Names Version 2014, The Translator's Bible 2014, the Holy Bible Modern Literal Version 2015 and The New Matthew Bible 2016.

Lamsa's 1933 translation of the Syriac Peshitta - "You go up to this feast; I am NOT GOING JUST NOW to this feast, for my time is not yet come...But when his brothers had gone up to the feast, THEN HE ALSO WENT UP, not openly, but as it were in secret."

Weymouth N.T. 1903 - "As for you, go up to the Festival. I do NOT NOW go up go up to this Festival"

J.B. Phillips New Testament 1972 - "No, you go up to the festival. I shall NOT GO UP NOW, for it is NOT YET TIME for me to go."

The Living Bible 1971 - “ You go on, and I’LL COME LATER when it is the right time.”

Names of God Bible 2011 - "Go to the festival. I am NOT GOING to this festival RIGHT NOW."

The Voice 2012 - "Go on to the feast without Me; I am NOT GOING RIGHT NOW because My time is not yet at hand."

International Children's Bible 2015 - "So you go to the feast. I will NOT GO NOW. The right time for me has not yet come."


Foreign Language Bibles

Foreign language Bible that have Jesus saying He is NOT GOING to the feast, are the Spanish Sagradas Escrituras 1569, Cipriano de Valera 1602, Reina Valeras 1909 - 2011, -yo NO SUBO AUN aún á esta fiesta, the Portuguese Almeida - eu não subo ainda a esta festa, the French Martin 1744 and French Ostervald 1998 -pour moi, je n'y monte pas encore, the German Luther Bible 1545 and German Schlachter 2000 -Ich will noch nicht hinaufgehen auf dieses Fest, and the Italian Diodati 1649 and the New Diodati 1991 - io non salgo ancora a questa festa, to name but a few.

The Modern Greek Bible - “Σεις αναβητε εις την εορτην ταυτην· εγω δεν αναβαινω ετι εις την εορτην ταυτην, διοτι ο καιρος μου δεν επληρωθη ετι.” = “I do NOT YET GO”

And the Modern Hebrew Bible - עלו אתם לחג את החג אני לא אעלה אל החג הזה כי עתי לא מלאה עד עתה׃ = "I am NOT YET GOING"

 

[Will J. Kinney]

John 7:8-10 Did Jesus lie or tell the truth?

The Ever Changing NIVs


NIV 1973, 1978 and 1984 editions all had: - "You go up to the Feast. I am NOT YET going up to this Feast, because for me the right time has not yet come." Having said this, he stayed in Galilee. However, after his brothers had left for the Feast, he went also, not publicly, but in secret."

But the "new" NIV 2011 changed their underlying Greek text and now reads - "You go to the festival. I AM NOT GOING up to this festival, because my time has not yet fully come." After he had said this, he stayed in Galilee. However, after his brothers had left for the festival, he went also, not publicly, but in secret."


Even though the English NIV 2011 now says that Jesus is NOT going to the feast and then he goes to the feast, yet the Spanish NIV, La Nueva Versión Internacional 1986, 1999 and 2015 editions, read like the KJB - "Suban ustedes a la fiesta. Yo NO VOY TODAVIA a esta fiesta porque mi tiempo aún no ha llegado."

DAN WALACE'S NET VERSION - The "Logic" of a Bible Agnostic in Action

Daniel Wallace's NET version has the Lord saying He is NOT going to the feast, and then going. But the thinking of such "scholars" is revealed in his own footnotes where he says: "Most mss (P66, 75 B L T W 070 0105 0250 Ë1,13 Ï sa), INCLUDING MOST OF THE BETTER WITNESSES have "not yet" here. Those with the reading "not" (ouk) are not as impressive ( D K 1241 al lat), BUT "OUK" IS THE MORE DIFFICULT READING HERE, ESPECIALLY BECAUSE IT STANDS IN TENSION WITH V. 10."

So, in other words, because it absurdly makes our Lord Jesus Christ out to be a liar, and it is NOT found in "the better witnesses" or even the oldest manuscripts we have, therefore it must be the right reading! Hellooooo, is anybody home?


"hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?" 1 Corinthians 1:20

Wilbur Pickering, who himself is not even a KJB onlyist, comments on this blunder: Serious Anomalies/Aberrations -John 7:8 oupw--P66, 75, B, E, F, G, H, L, N, T, W, X, D, Q, Y 070, 0105, 0141, 0250, f1, 13, Byz, Lect, syr p, h, pal, co sa "NOT YET" ; ouk -- À, D, K, P, lat, syr s, c , co bo "NOT". Problem: Since Jesus did in fact go to the feast (and doubtless knew what He was going to do), the UBS text has the effect of ascribing a falsehood to Him.

