Another King James Bible Believer

More examples of Bible Babel Buffet in Proverbs

The Bible Babble Buffet Versions in the Book of Proverbs

 

 


In this study we will look at the book of Proverbs. I will show just some, by no means all, of the changes made by the NKJV, which purports to merely update and revise the old language of the KJB. Many of the changes are alluded to in the footnotes of the NKJV. Sometimes a completely different meaning is given to the verse, with no footnotes in the NKJV. I will focus primarily on the KJB versus the NKJV 1982, and not so much on the NIV and NASB.

Proverbs 1:6 KJB - "To understand a proverb and THE INTERPRETATION; the words of the wise, and their dark sayings."

The NKJV says: "To understand a proverb and AN ENIGMA."

The interpretation of a proverb is not the same as an enigma.  

NASB -"To understand a proverb and A FIGURE,The words of the wise and their riddles."

NIV - "for understanding proverbs and PARABLES, the sayings and riddles of the wise."

ESV - "to understand a proverb and A SAYING, the words of the wise and their riddles." 

Jehovah Witness New World Translation 2013 - "To understand a  proverb and A PUZZLING SAYING, the words of the wise and their riddles."

The Catholic Connection  

 

The previous Douay-Rheims of 1610 as well as the Douay 1950 both read like the KJB and earlier Bibles with "understand a parable AND THE INTERPRETATION."

 

However the 1970 St. Joseph NAB changed this to "that he may comprehend proverb and PARABLE." and the New Jerusalem bible 1985 has "for perceiving the meaning of proverbs and OBSCURE SAYINGS."

 

 

Agreeing with the KJB reading of "to understand a proverb and THE INTERPRETATION" or its equivalent are Wycliff 1395 "he shall perceive a parable and expounding" (its explanation), Coverdale 1535 "to vnderstonde a parable, and the INTERPRETATION thereof", the Great Bible 1540 "to perceaue a parable, & the INTERPRETATION thereof", Matthew's Bible 1549, Bishops' Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1587 - "To vnderstand a parable, & the INTERPRETATION", the Douay-Rheims 1610 "He shall understand a parable and the INTERPRETATION", Webster's translation 1833, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, the 1936 Hebrew Publishing Company translation, The Word of Yah 1993, the KJV 21st Century 1994, Third Millennium Bible 1998, God's First Truth 1999, Bond Slave Version 2009, the Jubilee Bible 2010, Hebraic Transliteration Scripture 2010, Biblos Interlinear Bible 2011 "THE INTERPRETATION", Conservative Bible 2011, The Work of God's Children Illustrated Bible 2011 and the Holy Bible, Modern English Version 2014 - “to understand a proverb and THE INTERPRETATION, the words of the wise and their riddles.”

 

Some weird ones out there are Young's with: "For understanding a proverb and ITS SWEETNESS"

Rotherham's Emphasized bible 1902 - "By gaining discernment of proverb, and SATIRE" 

Ancient Roots Translinear Bible 2008 - "to understand a proverb, SCORNING WORDS, and wise riddles."

 

Proverbs 1:32 "the PROSPERITY of fools shall destroy them". Prosperity is the reading of the Revised Version, Wycliffe, Coverdale, Bishops' Bible, Geneva, Darby, Douay-Rheims, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, the Spanish Reina Valera and others,

 

but the NKJV joins the NASB, NIV, ESV and the Catholic New Jerusalem bible 1985 and says "the COMPLACENCY of fools..." Not the same things, are they?

"Good understanding" or "high esteem"? Proverbs 3:4

Proverbs 3:1-4 starts off with "My son, forget not my law; but let thine heart keep my commandments."

Proverbs 3:4 in the KJB reads -  "So shalt thou find favour and GOOD UNDERSTANDING in the sight of God and man."

NKJV - "And so find favor and HIGH ESTEEM In the sight of God and man."

 ESV - "So you will find favor and GOOD SUCCESS in the sight of God and man."

NASB, RSV, NRSV - "So you will find favor and GOOD REPUTE In the sight of God and man."

NIV - "Then you will win favor and A GOOD NAME in the sight of God and man."

The Holman Standard 2009 - “Then you will find favor AND HIGH REGARD in the sight of God and man.”

The Easy To Read Version 2006 - “Then God will be pleased and think well of you and so will everyone else.”

 

Easy English Bible 2010 - “If you do that, YOU WILL MAKE GOD HAPPY. AND YOU WILL MAKE PEOPLE HAPPY TOO.”  

 

The Voice 2012 - “In this way, you will win the favor of God and others, AND THEY WILL THINK WELL OF YOU."



"Good understanding" are two words in Hebrew and English. The word "good" is very common. It is first found in Genesis 1:4 where God saw the light, that it was GOOD." The two words are found together in I Sam. 25:3 describing Abigail, the wife of Nabal, as "a woman of good understanding." Psalm 111:10 says: "a good understanding have all they that do his commandments" and in Proverbs 13:15 "Good understanding giveth favour". Even the NKJV has correctly translated both words as "good understanding" in these three verses.

The word "understanding" is found in Job 17:4 "For thou hast hid their heart from understanding" and in Pro. 16:22 "Understanding is a well-spring of life unto him that hath it." The word is also translated as wisdom, sense, prudence and discretion. It does NOT mean "esteem", "success", "repute" or "name".

 

The versions that agree with the KJB here in Proverbs 3:4 "good understanding" are the Revised Version 1881, the ASV 1901 "So shalt thou find favor and GOOD UNDERSTANDING In the sight of God and man.", Coverdale 1535, the Great Bible 1540 " fynde fauour & GOOD UNDERSTANDING", Matthew's Bible 1549 "So shalt thou fynde fauour & GOOD UNDERSTANDING in the sight of God & men.", Bishops' Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1587 - "So shalt thou finde fauour and GOOD UNDERSTANDING in the sight of God and man.", the Douay-Rheims 1610, the Longman Version 1841, the Smith Bible 1876, Youngs 1898, Darby 1890, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, the 1936 Hebrew Publication Society version, Douay 1950, the New Life Version 1969, the Living Bible 1971, the Third Millennium Bible 1998,  J.P. Green's literal 2004, and even Dan Wallace's NET bible 2006 - "Then you will find favor and GOOD UNDERSTANDING."  

 

Other Bibles that correctly read "GOOD UNDERSTANDING" are The Word of Yah 1993, God's First Truth 1999, The Judaica Press Complete Tanach 2004, Green's Literal Bible 2005, the Context Group Version 2007, the Bond Slave Version 2009, the New Heart English Bible 2010, The Holy Scriptures VW Edition 2010, The New European Version 2010, The Hebraic Transliteration Scripture 2010, The Work of God's Children Illustrated Bible 2011, The World English Bible 2012, the Interlinear Hebrew-Greek Scriptures 2012 (Mebust), The Hebraic Roots Bible 2012, The Biblos Bible 2013, The Hebrew Names Version 2014, and The Modern English Version 2014.

 

Foreign language bible that also follow the Hebrew text and say "good understanding" are the Italian Diotati - "E tu troverai grazia E BUON SENNO", the French Martin 1744 and the French Louis Second 2007 - "la grâce et LE BON SENS", the Dutch Staten Vertaling Bible - "En vind gunst en GOED VERSTAND", the Portuguese A Biblia Sagrada and the Almeida Corrigida 2009 - "E achars graa e BOM ENTENDIMENTO" and the Portuguese Almeida Actualizada - "e achars graa e BOA COMPREENSO diante de Deus e dos homens.", the Italian La Nuova Diodati 1991 - troverai cosí grazia e INTENDIMENTO AGLI occhi di DIO e degli uomini.”, Luther's German Bible 1545 - "so wirst du Gunst und Klugheit finden, die Gott und Menschen gefällt." = "and GOOD UNDERSTANDING", the Romanian Fidela Bible 2014 - “Astfel vei găsi favoare şi BUNA INTELEGERE în ochii lui Dumnezeu şi a oamenilor.", the Russian Synodal Version - "и обретешь милость и благоволение в очах Бога и людей." = "and GOOD UNDERSTANDING".


 and the Modern Greek Bible - "ουτω θελεις ευρει χαριν και ευνοιαν ενωπιον Θεου και ανθρωπων." = "you will find grace and good understanding before God and men."

 

However the NKJV says: "and so find favor and HIGH ESTEEM."

The NASB has "GOOD REPUTE"

while the NIV has "A GOOD NAME".

The liberal RSV was the first version to pervert the correct sense of this verse. It says: "GOOD REPUTE" and then in a footnote tells us "- Hebrew - UNDERSTANDING."

The Holman Standard now says: "you will find favor and HIGH REGARD"

The New Living Translation 2007 and the International Standard Version (both critical text versions) say: "and find favor and A GOOD REPUTATION with God and men."

And the latest Critical text version called The Voice 2012 actually says: "and THEY WILL THINK WELL OF YOU."

 

The NRSV 1989 continued with "GOOD REPUTE", like the previous RSV, but this time omitted the telling footnote, and now the ESV revision of the revision of the revision says: "you will find GOOD SUCCESS", and then footnotes "or good repute". Yet "repute" was previously acknowledged by the RSV as being an emendation of the Hebrew text which reads "GOOD UNDERSTANDING."

The Catholic Connection  

Both the previous Douay-Rheims of 1610 and the 1950 Douay read like the KJB and the earlier English bible with "And thou shalt find grace, and GOOD UNDERSTANDING before God and men."

But then the 1968 Jerusalem changed this to "So shall you enjoy favor and GOOD REPUTE."(RSV, NRSV, NASB).

The Catholic St. Joseph New American Bible of 1970 says "you will win favor and GOOD ESTEEM" (NKJV)

while the Catholic New Jerusalem bible 1985 says "you will find favor and SUCCESS", just like the ESV.  

Do you begin to see how they play this shell game? 


The NIV says "You will win favor and A GOOD NAME" but word does NOT mean "name", as the NIV has it at all. In fact the NIV only translates this word "name" one time, and yet (as the NIV's own concordance tells us), translated the same Hebrew words as "UNDERSTANDING" 5 TIMES and as "wisdom" 3 times. Nor is "repute" correct, as the NASB only once has it; nor is the NKJV's " HIGH ESTEEM."

The meaning of "HIGH ESTEEM", "GOOD REPUTATION", "GOOD REPUTE" or "A GOOD NAME" is not at all the same as a "GOOD UNDERSTANDING".  

There are many who have a good understanding yet they are/were not highly esteemed by men, including our Lord Jesus Christ!  Our Lord was "despised, and we esteemed him not" (Isaiah 53:3) and "He made himself of no reputation" (Phil. 2:7)  Yet "the spirit of the LORD rested upon Him, the spirit of wisdom and understanding" (Isaiah 11:2)

Likewise there are many that are of high esteem or good repute among men, but are sadly lacking in spiritual good understanding.  "for that which is HIGHLY ESTEEMED among men, is abomination in the sight of God."  (Luke 16:15).

The modern versions like the NKJV, NIV, NASB, RSV, ESV, Holman and modern Catholic version are all appealing to the pride  and vanity of man. They are false witnesses to the truth of God.

The King James Bible is always right. "He that hath ears to hear, let him hear."  Luke 8:8

 

In Proverbs 3:8 we read "It shall be health to thy NAVEL, and marrow to thy bones."

Navel is the reading of the Revised Version, the ASV, Young's, Douay, Darby, 
The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, 1917 and 1936 Jewish translations, Geneva, Spanish of 1909 and the Diodati.

 

The RSV and the NKJV footnotes recognize the Hebrew literally says NAVEL, but the NKJV has changed it to "flesh", while the NIV, NASB and New Jerusalem bible have "body".  The ESV says "your FLESH" but then footnotes that the literal Hebrew is the word "navel". The word for navel is found only twice in the Hebrew texts; here and in Ezekiel 16:4 "in the day thou wast born thy NAVEL was not cut". Even there the NASB, NKJV have retained the word "navel".

Maybe God should have made a better choice of words here in Proverbs 3:8 instead of "navel", so the modern versions are helping God out with His odd way of expressing Himself - Just to assist the modern reader, you understand. We know better than God how to express what He really wants to say.

In verse 25 we read "Be not afraid of sudden fear, neither of the DESOLATION OF THE WICKED, when it cometh." The RV, ASV, 
The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, the 1917 Jewish Publication Society Bible, the 1936 Hebrew Publishing Company Bible, Geneva, Young's, Darby, the Koster Scriptures 1998, The New European Version 2010, agree with the KJB.

Even the NIV, ESV and Holman agree in sense though they word it a little differently.


The NIV says: "Have no fear of sudden disaster or OF the ruin that overtakes the wicked."

But the NKJV reads: "Do not be afraid of sudden terror, Nor of trouble FROM the wicked when it comes." The NASB has "nor of the onslaught of the wicked when it comes". The NASB could go either way, but it leans heavily toward the more perverted NKJV.

The NKJV clearly states that the trouble that comes is FROM the wicked, rather than the desolation that comes upon the wicked from God as a judgment. The next verse makes this clear. "For the LORD shall be thy confidence, and shall keep thy foot from being taken."

Judgment shall come from God upon this world and the wicked shall be made desolate, but we are safe in the care of God. If we read it as it stands in the NKJV, the wicked make us desolate. If we are made desolate by the wicked, then how is God keeping out feet from being taken? It is a contradiction.

What these little studies are showing is that if all these bibles are the inspired words of God, as some foolishly claim, then we end up not really being sure of what God actually said. Guess who wants us to be in that position? Yea, hath God said?

3:35 "The wise shall inherit glory: but shame shall be the PROMOTION of fools."

To Promote is the same word found in 4:8 where it says "exalt her and she shall promote thee." To promote is to move forward, and though fools who despise the words of God may prosper in this world, God shall turn them over to shame for having lived a life apart from God. This is still in their future, just as glory shall be the inheritance of the wise. The RV, ASV, 
The New European Version 2010 and many others read just like the KJB.

However, the NKJV says: "shame shall be the LEGACY of fools." The legacy is what they leave behind for others. Completely different meaning.

4:18 "But the path of the just is as the shining LIGHT, that shineth more and more unto the perfect day."

NKJV "like the shining SUN" footnote - lit. light.

The light that shines in the spiritual darkness of this world does get brighter, as we understand more of God's word until the perfect day come when He is fully revealed to us. This word is "light" both physical and spiritual, and is never translated as "sun" in the KJB. The sun, on the other hand, rises, passes across the sky and then sinks into coming darkness. Just a little change by the NKJV, which admits the word is literally "light", and the meaning is subtly altered.

Proverbs 6:11 "Yet a little sleep, a little slumber, a little folding of the hands to sleep: So shall thy poverty come as ONE THAT TRAVELLETH, and thy want as an armed man."

The Hebrew word used here is #1980 hah-lach. It is very common and means simply "to travel, to go, to walk". It is used in such phrases as "Enoch walked with God" and "he IS GONE on a long journey" Proverbs 7:19. In fact, the same word is found in the next verse as "walketh with a froward mouth." One who travels, eventually comes to his destination; so through idleness, poverty eventually arrives. But this word has nothing to do with "a robber".

Other Bible versions that read as the KJB "so shall thy poverty come as ONE THAT TRAVELLETH" are Wycliffe 1395, Coverdale 1535, Bishops' Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible, the Douay-Rheims, Young's, the Spanish Reina Valera, Douay, Italian Diodati, Webster's, Green's 1998 MKJV, and the Third Millenium Bible.

However the NKJV joins the ASV, NRSV, Holman, and ESV and says "so shall your poverty come AS A ROBBER". The NASB, RSV have "a vagabond", which is more like the KJB meaning. The NIV has "LIKE A BANDIT" but then footnotes "or like a vagrant." The New Jerusalem bible has "a vagrant"

Daniel Wallace's NET bible also reads as the perverted NKJV. It says: "and your poverty will come like A ROBBER", but then in his footnote Dr. Wallace says: " Hebrew “like a wayfarer” or “like a traveler.” The LXX has “swiftness like a traveler.” It has also been interpreted as a “highwayman” or a “dangerous assailant.” W. McKane suggests “vagrant” . Someone traveling swiftly would likely be a robber."

All Wallace's footnote tells us is that he knows what the Hebrew text actually says, but he has chosen to alter it, and instead, put in his own private interpretion - just like the NKJV did.

6:22 "when thou goest IT shall lead thee...IT shall keep thee...IT shall talk with thee. NKJV "THEY" in all three. footnote Lit. It.

Proverbs 7:22 KJB - “He goeth after her straightway, as an ox goeth to the slaughter, OR AS A FOOL TO THE  CORRECTION OF THE STOCKS.”  

NIV - " LIKE A DEER STEPPING INTO A NOOSE.” 

ESV -  AS A STAG IS CAUGHT FAST.”

World English Bible 2012 - “AS A FOOL STEPPING INTO A NOOSE."

NASB - "OR AS ONE IN FETTERS TO THE DISCIPLINE OF A FOOL."

Catholic Public Domain Version 2009 - " LIKE A LAMB ACTING LASCIVIOUSLY, AND NOT KNOWING THAT HE IS BEING DRAWN FOOLISHLY INTO CHAINS."  ??? OooooKaaaay...

 

Lamsa's 1933 - "AS A DOG TO BE MUZZLED."

 

Complete Tanach 2005 - “and AS A VIPER to the chastisement of a fool.”  ???

 

Greek Septuagint - "AS A DOG TO BONDS, OR AS A HART SHOT IN THE LIVER WITH AN ARROW." 

 

Proverbs 7:22 KJB - “He goeth after her straightway, as an ox goeth to the slaughter, OR AS A FOOL TO THE  CORRECTION OF THE STOCKS.”   

So read the Hebrew texts, as well as The Jewish Family Bible 1864, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, the JPS (Jewish Publication Society) Bible 1917, the 1936 Hebrew Publishing Company translation, The New Jewish Version 1985, The Word of Yah Bible 1993, the Complete Jewish Bible 1998, The Natural Israelite Bible 2010, Coverdale 1535, Matthew’s Bible 1549, the Bishops’ Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1599, The Revised English Bible 1877, the RV 1885, Rotherham’s Emphasized bible 1902, the ASV 1901, the [NASB], Darby 1890, Youngs 1898, New Berkeley Version in Modern English 1969, the KJV 21st Century version 1994, the Third Millennium Bible 1998, The Koster Scriptures 1998, God's First Truth 1999, The Yah Sacred Scriptures 2001, Green's Literal 2005, The Bond Slave Version 2009, the Jubilee Bible 2010, The Hebrew Transliteration Bible 2010, The Biblos Bible 2013, the Modern English Bible 2014 - "as a fool to the correction of the stocks."  

 

Foreign Language Bibles


Foreign language Bibles that read the same as the Hebrew texts and the King James Bible are the Spanish Reina Valera’s 1909, 1960, 1995 - “o como va el necio a prisión para ser castigado”, the French Martin 1744, Louis Segond  1910, Ostervald 1991 and Louis Segond 2007- “Comme un fou qu'on lie pour le châtier”, the Italian Diodati 1649 and 1991, Riveduta 2006 - “come un incatenato alla punizione dello stolto”, the Portuguese Almeida - “como o louco ao castigo das prisões”, and Luther’s German bible 1545 and German Schlachter Bible 2000 - "und wie ein Gefesselter zur Bestrafung der Toren."

 


The NKJV reads the same as the KJB: “Immediately he went after her, as an ox goes to the slaughter, Or AS A FOOL TO THE CORRECTION OF THE STOCKS."

 

BUT THEN, just so you won’t be too confident in what God said, it footnotes:  Septuagint, Syriac, and Targum read AS A DOG TO BONDS,  Vulgate reads AS A LAMB...TO BONDS.”


Let’s see what a confusing mess the modern versions have made out of this verse.


The NIV actually says: “All at once he followed her like an ox going to the slaughter, LIKE A DEER STEPPING INTO A NOOSE.” (Deer, Fool, Dog... Yeah, that’s pretty much the same, right?)  Then the NIV footnotes: Syriac; Hebrew “fool”. And it also adds: “The meaning of the Hebrew for this line is uncertain.”


Well, even the NIV does seem certain that the Hebrew says “fool” but they have given us A DEER instead!  


Lamsa’s 1936 translation of the Syriac says: “He went after her as a little child, as an ox that goes to the slaughter, and AS A DOG TO BE MUZZLED.”  - A DOG, not A DEER, not a FOOL.


The Holman Standard is basically like the NIV with: “He follows her impulsively like an ox going to the slaughter, like A DEER BOUNDING TOWARD A TRAP.” Then it tells us in their footnote: “Text emended (That means changed!)  - like shackles for the discipline of a fool; Hebrew obscure.”!


Hey, wait a minute.  They admit they changed the text; then they give us their translation of the Hebrew, which is basically the same as what the KJB says, and then they tell us it is obscure!  You gotta luv ‘em.  These bible correctors are a kick in the head, aren’t they?


The liberal RSV 1954 has: “as an ox goes to the slaughter, or AS A STAG IS CAUGHT FAST.”


The ESV 2001 is the same with: “All at once he follows her, as an ox goes to the slaughter, or AS A STAG IS CAUGHT FAST.”

 

Then it has this amazing footnote: “Probable reading (compare Septuagint, Vulgate, Syriac) Hebrew -  as an anklet for the discipline of a fool”!!! 

 

They come right out and tell us what the Hebrew reading is, (though they have given us ballpark approximations with their paraphrase) and it is what is found in the KJB and so many others. = as a fool to the correction of the stocks. "anklet = stocks", "discipline=correction" and "fool". And to think that people use these bogus bible versions then criticize the King James Bible! Just amazing.

 

It should also be noted that neither the so called Septuagint, nor the Vulgate, nor the Syriac read as does the Hebrew text they call “obscure” NOR do any one of them agree with each other! So why does the vaunted ESV change the Hebrew text; tell us to compare the Septuagint, Vulgate and Syriac, and then tell us how the Hebrew reads, which is like what the King James Bible has had all along?


The Septuagint copy I have reads like no other Bible version on the face of the earth I am aware of and adds a whole bunch of words besides.  It says: “And he followed her, being gently led on, and that as an ox is led to the slaughter, AND AS A DOG TO BONDS, OR AS A HART SHOT IN THE LIVER WITH AN ARROW.”!!!  Hellooooo? 

 

And the Syriac, as we have seen, says: “He went after her as A LITTLE CHILD, as an ox that goes to the slaughter, and AS A DOG TO BE MUZZLED.”  So, in other words, their “helpful footnote” is nothing more than a confusing bunch of Baloney.


Dan Wallace and Company’s silly NET version reads: “Suddenly he went after her like an ox that goes to the slaughter, LIKE A STAG PRANCING INTO A TRAPPER’S SNARE.” (This is basically like the NIV, Holman junk)


 

The 2012 critical text Names of God Bible gives us: "like A RAM HOBBLING INTO CAPTIVITY." 

 

 The Catholic Connection


Both the Douay Rheims 1610 and the 1950 Douay version are translated from the Latin and they both say: “Immediately he followeth her as an ox led to be a victim, and AS A LAMB PLAYING THE WANTON, AND NOT KNOWING THAT HE IS DRAWN LIKE A FOOL TO BONDS.” (Read that again just to capture the "meaning")  

 

Then in 1968 the Jerusalem bible came out with - "Bemused, he follows her LIKE AN OX BEING LED TO THE SLAUGHER, LIKE A STAG CAUGHT IN A NOOSE."  This is like the ESV, NIV, Holman, NET versions. Surprise!