Discussion: Since the UBS editors usually attach the highest value to P75 and B, isn't it strange that they reject them in this case? Here is Metzger's explanation: "The reading ["not yet"] was introduced at an early date (it is attested by P66,75) in order to alleviate the inconsistency between ver. 8 and ver. 10" (p. 216). So, they rejected P66, 75 and B (as well as 99% of the MSS) because they preferred the "inconsistency". NASB, RSV, NEB and TEV stay with the eclectic text here. (end of comments by Dr. Pickering.)


John Gill on John 7:8 - "I go not yet unto this feast". in others it is read, "I go NOT up unto this feast"; leaving out the word YET; which occasioned Porphyry, that great enemy of Christianity, to reproach Christ, as guilty of inconstancy, or of an untruth, since he afterwards did go up: but in almost all the ancient copies the word (YET) is read; and so it is by Chrysostom and Nonnus; and to the same sense the Syriac and Arabic versions render it, "I do NOT GO UP NOW to this feast"; that is, just at that very time, that very day or hour: which is entirely consistent with what is afterwards said."


Also in just these three verses we see that the word “this” of THIS FEAST is omitted by Vaticanus but found in Sinaiticus, and the NASB and NIV both omit the word, while "UNTO THEM" is in the NASB and Vaticanus, but not in the NIV or Sinaiticus, and "AS IT WERE" is in Vaticanus and the NASB, but not in Sinaiticus or the NIV. This is the character of these two manuscripts and bible versions in a nutshell.

The King James Bible is right, as always. Don't settle for a bogus "bible" that nobody seriously believes is the inerrant words of God.
God bless.

 

[Van]

Jesus did not lie!

NET Bible footnote:
19tc Most mss (Ě66,75 B L T W Θ Ψ 070 0105 0250 Ë1,13 Ď sa), including most of the better witnesses, have “not yet” (οὔπω, oupw) here. Those with the reading οὐκ are not as impressive (א D K 1241 al lat), but οὐκ is the more difficult reading here, especially because it stands in tension with v. 10. On the one hand, it is possible that οὐκ arose because of homoioarcton: A copyist who saw oupw wrote ouk. However, it is more likely that οὔπω was introduced early on to harmonize with what is said two verses later. As for Jesus’ refusal to go up to the feast in v. 8, the statement does not preclude action of a different kind at a later point. Jesus may simply have been refusing to accompany his brothers with the rest of the group of pilgrims, preferring to travel separately and “in secret” (v. 10) with his disciples.

Based above footnote, the NET scholars believe "yet" was added for clarification. However, they also believe the unaltered text supports the interpretation of NOT YET.

 

[atpollard]

John 7:8-10 Did Jesus lie or tell the truth?

Jesus told the truth.
The real question is “Which translation is telling the truth about what Jesus said?”

 

[Scarlett O.]

The context of the whole story explains everything very simply.

 

[MrW]

Titus 1:2.

 

[Will J. Kinney]

Jesus did not lie!

NET Bible footnote:
19tc Most mss (Ě66,75 B L T W Θ Ψ 070 0105 0250 Ë1,13 Ď sa), including most of the better witnesses, have “not yet” (οὔπω, oupw) here. Those with the reading οὐκ are not as impressive (א D K 1241 al lat), but οὐκ is the more difficult reading here, especially because it stands in tension with v. 10. On the one hand, it is possible that οὐκ arose because of homoioarcton: A copyist who saw oupw wrote ouk. However, it is more likely that οὔπω was introduced early on to harmonize with what is said two verses later. As for Jesus’ refusal to go up to the feast in v. 8, the statement does not preclude action of a different kind at a later point. Jesus may simply have been refusing to accompany his brothers with the rest of the group of pilgrims, preferring to travel separately and “in secret” (v. 10) with his disciples.

Based above footnote, the NET scholars believe "yet" was added for clarification. However, they also believe the unaltered text supports the interpretation of NOT YET.

Hi Van. Neither you nor Dan Wallace believe that any Bible is inerrant. This examples is just one of many where the so called "oldest and most reliable manuscripts" differ from each other and where even the oldest known manuscript readings are rejected by the Vatican Version promoters. Even your comment here shows the double-minded confusion and absurdity that these people believe.

By the way, here is what Dan Wallace of NET fame really believes about the Bible.



Dan Wallace - what he really thinks about the New Testament.



"WE DO NOT HAVE NOW IN ANY OF OUR CRITICAL GREEK TEXTS OR IN ANY TRANSLATIONS EXACTLY WHAT THE AUTHORS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT WROTE. EVEN IF WE DID, WE WOULD NOT KNOW IT. THERE ARE MANY, MANY PLACES IN WHICH THE TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT IS UNCERTAIN."



Elijah Hixson & Peter Gurry. Myths & Mistakes in New Testament Textual Criticism. xii. Quote by Dan Wallace.