 

Then the 1970 St. Joseph NAB gave us some more innovation with: "He follows her stupidly, like an ox that is led to the slaughter, LIKE A STAG THAT MINCES TOWARD THE NET."

 

But once again Catholic New Jerusalem bible 1985 changed it again to now read: "Forthwith he follows her, like an ox on its way to the slaughterhouse, LIKE A MADMAN ON HIS WAY TO THE STOCKS."

 

And finally in 2009 they came out with the Catholic Public Domain Version and it reads differently than them all. It says: "Immediately, he follows her, like an ox being led to the sacrifice, and LIKE A LAMB ACTING LASCIVIOUSLY, AND NOT KNOWING THAT HE IS BEING DRAWN FOOLISHLY INTO CHAINS."  Well... that IS, after all, what every lascivious lamb deserves, right?

 

With today’s multiple Bible Babble Buffet “scholars” giving us such “an embarrassment of riches” to chose from for what God may or may not have said in His word, small wonder most Christians no longer believe “The Bible” or any bible is the complete and 100% true words of the living God.

 

Get the Bible God has has born witness to in so many ways and the only one English speaking Christians actually believe is the inerrant words of truth and life - the King James Holy Bible.

 

 

Proverbs  8:16 Wisdom is speaking and says "By me princes rule, and nobles, even all the judges OF THE EARTH."

 

Here the NKJV reads as does the King James Bible, but it has a false and lengthy footnote. After reading the same as the KJB, it then footnotes: "Masoretic text (this is a false and misleading statement), Syriac, Targum and Vulgate read "righteousness".  "Bomberg, LXX and some mss. read "earth".

The NASB, Holman Standard and ESV read "By me princes rule, and nobles, All who judge RIGHTEOUSLY" or "all who  GOVERN JUSTLY" (ESV) instead of "all the judges OF THE EARTH." and Dan Wallace's goofy NET version - "and ALL RIGHTEOUS JUDGES."  

The NASB, ESV and Holman here follow a different Hebrew text than the KJB, the RV 1881, ASV 1901, or even the NIV.

Those that read "all the judges OF THE EARTH" like the KJB are the Geneva Bible, Bishops' Bible, the Revised Version, American Standard Version, New Life Version 1969, The New Berkeley Version in Modern English 1969, Lamsa's translation of the Syriac Peshitta, the Hebrew Names Version 2014, the Jewish Publication Society of 1917, the 1936 Hebrew Publishing Company Bible, NKJV 1982, and the Complete Jewish Bible 1998, the Koster Scriptures 1998, the New Revised English Bible 1989, Young's, Darby, the Amplified bible (put out by the same Lockman Foundation that does the NASB) and even the RSV of 1954, The New European Version 2010, and the NIV 2011 - "be me princes govern, and nobles - all who rule ON EARTH."  

 

Other English Bibles that follow the same Hebrew text as the KJB and read:"even all the judges OF THE EARTH" are The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, The Word of Yah 1993, God's First Truth 1999, Sacred Scriptures Family of Yah 2001, Green's Literal 2005, Hebraic Transliteration Scripture 2010, Holy Scriptures VW Edition 2010, Biblos Interlinear Bible 2011, World English Bible 2012 and The Holy Bible, Modern English Version 2014 - "even ALL THE JUDGES OF THE EARTH."

 

as well as the Modern Greek Bible  - "παντες οι κριται της γης·." = "all the judged OF THE EARTH."

 

Foreign language Bibles that follow the same Hebrew texts and read the same way as the King James Bible - "all the judges OF THE EARTH" are the Spanish Reina Valera 1909, 1960, 1995, the NIV 1999 Nueva Versión Internacional and the 2005 Reina Valera Gomez -  "todos los gobernadores juzgan la tierra.", the Portuguese Almeida and Portuguese NIV 1999 - "todos os juízes da terra.", the Italian Diodati 1649, Italian Riveduta 2006,  the New Diodati 1991 -"e tutti i giudici della terra.",  the French Martin 1744, Louis Segond 1910, the Ostervald 1996, and La Bible du Semeur 1999 - "et tous les juges de la terre.", the Dutch Staten Vertaling Bible - "al de rechters der aarde.", Luther's German Bible 1545 - "alle Regenten auf Erden." as well as the Modern Greek Bible  - "παντες οι κριται της γης·."

The false and misleading footnote found in the NKJV - "Masoretic text, Syriac, Targum and Vulgate read "righteousness".  "Bomberg, LXX and some mss. read "earth" - is merely accomodating the false NASB reading, and implying that part of God's words have been lost or confused.

The NKJV footnote tells us the Syriac version reads "righteousness", but Lamsa's 1936 translation of the Syriac actually reads differently by combining both ideas. It says: "By me princes and nobles rule, even all THE RIGHTEOUS JUDGES OF THE EARTH."

Likewise the NKJV is inaccurate regarding the so called Greek Septuagint. The copy I have says: "By me the nobles BECOME GREAT AND MONARCHS (not Judges) BY ME RULE OVER the earth."

So the truth of the matter concerning the so called LXX is that it has a whole bunch of words that are not in the Hebrew text nor in the KJB, but does have the word "earth" in it.  The NKJV footnote is completely inaccurate.  

Neither is the NKJV footnote totally accurate regarding the Latin Vulgate. It actually reads: "per me principes imperant et potentes decernunt iustitiam" - which would be translated as "By me princes rule and potentates DISCERN JUSTICE."  So, the NKJV footnote is basically a bunch of Baloney!

Dan Wallace and company's NET version as usual departs from the correct texts and says: "nobles and ALL RIGHTEOUS JUDGES" but then he has a revealing footnote that not only shows the NKJV footnotes are in error, but shows the mindset of all bible agnostics.  The NET footnotes on this verse says: Many of the MT mss read “sovereigns [princes], all the judges of the earth.” (Thus the NKJV ft. is a lie) The LXX has “sovereigns…rule the earth.” But the MT manuscript in the text (the one Wallace has chosen to follow)  has “judges of righteousness.” C. H. Toy suggests that the Hebrew here has assimilated Psalm 148:11 in its construction (Proverbs [ICC], 167). The expression “judges of the earth” is what one would expect, but the more difficult and unexpected reading, the one scribes might change, would be “judges of righteousness."    

So  in other words, this guy who is "Toying" around with the Hebrew texts "suggests" that some scribes took "the more difficult reading" and changed it to match what is found in another part.  So we are then left with speculation, guesses, hypothesis and personal preferences rather than the sure and infallible words of the living God.  This all sounds suspiciously like the "Yeah, hath God said....?" syndrome to me.  How about you?


Proverbs 11:16 KJB - “A gracious woman retaineth honour: and STRONG men retain riches.”


NKJV (NASB, NIV) - “A gracious woman retains honor, But RUTHLESS men retain riches.”


ESV - “A gracious woman gets honor, and VIOLENT men get riches.”




The underlying Hebrew word (#6182 gah-reetz) can have both a positive and a negative connotation. The KJB and others adopted the positive meaning in comparison to the gracious woman. Thus we have “AND strong men retain riches.”


The NKJV, on the other hand, adopted the negative meaning, and thus the “BUT (showing contrast) ruthless men retain riches.”


It is used in a positive way in Jeremiah 20:11 where God is described as “the Lord is with me as a mighty TERRIBLE one.”


The verb form of this word (# 6206 gah-ratz) also has a positive and a negative meaning. We see the positive meaning in such places as “when he (God) ariseth to SHAKE TERRIBLY the earth” Isaiah 2:19; “God is greatly TO BE FEARED.” Psalms 89:7; “and shall FEAR the God of Israel” Isaiah 29:23, and “and let him (God) be YOUR DREAD.” Isaiah 8:13


Agreeing with the meaning found in the King James Bible - “and strong men retain riches” are Wycliffe 1395 - “and stronge men schulen haue richessis.”, Coverdale 1535 - “as for THE MIGHTY”, Matthew’s Bible 1549 “as for the mighty”, the Bishops’ Bible 1568 “but THE STRONG MEN attayne riches.”, the Geneva Bible 1587 - “and THE STRONG MEN atteine riches.”, Douay-Rheims 1610, Webster’s Bible 1833, The Longman Version 1841 “but strong men”, The Commonly Received Version 1851, The Lesser O.T. 1853 - “and the powerful will obtain riches.”, the Julia Smith Translation 1855 “and the powerful men”, The Jewish Family Bible 1864 - “but STRONG MEN retain riches.”, The Revised English Bible 1877, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907 - “and STRONG MEN retain riches.”, The JPS (Jewish Publication Society) 1917 -“and STRONG MEN”, The Hebrew Publication Company bible 1936, The Bible in Basic English 1961 - “but the strong keep their wealth”, The Word of Yah Bible 1993, the 21st Century KJV 1994, The Revised Webster Bible 1995, The Third Millennium Bible 1998, God’s First Truth 1999, The Judaica Press Tanach 2004, The Revised Geneva Bible 2005, the Jubilee Bible 2010, The Hebrew Transliteration Scriptures 2010, The Biblos Bible 2013.


Other Translations


The Great Bible 1540 - “as for the WYCKED, they maynteyne ryches.”

So obviously the KJB translators were aware of the negative meaning, but they rejected it.


Rotherham’s Emphasized bible 1902 - “but THE DILIGENT shall obtain wealth.”


Contemporary English Version 1995 - “but A MAN MUST WORK HARD to get rich.”


The Apostolic Polyglot Bible 2003 - “but THE VIGOROUS establish riches.”


The Judaica Press Tanach 2004 - “A charming woman draws near to honor, but strong men draw near to riches.”


Commentary by Rashi - “but strong men draw near to riches: that it should not be lost to them.”


Foreign Language Bibles = KJB


The Spanish Reina Valera 1960, 1977, 1995 - “La mujer agraciada tendrá honra, Y los fuertes tendrán riquezas.” = “And THE STRONG will obtain riches.”


The Italian Nuova Riveduta bible 2006 - “e gli uomini forti ottengono la ricchezza.” - “and a strong man obtains riches.”


The Modern Greek Bible - Η ευκοσμος γυνη απολαμβανει τιμην· οι δε καρτερικοι απολαμβανουσι πλουτη. - “and the PERSEVERING lay up riches.”

 


Proverbs 11:30 KJB - “The fruit of the righteous is a tree of life; and HE THAT WINNETH SOULS IS WISE.”

 

Holman Standard Proverbs 11:30 - “The fruit of the righteous is a tree of life, BUT VIOLENCE TAKES LIVES.” 

 

 

 

"HE THAT WINNETH SOULS IS WISE.” 

 

Agreeing with the King James Bible are the Jewish translation of the Jewish Publication Society 1917, the 1936 Hebrew Publication Society translation, the Judaica Press Tanach 2004, the Complete Jewish Bible 1998, Coverdale 1535, Bishops' bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1587, the Revised Version 1885, ASV 1901, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, NASB, NKJV, NIV 1984 edition, Young’s 1898, Darby 1890, the Koster Scriptures 1998, World English Bible 2000, the ESV 2011, NET version 2006, The New European Version 2010, ISV 2014, Jubilee Bible 2010 - "and he that wins souls is wise.", The Hebrew Transliteration Scriptures 2010, The Voice 2012. 

 

Many foreign language Bible read the same as the King James Bible including the Spanish Sagradas Escrituras 1569, Cipriano de Valera 1602, Reina Valera 1909-1995 -"El fruto del justo es árbol de vida; y EL QUE GANA ALMAS, ES SABIO.", the Portuguese Almeida Bible - "e o que ganha almas sábio é.", the French Martin 1744 and Ostervald 1996 - " et celui qui gagne les âmes est sage.', the Italian Diodati 1649 and La Nuova Diodati 1991 - " E il savio prende le anime." and the Dutch Staten Vertaling "en wie zielen vangt, is wijs." to name but a few.  


However the 2003 Holman Christian Standard Version, the NRSV 1989, the New English Bible 1970, and the Revised English Bible 1989 actually read: “The fruit of the righteous is a tree of life, BUT VIOLENCE TAKES LIVES.” 

 

Also the 2003 Message by Eugene Peterson reads: "A good life is a fruit-bearing tree; A VIOLENT LIFE DESTROYS SOULS."

 

Then the Holman footnotes refers us to the so called LXX (Greek Septuagint) and the Syriac, but tells us that the Hebrew text reads “the wise one”.

 

The Catholic Connection  

 

The previous Douay-Rheims 1610 as well as the Douay Version of 1950 both read "The fruit of the just man is a tree of life: AND HE THAT GAINETH SOULS IS WISE."

 

However the 1968 Jerusalem says: "...THE WICKED ARE CARRIED OFF BEFORE THEIR TIME."  

 

Then the St. Joseph New American bible 1970 reads like the Holman Standard, saying: "The fruit of virtue is a tree of life, BUT VIOLENCE TAKES LIVES AWAY."

 

But now the 2009 Catholic Public Domain Version has gone back to a reading more like that found in the King James Bible, saying: "The fruit of the just one is the tree of life. AND WHOEVER RECEIVES SOULS IS WISE."  

 

The NIVs

 

 

The NIV 1978 and 1984 editions read: "The fruit of the righteous is a tree of life, and HE who WINS SOULS is wise."  But the 2011 NIV edition changed this a bit and says: "The fruit of the righteous is a tree of life, and the ONE who is wise SAVES LIVES."

 

However the NIV Spanish version, La Nueva Versión Internacional 1999 reads: "El fruto de LA JUSTICIA es árbol de vida, PERO EL QUE ARREBATA VIDAS ES VIOLENTO." = "The fruit of RIGHTEOUSNESS is a tree of live, BUT HE WHO TAKES AWAY LIVES IS VIOLENT."

 

Then the Spanish NIV footnotes that the LXX reads RIGHTEOUSNESS but that the Hebrew read THE JUST, and that VIOLENT comes from the LXX but that the Hebrew reads THE WISE.



As is often the case with these fake bibles, not even their footnotes can be relied upon.  The copy of the LXX I have right here in front of me does not read either like the Hebrew texts nor the Holman, RSV, NRSV fiasco.  The LXX actually says: “Out of the fruit of righteousness grows a tree of life; BUT THE SOULS OF TRANSGRESSORS ARE CUT OFF BEFORE THEIR TIME.”


And Lamsa’s 1936 translation of the Syriac is also different from both the LXX and Holmans.  It reads: “The fruit of the righteous is a tree of life; but THE SOULS OF THE WICKED SHALL BE DRIVEN OUT.” - NOT “violence takes lives”.


The RSV was similar to the Holman with: “The fruit of the righteous is a tree of life, BUT LAWLESSNESS TAKES AWAY LIVES.”  But then the revision of the revision of the revision - the ESV 2001, which itself was revised once again in 2007, then again in 2011 and once more in 2016 - now says: “The fruit of the righteous is a tree of life, and whoever captures souls is wise.”

Modern “scholarship” is in complete disarray.  They are continually changing their minds and continue to disagree among themselves as to what words God may or may not have inspired in His Book. 


Proverbs 12:26  KJB - "The righteous IS MORE EXCELLENT THAN HIS NEIGHBOR; but the way of the wicked seduceth them."


The NKJV - "The righteous SHOULD CHOOSE HIS FRIENDS CAREFULLY."

NASB - "The righteous is A GUIDE to his neighbor"

NIV 1984 edition has "the righteous man is CAUTIOUS IN FRIENDSHIP."  But...

The NIV 2011 now reads: "The righteous CHOOSE THEIR FRIENDS CAREFULLY"  But...

The NIV Spanish edition La Nueva Versión Internacional of 1999 says: "El justo es guía de su prójimo" =The righteous IS A GUIDE TO HIS NEIGHBOR." (Yeah, that's pretty close to the NIV English version, right?)

Holman Standard - "A righteous man IS CAREFUL IN DEALING WITH HIS NEIGHBOR."

The Message - "A good person SURVIVES MISFORTUNE."

The Voice 2012 -  "Those who live right ARE GOOD GUIDES TO THOSE WHO FOLLOW"


The CEV (Contemporary English Version) of 1995 put out by the American Bible Society is so "contemporary" that it is unrecognizable. Sure, it's "easy to read" but is it even close to what God said?  It says -

CEV- "YOU ARE BETTER OFF TO DO RIGHT, THAN TO LOSE YOUR WAY BY DOING WRONG."

Young's 'literal' - "The righteous SEARCHETH HIS COMPANION."

2012 Knox Bible - "IT IS WELL DONE TO PUT UP WITH LOSS FOR A NEIGHBOUR'S NEED; the calculations of the sinner do but lead him astray."  (Say What?!?)

RSV 1952 - "A righteous man TURNS AWAY FROM EVIL."

NRSV 1989 - "The righteous GIVES GOOD ADVICE TO FRIENDS."

The Revised English Bible of 1989 - "The righteous ARE FREED FROM EVIL, but the wicked take a path that leads them astray."

ESV 2001 - "One who is righteous IS A GUIDE TO HIS NEIGHBOR."

The Catholic Versions

Let's see how the Catholic bible versions handle this verse. All four of them are completely different.

Douay-Rheims 1610, 1950 - "HE THAT NEGLECTETH A LOSS FOR THE SAKE OF A FRIEND, IS JUST."

Jerusalem Bible 1968 - "AN IMPARTIAL ARBITER IS HIS OWN BEST FRIEND."

St. Joseph New American Bible 1970 - "The just man SURPASSES HIS NEIGHBOR." This one is actually like the King James Bible here)

The New Jerusalem 1985 - "The upright SHOWS THE WAY TO A FRIEND; the way of the wicked leads them astray."

The LXX - Even Adam Clarke says - The Septuagint is insufferable: "The WELL-INSTRUCTED RIGHTEOUS SHALL BE HIS OWN FRIEND."

The Jewish Translations

How about the Jewish translations? They too all differ from each other. So much for "going to the Hebrew".

Jewish Publication Society 1917 - "The righteous IS GUIDED BY HIS FRIEND."

Hebrew Publishing Company 1936 - "The righteous IS MORE EXCELLENT THAN HIS NEIGHBOUR." = KJB.

The Complete Jewish Bible - "The righteous GUIDES HIS FRIEND'S WAY RIGHTLY."

The 2001 Judaica Press Tanach - "The righteous IS MORE GENEROUS THAN HIS NEIGHBOR."

The Orthodox Jewish Bible 2011 - "The tzaddik (righteous) PREVAILETH ADVANTAGEOUSLY OVER his neighbor, but the derech resha’im leads them astray."

Note: Actually, this last one is pretty close to the meaning found in the King James Bible. Also, note the use of "that old, archaic English" in this very recent translation done in 2011 that uses the word "prevaileth". By the way, here is Proverbs 30:6 in this 2011 translation - "Add THOU not unto His devarim, lest He rebuke THEE, and THOU be found a kazav (liar)." (CAPS are mine)

You can see for yourself this Orthodox Jewish Bible (OJB) Copyright © 2002, 2003, 2008, 2010, 2011 by Artists for Israel International at Gateway here -


http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=

 

Agreeing with the King James Bible reading are the Great Bible 1540 - "The righteous excelleth his neygboure",  Bishops' bible 1568-"The ryghteous excelleth his neyghbour", the Geneva Bible 1599 "The righteous is more excellent then his neighbour.", Webster's translation 1833, 1936 Hebrew Publishing Company translation, - "The righteous is more excellent than his neighbor", the New American Bible 1970 - "The just man surpasses his neighbor", the KJV 21st Century 1994 and the Third Millennium Bible 1998 - "The righteous is more excellent than his neighbor"

 

Several foreign language Bible read like the KJB. Among these are the Portuguese Almeida Corregida E Fiel 1681 - "O justo é mais excelente do que o seu próximo, mas o caminho dos ímpios faz error. " = "The just is more excellent than his neighbor", the French Ostervald 1996 - "Le juste l'emporte sur son voisin", Luther's German bible 1545 -  "Der Gerechte hat's besser denn seine Nächster" = "The righteous is more excellent than his neighbor", the Modern Greek Bible - "Ο δικαιος υπερεχει του πλησιον αυτου·"

 

John Gill comments on the meaning of the verse - "The righteous is more excellent than his neighbour… Not than his neighbour who is righteous also; ... but the righteous is more excellent than his neighbour, who is ungodly and unrighteous, or however who has no other righteousness than his own; though his neighbour may be of more noble birth, and have even the title of "his excellency" given him; though he may have a larger share of wealth and riches; and though he may have attained a greater degree of natural wisdom and understanding, be a man of brighter parts, and of a larger capacity; yet, being righteous, he is more excellent than he: his superior excellency lies in his righteousness, from whence he is denominated; the righteousness of Christ, imputed to him, is far better than the best righteousness of his neighbour; it being the righteousness of God, his is the righteousness of a creature."

Adam Clarke also agrees with this sense of the Hebrew and the KJB reading, as does Matthew Henry who comments: "There is a true excellency in religion; it ennobles men, inspires them with generous principles, makes them substantial; it is an excellency which is, in the sight of God, of great price, who is the true Judge of excellency. His neighbour may make a greater figure in the world, may be more applauded, but the righteous man has the intrinsic worth. "

 

Proverbs 13:7 "There is that MAKETH HIMSELF RICH, yet hath nothing: there is that MAKETH HIMSELF POOR, yet hath great riches."

So read the Bishops' Bible, the Geneva Bible, the Revised Version 1881, the American Standard Version 1901, Young's, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, KJV 21, the Koster Scriptures 1998, and the NKJV.

The Spanish Reina Valera also reads this way - "Hay quienes se hacen ricos, y no tienen nada: Y hay quienes se hacen pobres, y tienen muchas riquezas."

This Proverb is a perfect tie in to Proverbs 11:24 which says: "There is that scattereth, and yet increaseth; and there is that withholdeth more than is meet, but it tendeth to poverty."

The idea in the New Testament is found in the example of Christ who "though he was rich, yet for your sakes he became poor, they ye through his poverty might be rich." 2 Cor. 8:9.

As Adam Clarke expresses it - "There is that maketh himself poor, yet hath great riches. "As poor," said St. Paul, "yet making many rich; as having nothing, yet possessing all things." The former is the rich poor man; the latter is the poor rich man."

However versions like the NASB, RSV, ESV, Holman and NIV read: "One man PRETENDS TO BE rich, yet has nothing; another PRETENDS TO BE poor, yet has great wealth." Regardless of how one might think the Hebrew text should be translated, you have to admit there is a big difference in the meaning here.

Proverbs 13:13 - KJB - "Whoso despiseth THE WORD SHALL BE DESTROYED: but he that feareth the commandment shall be rewarded."

So read the Geneva Bible, Bishops' bible, RV, ASV, Youngs, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, the NKJV, RSV, NRSV, the Koster Scriptures 1998, and the 2001 ESV - "Whoever despises THE WORD BRINGS DESTRUCTION ON HIMSELF, but he who reveres the commandment will be rewarded."

However in the NASB we read: - "The one who despises the word WILL BE IN DEBT TO IT, But the one who fears the commandment will be rewarded."

NIV - "He who scorns INSTRUCTION WILL PAY FOR IT, but he who respects a command is rewarded."  

Proverbs 13:23 KJB - "Much food is in THE TILLAGE of the poor: but there is that is destroyed for want of judgment."

The word "tillage" is not at all archaic and it means plowed land that is cultivated for the growing of crops. It is land that produces food.