What Dan Wallace really believes about the truth of the Scriptures in his own words -



"SCHOLARS ARE NOT SURE OF THE EXACT WORDS OF JESUS. Ancient historians were concerned to get the gist of what someone said, but not necessarily the exact wording. A comparison of parallel passages in the Synoptic Gospels reveals that the evangelists didn't always record Jesus' words exactly the same way. The terms ipsissima verba and ipsissima vox are used to distinguish the kinds of dominical sayings we have in the Gospels. The former means "the very words," and the latter means "the very voice." That is, the exact words or the essential thought. There have been attempts to harmonize these accounts, but they are highly motivated by a theological agenda which clouds one's judgment and skews the facts. IN TRUTH, THOUGH RED-LETTER EDITIONS OF THE BIBLE MAY GIVE COMFORT TO BELIEVERS THAT THEY HAVE THE VERY WORDS OF JESUS IN EVERY INSTANCE, THIS IS A FALSE COMFORT." (Dr. Daniel Wallace, "Fifteen Myths About Bible Translation")

 

[Van]

Hi Van.

I do not know what the purpose of post 7 was. Jesus did not lie. Is our copy, with its errors and corruptions, still reliable and trustworthy? Yes

The KJV contains errors, and the NET contains errors. So what?

 

[JesusFan]

Hi Van. Neither you nor Dan Wallace believe that any Bible is inerrant. This examples is just one of many where the so called "oldest and most reliable manuscripts" differ from each other and where even the oldest known manuscript readings are rejected by the Vatican Version promoters. Even your comment here shows the double-minded confusion and absurdity that these people believe.

By the way, here is what Dan Wallace of NET fame really believes about the Bible.



Dan Wallace - what he really thinks about the New Testament.



"WE DO NOT HAVE NOW IN ANY OF OUR CRITICAL GREEK TEXTS OR IN ANY TRANSLATIONS EXACTLY WHAT THE AUTHORS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT WROTE. EVEN IF WE DID, WE WOULD NOT KNOW IT. THERE ARE MANY, MANY PLACES IN WHICH THE TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT IS UNCERTAIN."



Elijah Hixson & Peter Gurry. Myths & Mistakes in New Testament Textual Criticism. xii. Quote by Dan Wallace.



What Dan Wallace really believes about the truth of the Scriptures in his own words -



"SCHOLARS ARE NOT SURE OF THE EXACT WORDS OF JESUS. Ancient historians were concerned to get the gist of what someone said, but not necessarily the exact wording. A comparison of parallel passages in the Synoptic Gospels reveals that the evangelists didn't always record Jesus' words exactly the same way. The terms ipsissima verba and ipsissima vox are used to distinguish the kinds of dominical sayings we have in the Gospels. The former means "the very words," and the latter means "the very voice." That is, the exact words or the essential thought. There have been attempts to harmonize these accounts, but they are highly motivated by a theological agenda which clouds one's judgment and skews the facts. IN TRUTH, THOUGH RED-LETTER EDITIONS OF THE BIBLE MAY GIVE COMFORT TO BELIEVERS THAT THEY HAVE THE VERY WORDS OF JESUS IN EVERY INSTANCE, THIS IS A FALSE COMFORT." (Dr. Daniel Wallace, "Fifteen Myths About Bible Translation")

NO translation would be inspired nor inerrant, as ALL biblical passages for that applies to the Originals themselves period

 

[Will J. Kinney]

NO translation would be inspired nor inerrant, as ALL biblical passages for that applies to the Originals themselves period

So, in plain words you have never seen nor read nor can you show any Bible that you believe is the complete and 100% true words of God because there ARE Nriginals. I'm shocked....shocked I tell you. ;-)

 

[Ascetic X]

So, in plain words you have never seen nor read nor can you show any Bible that you believe is the complete and 100% true words of God because there ARE Nriginals. I'm shocked....shocked I tell you. ;-)

I do not understand why you hate the King James Version so much.

You do enjoy putting words in the mouths of other individuals, ascribing beliefs to them that they never expressed. You say I promote the NASB, for example, but I have never said such a thing. The Bible condemns that as bearing false witness. Also called lying.

 

[Scarlett O.]

So, in plain words you have never seen nor read nor can you show any Bible that you believe is the complete and 100% true words of God because there ARE Nriginals. I'm shocked....shocked I tell you. ;-)

You have more disdain for people here than I have seen in a long, long time.

You need to dial it way down.

 

[JesusFan]

So, in plain words you have never seen nor read nor can you show any Bible that you believe is the complete and 100% true words of God because there ARE Nriginals. I'm shocked....shocked I tell you. ;-)

Have you ever seen a perfect English translation that NEVER had to get revised/redited ever since was first translated?

 

[JesusFan]

You have more disdain for people here than I have seen in a long, long time.

You need to dial it way down.

His response seems to be typical KJVO though