So read translations like the Revised Version 1881, American Standard Version 1901, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, the 1917 and 1936 Jewish translations, Douay, Darby, Young, and the KJV 21st Century.

John Gill comments: Much food is in the tillage of the poor…?The poor are generally employed in tilling land; from whose labours in ploughing and sowing much food arises to men, bread to the eater, and seed to the sower: or a poor farmer, that has but a small farm, a few acres of land, to till; yet through his diligence and industry, with the blessing of God upon it, he gets a comfortable livelihood for himself and family; much food, or a sufficiency of it for the present year, and seed to sow land again the following year; but there is that is destroyed for want of judgment."

The Judaica Press Tanach has: "An abundance of food is the result of the plowing of the poor, and some perish because of lack of propriety."

Even the NIV, NRSV are OK here in the first part with: "A poor man's field may produce abundant food, but injustice sweeps it away." The Holman is OK too, reading: "The field of the poor yields abundant food".

The Message is unrecognizable with: "Banks foreclose on the farms of the poor, or else the poor lose their shirts to crooked lawyers."

However the NKJV, along with the NASB, ESV reads: "Much food is in THE FALLOW GROUND of the poor, And for lack of justice there is waste."

You might ask, What is wrong with this? Well, "fallow ground" is a field that has been plowed and then LEFT UNSEEDED. NOTHING is planted and, of course, nothing in the way of food grows there. It is the opposite of "tillage", in which we DO have food.

The TNIV has now changed even the meaning in the previous NIV and now reads: "An UNPLOWED FIELD produces food for the poor, but injustice sweeps it away."

Hebrew words have different meanings in different contexts, and it is obvious that not all "scholars" see this verse in the same way. In any case, it should be obvious that the NKJV does not carry the same meaning as found in the KJB and many others.

Proverbs 14:3 KJB - "In the mouth of the foolish IS A ROD OF PRIDE; but the lips of the wise shall preserve them."

Proverbs 14:3 NIV 1984 - “A fool’s TALK BRINGS A ROD TO HIS BACK”

Proverbs 14:3 NIV 2011 - “A fool’s MOUTH LASHES OUT WITH PRIDE”

What is going on here? Let's look at this verse a little closer. "In the mouth of the foolish IS A ROD OF PRIDE." The KJB is a literal, word for word translation of the Hebrew text. 

It is also the same reading found in the Great Bible 1540, the Bishops' Bible 1568 - "In the mouth of the foolishe is the rodde of pryde", the Geneva Bible - "In the mouth of the foolish is the ROD OF PRIDE: but the lippes of the wise preserue them.", the 1610 Douay-Rheims version, the Revised Version 1881, the ASV 1901, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, the JPS (Jewish Publication Society) 1917, the 1936 Hebrew Publishing Company translation, Darby, Youngs, the Douay 1950, the NKJV 1982, the Koster Scriptures 1998,  and the 2011 Orthodox Jewish Bible.

However the liberal RSV then followed by the NRSV, ESV, NASB, NET AND the modern Catholic St. Joseph New American bible of 1970 say: "By the mouth of a fool COMES a rod FOR HIS BACK."

Then the RSV footnotes that the literal Hebrew is "a rod of pride" but that they have "emended" (changed) the text.  There is no verb here like the NIV's 2011 "lashes out" or "comes" and there certainly are no words in the text for "TO HIS BACK", and the NIV 2011 has omitted the Hebrew word "ROD", which at least WAS in the 1984 edition.  The word is only found 2 times in the entire Hebrew text and the other one is in Isaiah 11:1 "And there shall come forth A ROD out of the stem of Jesse..."

Dan Wallace's NET version says: "In the speech [7] of a fool is a rod FOR HIS BACK, [8] but the words [9] of the wise protect them."

Then he footnotes that the literal Hebrew is "mouth" not "speech", and "lips" not "words" (just as the KJB has them) and that the literal Hebrew reads "rod of pride" (just as the KJB has it) but that he has "emended" (edited and changed) the text because he thinks the literal Hebrew, as found in the KJB, "creates an awkward sense"!  This is how the Bible critic's mind works, folks. 

Many Bible commentators have mentioned that the sense seems to be that the fool has a rod of pride in his mouth with which he beats, mauls and pounds on others around him to break them down, and that seems to make perfect sense. 

The Holman Standard adds a bunch of words saying: "The proud speech of a fool [brings] a rod [of discipline]."

These are the perversions that are being passed off as today's "bibles" and few seem to really care anymore.

 

Proverbs 14:9 "FOOLS MAKE A MOCK AT SIN; but among the righteous there is favor." 

The word translated as "sin" is #817 ah-shahm and it can have several meanings including "sin" (Jer. 51:5 - their land is filled with sin) "guiltiness" (Gen.26:10 - have brought guiltiness upon us) "trespass" (Ps. 68:21 - goeth on still in his trespasses), and a trespass offering (Lev. 5:6). It comes from the verb #816 meaning "to trespass, to offend, to be guilty, to be found faulty".

Bible translations that agree with the King James Bible "FOOLS MAKE A MOCK AT SIN" are Wycliffe 1395 - "A fool scorneth synne", Coverdale 1535, the Bishops' Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1587 - "The foole maketh a mocke of sinne", Douay-Rheims 1610 - "A fool will laugh at sin", Webster's translation 1833, Revised Version 1881 - "The foolish make a mock at guilt", Darby, (Rotherham's Emphasized bible 1902 - "the foolish scoff at guilt"), The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, Douay 1950 - "Fools will laugh at sin", New Life Bible 1969 - "Fools laugh at sin", NKJV 1982, NASB 1972-1995 - "Fools mock at sin", New Century Version 1991 - "Fools don't care if they sin", the Third Millennium Bible 1998, Expanded Bible 2011 and the 2009 Catholic Public Domain Version - "The foolish will speak mockingly of sin." 

Among foreign language Bible that agree with the King James Bible "Fools make a mock at sin" are the 1997 Spanish La Biblia de las Américas and the Reina Valera 1909, 1960, 1995, and Reina Valera Gómez 2010 - "Los necios se mofan del pecado" = "The fools mock at sin", the Spanish La Nueva Biblia de los Hispanos 2005 - "Los necios se ríen del pecado",  the French Martin 1744 and Louis Segond 1910 - "Les insensés se font un jeu du péché", and French Ostervald - "Les insensés se raillent du péché", and the Louis Segond 2007-"Les fous se moquent du péché" = "The fools mock at sin",  Luther's German Bible 1545 -"Die Narren treiben das Gespött mit der Sünde" = "Fools make a mock at sin", the Italian Diodati 1649 - "Gli stolti si fanno beffe del commetter misfatto" = "The fools mock at committing crimes", and the 2006 Italian Nuova Riveduta - "Gli insensati si burlano del peccato" = "The fools make a mock at sin", the Portuguese A Biblia em Portugués and Portuguese Almeida Corrigida E Fiel - "Os loucos zombam do pecado" = "The fools make a mock of sin.",  and the Modern Greek Bible - "Οι αφρονες γελωσιν εις την ανομιαν" = "The fools laugh at sin."

Clarke's Commentary on the Bible - "Fools make a mock at sin - And only fools would do so. But he that makes a sport of sinning, will find it no sport to suffer the vengeance of an eternal fire. Some learned men by their criticisms have brought this verse into embarrassments, out of which they were not able to extricate it. I believe we shall not come much nearer the sense than our present version does."

However the NIV and several others have a very different meaning. 

The NIV says: "FOOLS MOCK AT MAKING AMENDS FOR SIN, but goodwill is found among the upright."

However the NIV Spanish edition, called La Nueva Versión Internacional of 1999, says: "Los necios hacen mofa de sus propias faltas" = "The fools make a mock OF THEIR OWN FAULTS."

The Holman Standard is very similar to the English NIV version with: "Fools mock at MAKING RESTITUTION." 

The ESV 2001 has: "Fools mock at THE GUILT OFFERING."

"Dan Wallace and company's NET version - "Fools mock AT REPARATION but among the upright there is favor." Yet Wallace translates the same word as "guilt" in Genesis 26:10 and in Jeremiah 51:5 and as "rebellion" in Ps.68:21.

Some of the weirder translations: 

The RSV 1952 - "GOD SCORNS THE WICKED, but the upright enjoy his favor." Then it footnotes: "Hebrew is obscure".

Bible in Basic English 1961 which says: "IN THE TENTS OF THOSE HATING AUTHORITY THERE IS ERROR, but in the house of the upright man there is grace."

Catholic St. Joseph New American bible 1970 - "GUILT LODGES IN THE TENTS OF THE ARROGANT, but favor in the house of the just."

Catholic Jerusalem bible 1968 - "GOD MOCKS THE WICKED, he shows favor to honest men."

Catholic New Jerusalem 1985 - "Fools mock at the sacrifice for sin"

God's Word Translation 1995 - "STUBBORN FOOLS MAKE FUN OF GUILT, but there is forgiveness among decent people."

The Judaica Press Tanach - "AMENDS FOR GUILT PLEAD FOR THE FOOLS" (Huh?!)

International Standard Version 2012 - "Fools MAKE FUN OF GUILT, but among the upright there are good intentions."

The ASV 1901, the Updated Bible version 2004 and Complete Jewish bible -"A TRESPASS-OFFERING MOCKS FOOLS;  But among the upright there is good will." (Say what?)

Lamsa's translation of the Syriac AND the so called Greek Septuagint - "TRULY THE HOUSEHOLDS OF THE WICKED NEED PURIFYING; but the households of the righteous are acceptable."

The Message 2002 - "THE STUPID RIDICULE RIGHT AND WRONG"

Amplified bible - "Fools make a mock of sin and sin mocks the fools"

The New Berkeley Version in Modern English 1969 - "THE BOND BETWEEN FOOLISH MEN IS GUILT, but between the upright it is good-will." 

Aramaic Bible in Plain English 2010 - "THE HOUSEHOLDS OF THE EVIL ARE RIGHTLY BEGGING FOR CLEANSING, and the households of the righteous are acceptable." (Huh?!)

It looks like James White is right on the money when he says we can get a better understanding of a passage by comparing other versions, don't ya think?

Proverbs 14:32 "The wicked is driven away in his wickedness: but the righteous hath HOPE IN HIS DEATH."

Implied in this verse is the hope the righteous have in the resurrection from the dead. This is also the reading of the Geneva Bible, the Revised Version, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, the Jewish translations of 1917, 1936, the Spanish Reina Valera and the Douay version.

The NKJV, RSV, NASB, and NIV change it a bit with: "but the righteous has A REFUGE in his death", BUT the RSV and the NRSV say: "but the righteous FINDS REFUGE IN HIS INTEGRITY." Then in a footnote, they tell us that the reading of "in his integrity" comes from the Greek and Syriac, but that the Hebrew texts read "in his death".

Proverbs 14:33 "Wisdom resteth in the heart of him that hath understanding: but THAT WHICH IS IN THE MIDST OF FOOLS IS MADE KNOWN."

This is the reading of the KJB, NKJV, RV, ASV, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, New Life Bible, the Amplified Bible, and Darby. If wisdom is in the heart of him that understands, then the contrasting idea is that foolishness is made known from fools.

Jamieson, Faussett and Brown simply comment: "fools blazon their folly", while John Gill notes: "but that which is in the midst of fools is made known ..."instead of getting the character of wise and prudent men, obtain that of fools; ...without any manner of judgment or discretion, or regard to persons, places, and seasons, vainly thrust out their knowledge, and so proclaim their folly."

However many modern versions give conflicting and opposite meanings to this verse. The RSV and the NRSV say: "Wisdom abides in the mind of a man of understanding, but IT IS NOT KNOWN in the heart of fools."

Even the badly paraphrased The Message of 2002 says: "Lady Wisdom is at home in an understanding heart-- fools never even get to say hello."

But wait! The NASB, NIV, ESV and Holman read: "Wisdom rests in the heart of one who has understanding, But in the hearts of fools IT IS MADE KNOWN."

This reading teaches that wisdom IS made known to the foolish - The exact opposite! Notice that the NASB completely changed from the old ASV, and the ESV changed from the previous RSV.

Proverbs 17:7 "EXCELLENT SPEECH becometh not a fool: much less do lying lips a prince."

The meaning is obvious. It is completely out of place and incongruous that a fool would use "excellent speech", as it would be for a prince to lie. "Excellent speech" or its equivalent is the reading of the KJB, NKJV, RV, ASV, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, NASB, ESV, RSV, Darby, the Koster Scriptures 1998,  and the Spanish Reina Valera.

However the NIV says: "ARROGANT LIPS are unsuited to a fool - how much worse lying lips to a ruler! " Is it not rather true that "Arrogant lips" is exactly what we would expect from a fool?

The Holman Standard tells us: "EXCESSIVE SPEECH is not appropriate on a fool's lips; how much worse are lies for a ruler." Again, "excessive speech" is exactly what we expect from a fool, but not "excellent speech" as the KJB and many others have it.

 

Proverbs 17:8 KJB - “A GIFT is as a PRECIOUS STONE in the eyes of HIM THAT HATH IT: whithersoever it turneth, it prosperity.”

 

ESV (RSV, NRSV, Holman Standard) - “A BRIBE is like a MAGIC STONE in the eyes of THE ONE WHO GIVES IT; wherever he turns he prospers.”

 



The most obvious difference in meaning is between the KJB’s “A PRECIOUS STONE” and the ESV’s “A MAGIC STONE”.


The Hebrew word for “stone” is stone, so that is not the problem.  The problem is the difference between “a precious stone” and “a magic stone”. 


The word translated as “PRECIOUS” in the KJB and MANY others is #2580 ghehn, and it usually means “grace” as in Noah found grace in the eyes of the Lord. 


It is also translated as “FAVOUR” - “Favour is deceitful, and beauty is vain; but a woman that feareth the LORD, she shall be praised.” (Proverbs 31:30)


and as “PLEASANT” - in describing the wife of one’s youth as “the loving hind and PLEASANT roe” (Proverbs 5:19).  The word is also translated as “wellfavoured” in Nahum 3:4.


BUT it has NOTHING AT ALL to do with “magic”. 


The Catholic Connection


Can you guess who else translates this verse as “A MAGIC STONE”?  You got it.  


The Roman Catholic St. Joseph New American bible 1970 says; “A man who has a BRIBE to offer rates it A MAGIC STONE, at every turn it brings him success.”  


The Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition 1966 - “A BRIBE IS LIKE A MAGIC STONE  in the eyes of him who gives it; wherever he turns he prospers.”


And the Catholic New Jerusalem bible 1985 has: “A gift works like A TALISMAN for one who holds it”


NASB (NIV) - “A bribe is A CHARM in the sight of its owner”  


NET - “A bribe works LIKE A CHARM for the one who offers it”


“A PRECIOUS STONE”


Agreeing with the King James Bible are Wycliffe 1395, Coverdale 1535, The Great Bible 1540, Matthew’s Bible 1549, the Bishops’ Bible 1568, Webster’s bible 1833, The Lesser O.T. 1835, The Revised English Bible 1877, the English Revised Version 1885 - “A GIFT IS AS A PRECIOUS STONE in the eyes of him that hath it: whithersoever it turneth, it prospereth”,  the ASV 1901,  The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907- “A GIFT IS AS A PRECIOUS STONE”, JPS (Jewish Publication Society) 1917 - “A GIFT IS AS A PRECIOUS STONE”,  Lamsa’s 1933 translation of the Syriac Peshitta “a precious stone”, NKJV 1982 - “a PRESENT IS A PRECIOUS STONE”, God’s First Truth 1999, World English Bible 2000, The Complete Tanach 2004, the New Heart English Bible 2010, The Hebrew Transliteration Bible 2010, The New European Version 2010, Bond Slave Version 2012, The Biblos Bible 2013 - “A GIFT IS AS A PRECIOUS STONE”, The Hebrew Names Version 2014 and The Modern English Version 2014.


The Jewish Virtual Library - The Tanakh Full Text - “A GIFT is as A PRECIOUS STONE in the eyes of him that hath it”


http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/mishlei-proverbs-chapter-17


And this online Hebrew Interlinear Old Testament - “a precious stone”


http://studybible.info/IHOT/Proverbs%2017:8


Other Versions -


Bible in Basic English 1961 - “a stone of great price”


New Life Version 1969 - “a stone of much worth”


The Message 2002 -“gift is like getting a rare gemstone”


Names of God Bible 2011 = “a jewel”  


Work of God’s Children Bible 2011 - “a most acceptable jewel”


The King James Bible is always right, and these new Vatican Versions like the ESV, NIV, NASB, NET, Holman, etc. are getting worse, not better.


.

Proverbs 18:1 King James Bible - "Through desire a man, having separated himself, seeketh and intermeddleth with all wisdom."

If a man has a desire to know true wisdom, then he separates himself from the foolish and carnal, "natural man" wisdom of this world (even the "church" world) and seeks the wisdom of God.

In order to do this, he has to "intermeddle" with all wisdom. By this term, I think it means he has to examine and think about and sift his way through the different views and opinions of others, and try to come to the right conclusion.

 

Some Bible critics object to the word “intermeddle”.  They tell us the word means “to meddle impertinently and officiously and usually so as to interfere”, and thus they think the KJB cannot be right.  

However, the word "intermeddle" can be a good thing or a bad thing. It depends on whether you are the one who is being intermeddled with or not.

It means "to interfere in the affairs of others, to meddle." It can have the connotation of in an annoying or officious way, but not necessarily.

In any event, I am sure those espousing their false wisdom, the trite sayings, and the unfounded claims that they pass off as their “wisdom” do not appreciate being examined or challenged by the person who seeks the true wisdom that comes from God alone.

Webster's 1913 dictionary defines the transitive form of the verb “to intermeddle” (and this is transitive - it has a direct object, which is "wisdom") as "v. t. 1. To intermix; to mingle."

 

 

The man described in the KJB has devoted himself to find out all wisdom. Reading exactly or similar to the King James Bible are the following Bible translations:

(Great Bible 1540), the Bishops’ Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible, Webster's bible 1833, Young’s 1898, The Word of Yah Bible 1993, the 21st Century KJV 1994, The Third Millennium Bible 1998, The Revised Geneva Bible 2005 - “For the desire thereof he will separate himself to seek it, and occupy himself in all wisdom.” and The Bond Slave Version 2012 - “Through desire a man, having separated himself, seeks and meddles with all wisdom.”

  

Bible Babble Buffet Versions - (many are radically different from the others)

NKJV 1982-  "A man who isolates himself seeks his own desire; He rages against all wise judgment."   

Greek Septuagint - “A man who wishes to separate from friends seeks excuses; but at all times he will be liable to reproach.”

Coverdale 1535 - “Who so hath pleasure to sowe discorde, piketh a quarell in euery thinge.”

Catholic Douay-Rheims bible - “He that hath a mind to depart from a friend, seeketh occasions: he shall ever be subject to reproach.” 

Rotherham’s Emphasized bible 1902 - “A man seeketh, for satisfaction, going his own way, through all safe counsel, he breaketh.”  (Huh??!!)  

Lamsa’s 1933 translation of the Syriac Peshitta - “When a man is inactive he imagines lust and mocks at good instruction.”

Common English Bible 2011 - “Unfriendly people look out for themselves; they bicker with sensible people.”

Judaica Press Tanach - “He who is separated seeks lust; in all sound wisdom, he is exposed.”

The Work of God’s Children Bible 2011 - “He that hath a mind to depart from a friend, seeketh occasions: he shall ever be subject to reproach.”

Lexham English bible 2012 - “He who is selfish seeks a craving; against all sound judgment he shows contempt.

World English Bible 2000 - “An unfriendly man pursues selfishness, and defies all sound judgment.”

Adam Clarke comments: “Through desire a man, having separated himself - The original is difficult and obscure.” Then he basically sides with the KJB translation, saying: “The nearest translation to the words is perhaps the following: "He who is separated shall seek the desired thing, (i.e., the object of his desire), and shall intermeddle (mingle himself) with all realities or all essential knowledge." He finds that he can make little progress in the investigation of Divine and natural things, if he have much to do with secular or trifliing matters: he therefore separates himself as well from unprofitable pursuits as from frivolous company, and then enters into the spirit of his pursuit; is not satisfied with superficial observances, but examines the substance and essence, as far as possible, of those things which have been the objects of his desire. This appears to me the best meaning”

Matthew Henry comments on the different ways people have understood Proverbs 18:1 and finishes saying: “Our translation seems to take it as an excitement to diligence in the pursuit of wisdom. If we would get knowledge or grace, we must desire it, as that which we need and which will be of great advantage to us, 1 Co. 12:31. We must separate ourselves from all those things which would divert us from or retard us in the pursuit, retire out of the noise of this world's vanities, and then seek and intermeddle with all the means and instructions of wisdom, be willing to take pains and try all the methods of improving ourselves, be acquainted with a variety of opinions, that we may prove all things and hold fast that which is good.”

Matthew Poole’s English Annotations sides with the KJB reading.  He comments: “Through desire (of it, to wit of wisdom)  a man, having separated himself, ( being sequestered from the company, and noise, and business of the world, betaking himself to retirement and solitude, as men do that apply themselves to any serious study.)  seeketh and  intermeddleth with all wisdom, i.e. useth all diligence, that he may search and find out all solid knowledge and true wisdom. And this earnest desire and endeavour to get true wisdom within a man’s self is fitly opposed to the fool’s contempt of wisdom, or to his desire of it, not for use and benefit, but only for vain ostentation, which is expressed in the next verse”

John Wesley’s Explanatory Notes - “Desire - Thro' desire of wisdom, a man having separated himself from the company, and noise, and business of the world, seeketh and intermeddleth with all wisdom, uses all diligence, that he may search and find out all solid knowledge and true wisdom.”


Proverbs 18:8

 

KJB -  The words of a talebearer are as WOUNDS

NKJV - The words of a talebearer are like TASTY TRIFLES

NIV  - The words of a gossip are like CHOICE MORSELS

NASB - The words of a whisperer are like DAINTY MORSELS

ESV - The words of a whisperer are DELICIOUS MORSELS

Catholic St. Joseph NAB - The words of a talebearer are like DAINTY MORSELS



 

Both this Proverb and Proverbs 26:22 are the same. The KJB says: "The words of a talebearer are as WOUNDS, and they go down into the innermost parts of the belly."  The word translated as "wounds" is only found twice in the entire Hebrew Old Testament.

 

The NKJV differs considerably from the KJB and sides with the modern versions, but footnotes "A Jewish tradition reads "wounds".

 

As we shall soon see, it is far more than just "a Jewish tradition" but a legitimate translation of the Hebrew word.

 

Strong's concordance tells us the word comes from the idea of to burn or rankle, and "to rankle" means "to fester; to become inflamed, or to cause continual mental pain.", and that is how we get the idea of "wounds"

 

The Bible commentaries as well as the various translations in many languages are all over the board. 


Perhaps the Commentary on the Old Testament by Keil and Delitzsch best gives some idea of how varied the translations are.  


They comment on Proverbs 18:8 (Caps are mine) - “Ewald, Bertheau, Hitzig, and others, are constrained to interpret המו as introducing a contrast, and in this sense they give to מתלהמים all kinds of unwarrantable meanings. Ewald translates: A BURNING and offers next: as WHISPERING; Ch. B. Michaelis, Bertheau, and others: as SPORTINIG; Hitzig: LIKE SOFT AIRS. All these interpretations are without support…But Böttcher's explanation also: “as SWALLOWED DOWN, because spoken with reserve,” …THE RELATION OF THE PARTS OF THE PROVERB IS RIGHTLY GIVEN BY LUTHER: “The words of the slanderer ARE STRIPS, And they go through the heart of one.”

 

And we see that Luther's translation is very similar to that found in the King James Bible.

 


Matthew Henry - “As wounds (so the text reads it), as deep wounds, deadly wounds, wounds in the innermost parts of the belly; the venter medius vel infimus—the middle or lower belly, the thorax or the abdomen, in either of which wounds are mortal. The words of the tale-bearer wound him of whom they are spoken, his credit and interest, and him to whom they are spoken, his love and charity. They occasion sin to him, which is a wound to the conscience.



John Trapp Complete Commentary - “Ver. 8. The words of a talebearer are as wounds. He that takes away a man’s good name kills him alive, and ruins him and his posterity; being herein worse than Cain, for he, in killing his brother, made him live for ever, and eternalised his name. Some read, "Are as the words of the wounded": they seem to speak out of wounded, troubled hearts, and then their words go down into the belly - they go glib down, pass without the least questioning.”


 

John Gill comments on the passage: "they are wounds; they wound the credit and reputation of the person of whom the tale is told; they wound the person to whom it is told, and destroy his love and affection to his friend; and in the issue they wound, hurt, and ruin the talebearer himself."

 

Benson’s Commentary - “The words of a tale-bearer — Who privily slanders his neighbour; are as wounds — Deeply wound the reputation, and afterward the heart, of the slandered person.”

 

"The words of a talebearer ARE AS WOUNDS, and they go down into the innermost parts of the belly."  Proverbs 18:8 King James Bible 

 

There are many translations both in English and other languages that agree with the King James Bible here.  The 1936 Hebrew Publishing Company version says "the words of the talebearer are as STROKES". The 2004 Judiaca Press Complete Jewish Tanach translates Proverbs 18:8 as: "The words of a grumbler are LIKE BLOWS, and they descend into the inmost parts.

 

Translations that read "as WOUNDS" are the Coverdale Bible of 1535, the Great Bible 1540 - "The wordes of a sclaunderer ARE VERY WOUNDS, and go thorowe vnto the ynmost partes of the body.", Matthew's Bible 1549,  the Bishops' Bible of 1568 - "The wordes of a slanderer ARE VERY WOUNDS, and go through vnto the innermost partes of the body.", the Lesser Old Testament 1853, "as wounds", Young's literal 1898 - “The words of a tale-bearer are as self-inflicted WOUNDS, And they have gone down to the inner parts of the heart.", Webster's translation of 1833, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907 - "The words of a talebearer as AS WOUNDS", The Word of Yah 1993, the KJV 21st Century Version of 1994, The Revised Webster Bible 1995, Green's Modern KJV 1998 edition - "The words of a talebearer are AS WOUNDS, and they go down into the innermost parts of the belly.", the Third Millennium Bible of 1998, God's First Truth 1999, the Bond Slave Version 2009, The Hebraic Transliteration Scripture 2010, The Biblos Bible 2013 - "The words of a talebearer ARE AS WOUNDS, and they go down into the innermost parts of the body." and The Modern English Version 2014 - "are AS WOUNDS"

 

The New Jewish Version 1985 - "The words of a querulous man ARE BRUISING; they penetrate one's inmost parts."

 

The Hebraic Roots Bible 2012 - "The words of the slanderer ARE AS WOUNDS, yea, they go down into the innermost chambers of the belly."

 

And this online Interlinear Hebrew Old Testament - "The words of a talebearer as WOUNDS" 

http://studybible.info/IHOT/Proverbs%2018:8

 

The Geneva Bible 1587 is sort of the odd man out. It had a very different meaning.  It read: “The wordes of a tale bearer are AS FLATTERINGS, and they goe downe into the bowels of the belly.”

 

Other weird Versions

 

The Longman Version 1841, The Boothroyd Bible 1853 - "The words of a talebearer ARE GREEDILY SWALLOWED, and they go down to the innermost parts of the belly."

 

The Holy Scriptures VW Edition 2010 - "The words of a talebearer ARE GULPED DOWN, they go down into the innermost parts of the belly."

 

The Jubilee Bible 2010 - "The words of a talebearer SEEM SMOOTH, but they go down into the innermost parts of the belly."

 

The Work of God's Children Illustrated Bible 2011 - "The words of the double tongued are AS IF THEY WERE HARMLESS, and they reach even to the inner parts of the bowels."

 

Easy English Bible 2010 - "LIES ABOUT OTHER PEOPLE HAVE MUCH INTEREST AND OFTEN WE BELIEVE THEM."

 

(This is actually how it reads! Yeah, it's "easy to read in modern English" but the meaning is out there all by itself)

 

The so called Greek LXX version has a completely different meaning in Proverbs 18:8 and reads: "FEAR CASTS DOWN THE SLOTHFUL; AND THE SOULS OF THE EFFEMINATE SHALL HUNGER." (Yeah, that's pretty close, huh?) and in Proverbs 26 the LXX is missing all of chapters 25, 26, 27, 28, and only has one verse of chapter 29.

 

Foreign Language Bibles = KJB

 

Among foreign language translations that read like the KJB's "words of a talebearer are as WOUNDS" are Luthers' German Bible of 1545 - "Die Worte des Verleumders sind Schläge und gehen einem durchs Herz." = "The words of a talebearer are as WOUNDS, and go through a heart" and the Spanish Reina Valera Gómez of 2010 has - "Las palabras del chismoso son como estocadas" = "are like stabs". 


The 2014 Romainian Fidela Bible - “Vorbele unui bârfitor sunt ca rănile şi coboară în părţile cele mai adânci ale pântecelui.” = “The words of a gossip ARE LIKE WOUNDS and down of the very  deep in the belly.”, The Russian Synodal Bible  - “ как лакомства, и они входят во внутренность чрева.” = “as WOUNDS, and they go down into the inside of the  womb.”,  the Afrikaans Bible 1953 - “Die woorde van die kwaadstoker is soos lekkernye” = “the words of a talebearer ARE AS WOUNDS”, Finnish Bible 1776 - “Panetteian sanat ovat haavat, ja käyvät läpi sydämen.” = “words AS WOUNDS, and go through to the heart.”

 

The Catholic Connection

 

The Catholic versions are in their usual disarray. The older Douay-Rheims of 1610 read: "The words of the double tongued are AS IF THEY WERE HARMLESS: and they reach even to the inner parts of the bowels."

 

But then the more modern ones like the St. Joseph NAB and the New Jerusalem read like the NKJV, NIV with "DAINTY MORSELS",

 

and then the 2009 Catholic Public Domain Version has gone with - "The words of the double-tongued SEEM SIMPLE.

 

 

The Syriac translation of Lamsa says: "The words of a slothful man BRING EVIL TO HIM, and they cause him to go down into the inner chambers of Sheol." (Pro. 18:8) while in Proverbs 26:22 it says: "The words of the malicious STIR UP TROUBLE; they go down into the innermost parts of the heart." - And that is supposedly quoting the same Proverb!

 

"The words of a talebearer ARE AS WOUNDS, and they go down into the innermost parts of the belly."  Proverbs 18:8 King James Bible 

 

 

As shown from this little study, there are many translations both in English and other languages that agree with the meaning found in the King James Bible here. 

 

18:24 "A man that hath friends MUST SHEW HIMSELF FRIENDLY: and there is a friend that sticketh closer than a brother."

Agreeing with the King James Bible word for word or in sense are Coverdale 1535, Bishops' Bible 1568 - "A man that wyll haue frendes, must shewe hym selfe frendly", the Geneva Bible 1599, - "A man that hath friends, ought to shew him selfe friendly", Barker's Bible 1615, Webster's 1833 translation, The Longman Version 1841, The Boothroyd Bible 1853, The Smith Bible 1876, Young's literal 1898 - "A man with friends is to show himself friendly", The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, the New Life Version 1969, the NKJV 1982, KJV 21st Century 1994, the Third Millennium Bible 1998.

 

Other English Bibles that read like the KJB are The Word of Yah 1993, The Modern Young's Literal Translation 2005, The Revised Geneva Bible 2005, Bond Slave Version 2009, English Jubilee Bible 2010, Hebraic Transliteration Scripture 2010, Biblos Interlinear Bible 2011 - "A man who has friends MUST SHOW HIMSELF FRIENDLY, and there is a friend that sticks closer than a brother.", and The Holy Bible Modern English Version 2014 -"A man WHO HAS FRIENDS MUST SHOW HIMSELF FRIENDLY, and there is a friend who sticks closer than a brother."

 

The Apostolic Polyglot Bible 2003 - "A MAN HAVING FRIENDS IS FOR FRIENDSHIP; and there is a friend cleaving to over a brother."

Foreign language Bibles that agree with the sense found in the KJB are the French Martin 1744 - "Que l'homme qui a des intimes amis, se tienne à leur amitié", the Italian Diodati 1649 -"Un uomo che ha degli amici deve portarsi da amico", and La Nuova Diodati 1991, the Spanish Las Sagradas Escrituras 1569, the Spanish Reina Valera 1909, 1960, 1995, the 2010 Reina Valera Gómez Bible, the Portuguese Almeida Corrigida E Fiel 1861 - "O homem de muitos amigos deve mostrar-se amigável, mas há um amigo mais chegado do que um irmäo." = "The man who has many friends should show himself friendly"

The 2014 Romanian Fideli Bible - "Un om care are prieteni trebuie sa se arate el insusi prietenos", the Finnish Bible 1776 - "Ihminen, jolla on ystävä, pitää oleman ystävällinen", the Dutch Staten Vertaling - "Een man, die vrienden heeft, heeft zich vriendelijk te houden.", the Russian Synodal Bible 1876 - "Кто хочет иметь друзей, тот и сам должен быть дружелюбным; и бываетдруг, более привязанный, нежели брат." = "Who wants to have friends, he himself should be friendly."

and the Modern Greek Bible -"Ο ανθρωπος ο εχων φιλους πρεπει να φερηται φιλικως· και υπαρχει φιλος στενωτερος αδελφου." = "A MAN WHO HAS FRIENDS OUGHT INDEED TO SHOW HIMSELF FRIENDLY"

 

The Spanish reads: "El hombre que tiene amigos ha de mostrarse amigo; Y amigo hay más unido que un hermano."  =  "The man who has friends must show himself friendly."

Likewise the 1991 New Italian Diodati reads like the KJB with: "L'uomo che ha molti amici deve pure mostrarsi amico" = "The man who has many friends must show himself friendly." 

 

Bible Commentators, like the bible versions themselves, are all over the board and in every opinion imaginable on what this Proverb means.  But here are three well known commentators who agree with the sense found in the KJB and many others.

 

John Gill comments: A man that hath friends must show himself friendly…"Friendship ought to be mutual and reciprocal, as between David and Jonathan; a man that receives friendship ought to return it, or otherwise he is guilty of great ingratitude."

Adam Clarke writes: A man that hath friends must show himself friendly "Love begets love; and love requires love as its recompense. If a man do not maintain a friendly carriage, he cannot expect to retain his friends. Friendship is a good plant; but it requires cultivation to make it grow."

Matthew Henry’s Complete Commentary - “Solomon here recommends friendship to us, and shows, 1. What we must do that we may contract and cultivate friendship; we must show ourselves friendly. Would we have friends and keep them, we must not only not affront them, or quarrel with them, but we must love them, and make it appear that we do so by all expressions that are endearing, by being free with them, pleasing to them, visiting them and bidding them welcome, and especially by doing all the good offices we can and serving them in every thing that lies in our power; that is showing ourselves friendly.”

 

The Bible Babble Buffet Versions in Action.

 

Proverbs 18:24 reads the same in the NKJV as does the KJB but it has a footnote that supports the ridiculous reading found in the previous NIVs, the NASB and Darby. The NIV 1984 edition and NASB say "A man of MANY COMPANIONS MAY COME TO RUIN, but there is a friend who sticks closer than a brother. " 

The NKJV, being in partnership to destroy faith in the words of God, includes a footnote "Or MAY COME TO RUIN". You see, some of the same "scholars" who worked on the NIV also worked on the NKJV.

The NIV 2011 edition doesn't even agree with the previous NIV editions of 1978 and 1984. Let's compare the two different NIVs.

NIV 1978 and 1984 editions: "A MAN OF MANY COMPANIONS MAY COME to ruin, but there is a friend who sticks closer than a brother." 

NIV 2011 edition: "ONE WHO HAS UNRELIABLE FRIENDS SOON COMES to ruin, but there is a friend who sticks closer than a brother."

The Holman Standard 2003 is very similar with: "A MAN WITH MANY FRIENDS MAY BE HARMED."

NASB - "A MAN OF TOO MANY FRIENDS COMES TO RUIN, But there is a friend who sticks closer than a brother."

The Message has: "FRIENDS COME AND GO, but a true friend sticks by you like family."

Ancient Roots Bible 2009  — “A MAN CAN DO EVIL TO THE NEIGHBORS, BUT LOVE EXISTS TO JOIN AS A BROTHER.”  OooooKaaaay... 

The Judaica Press Tanach 2001 - "A MAN ACQUIRES FRIENDS WITH WHOM TO ASSOCIATE, and there is a friend who sticks closer than a brother."

The New Jewish Version 1985 - "THERE ARE COMPANIONS TO KEEP ONE COMPANY, and there is a friend more devoted than a brother."

Douay-Rheims version reads: "A MAN AMIABLE IN SOCIETY, shall be more friendly than a brother."

Jerusalem Bible 1968 - "There are FRIENDS WHO LEAD ONE TO RUIN, others are closer than a brother.

Aramaic Bible in Plain English 2010 - "THERE ARE FRIENDS WHO ARE FRIENDS, and there is a friend that is closer than a brother."

RSV 1952 - "THERE ARE FRIENDS WHO PRETEND TO BE FRIENDS, but there is a friend who sticks closer than a brother."

NRSV 1989 - "SOME FRIENDS PLAY AT FRIENDSHIP but a true friend sticks closer than one's nearest kin."

ESV 2001 - "A MAN OF MANY COMPANIONS MAY COME TO RUIN, but there is a friend who sticks closer than a brother."

Good News Translation 1992 - "SOME FRIENDSHIPS DO NOT LAST, but some friends are more loyal than brothers."

Easy to Read Version 2001 - "SOME FRIENDS ARE FUN TO BE WITH. But a close friend can be even better than a brother."

God's Word Translation 1995 - "FRIENDS CAN DESTROY ONE ANOTHER, but a loving friend can stick closer than family."

Common English Bible 2011 - "THERE ARE PERSONS FOR COMPANIONSHIP, but then there are friends who are more loyal than family."

Amplified Bible 1987 - "The man of many friends [a friend of all the world] WILL PROVE HIMSELF A BAD FRIEND."

Knox Bible 2012 - "A MAN ENDEARED TO THEE BY FELLOWSHIP WILL PROVE A BETTER FRIEND TO THEE THAN THY OWN KIN."

Lamsa's 1936 translation - "THERE ARE FRIENDS WHO ARE MERELY FRIENDS; and there is a friend who sticks closer than a brother."

The so called Greek Septuagint shows its usual confusion by omitting Proverbs 18:23 and 24, and also omitting 19:1, 2 and 3. By the way, instead of Proverbs 18:22 reading: "Whoso findeth a wife findeth a good thing, and obtaineth the favor of the LORD." (KJB and an host of others), the LXX actually says: "He that PUTS AWAY A GOOD WIFE PUTS AWAY A GOOD THING, AND HE THAT KEEPS AN ADULTERESS IS FOOLISH AND UNGODLY." Yeah..., that's pretty close, isn't it?

New English Bible 1970 - "SOME COMPANIONS ARE GOOD ONLY FOR IDLE TALK, but a friend may stick closer than a brother."

As our scholarly friend James White says: "By comparing various Bible versions we get a better idea of what God said."  

 

Additional Help with Proverbs 18:24

 

Notes From the Internet on Proverbs 18:24

 

Brother Peter H. posted the following notes after seeing this study - Proof that Proverbs 18:24 should be translated as in the KJB

 

“A man that hath friends must show himself friendly: …”

 

1. Context (see the second half of the verse) indicates this.

2. It is NOT true that the hithpael [form] of “… roea” (an infinitive – “to be/show friendly”) si from the root word “raa” (though it looks similar)

3. The word in Proverbs 18:24 [in contrast to some supposed cross-references given in lexicons, etc.] is from the root word “rah” or “raiah” (resh, ayin, he; NOT resh ayin ayin) meaning “to treat as a friend” (see Gesenius’ Lexicon p. 775)

4. Wilson’s OT Word Studies (an English based concordance) p. 178 under “friend”, where he lists the root of the word as in fact “rah” – “to be/show friendly” [definition number 8], also confirms [note that word; not “proves”] the correctness of the KJB.

5. The 54 learned men did not make a mistake in translating it as they did.

 The key is to get the right root word. However there’s just no good (nor necessary) reason to go to the word “raa” as the root of the word in Proverbs 18:24. The root word is “rah” which means “to be a companion or friend”. A word which comes from the same root is found in Proverbs 22:24 (“friendship”). Judges 14:20 has a similar situation with regard to the root words. The “Analytical Hebrew and Chaldee Lexicon of the OT” by Davidson and published by MacDonald Publishing Co. will confirm [note that word; not “prove”] this. But again, you must get to the right root word. 



From a friend:

With regards to your question below – the King James Version is unquestionably correct. The reason for the error is the fact that they rely upon lexicons one would purchase at Zondervan's! These lexicons BDB, HALOT, Gesenius – were written by westerners who really do (did) not know the Hebrew language. They use modern speculative methods to try to 'deduce' the meanings of the words. Those lexcions are not exhaustive of all possible meanings of a word, and they are often authored by unsaved people. But they then deliberately set aside the centuries of Jewish tradition by which the actual speakers of the language carried on the meanings, and especially of the biblical meanings, of the words as understood by the original authors of scripture.


Avraham Even Shoshan (the most famous Hebrew lexicographer in Israel):


Translation: to connect with people, to join, to 'hang out', to establish a connection with someone, to create a systematic relationship, to be a friend – and then, finally, 'to be evil'. In other words, the word can be 'to be evil', but for the most part, the word means 'to be friendly'. Note carefully that 'to be broken' is not listed as one of the definitions.


Now: we look at the lexical authorities that our faithful Authorised Version translators would have used: David Kimchi, Moses Kimchi, and Joseph Kimchi.


Moses Kimchi (David's brother)


להתרועע; ...וכן הוא הפירוש: איש יאהב רעים כדי שיתרועעו עמו ויתחברו אליו, כי יש אוהב שהוא דבק באיש בעת צרכו יותר מן האח.


Translation: …and this indeed is the exposition of the world: a man will love friends in order to be friendly with him, and to make friends with him, because there is one who will love who sticks to a man in the time of his need more than a brother.


Joseph Kimchi (David Kimchi's father)

Translation: להתרועע One who is regular with friends, in every season they will seek him.


[Sigh] Do you see how it is with these Bible correctors? Frankly, the modern translations are incompetent. Their translators cannot read rabbinical Hebrew and/or they do not have access to the Kimchis, Rashi, and the other commentators. In contrast, the King James translators, and Launcelot Andrewes in particular, were entirely fluent in rabbinical Hebrew, and they had all the works of the rabbis before them in their libraries, along with the embedded comments of the Kimchis in the ben Hayyim Great Rabbinical Bible of 1524-1525.


 

 

Proverbs 19:18 - "Chasten thy son while there is hope, and LET NOT THY SOUL SPARE FOR HIS CRYING."

The NKJV has: "DO NOT SET YOUR HEART ON HIS DESTRUCTION."

The NASB says: "DO NOT DESIRE HIS DEATH.",

while the NIV says: "DO NOT BE A WILLING PARTY TO HIS DEATH."

and the ESV has: "DO NOT SET YOUR HEART ON PUTTING HIM TO DEATH."

 

 

 

The New KJV then footnotes "Literally to put to death. A Hebrew tradition reads "his crying".

However there is ample reason for coming up with the meaning found in the King James Bible "and let not thy soul spare for his crying".

Hebrew words often have a multitude of radically different meanings according to the context. For instance, the word "soul" (which by the way is omitted in the NASB, NIV and the ESV replaces with the word "heart", which is an entirely different Hebrew word).

This Hebrew word is Nephesh # 5315, and versions like the NASB, NIV and ESV have variously rendered this same word as "soul, life, death, body, corpse, throat, appetite, number, neck, and thirst." Obviously there is a wide range of different meanings to these English words.

The word the KJB translators may have been looking at which they translated as "crying" in the King James Bible and other translations too, is normally translated as "to die, to kill, to slay, to destroy (2 Samuel 20:19 - "thou seeks TO DESTROY a city"), the destroyers (Job 33:22) or "a dead body".  

But if the Hebrew phrase were literally translated it could come out something like "let not your soul spare to kill him" and this would be the opposite of what is intended in the Proverb. There is also the distinct possibility mentioned by others that the KJB translators went with a variant Hebrew reading in this place.  We will look at that idea in a moment.

 

Other weird Translations  


The Geneva Bible 1587 - "Chasten thy sonne while there is hope, and let not thy soule spare FOR HIS MURMURING."

The Thomas Bible 1808 reads: "Chasten thy son, for thus he will be hopeful; but BE NOT in thy soul TRANSPORTED TO  HAUGHTINESS." (???)  

Lamsa's 1933 translation of the Syriac Peshitta - "Chasten your son while there is hope, and LET NOT YOUR SOUL SHARE HIS DISHONOR."

The Complete Apostle’s Bible 2003 - “Chasten your son, for so he shall be hopeful; and BE NOT EXALTED IN YOUR SOUL TO HAUGHTINESS." (Huh?)

The Apostolic Polyglot Bible 2003 - "Correct your son!  for thus he will be confident; but DO NOT LIFT UP THE SOUL TO INSULT."  

 

I think the King James and other Bible translators either saw this passage as being figurative rather than literal, as when we say the kid got spanked and "cried bloodly murder". Or they recognized a variant reading of the Hebrew text itself.  Other commentators and translators agree with this view.

The KJB translators were obviously aware of the reading - "and let not your soul be MOVED TO SLAY HIM." because Wycliffe 1395, Coverdale 1535, The Great Bible 1540 and Matthew's Bible 1549 all read this way, but they rejected it.

Agreeing with the reading or the sense of the King James Bible's "and let not thy soul spare FOR HIS CRYING" are The Boothroyd Bible 1853 and the Smith Bible 1876 - "let not thy soul spare FOR HIS SIGHING"

Reading like the KJB, with: "Chasten thy son while there is hope, and let not thy soul spare for HIS CRYING" are the 1936 Hebrew Publishing Company Bible, New York, the Bishops' Bible 1568, the Webster's Bible 1833, the Lesser Bible 1853, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907 - "let not thy soul spare FOR HIS CRYING.", the New Life Version 1969 - "and do not worry ABOUT HIS CRYING.", The Word of Yah 1993, the KJV 21st Century Version 1994, The Revised Webster Bible 1995, the Third Millennium Bible 1998, The Bond Slave Version 2012, the The  Urim-Thummin Version of 2001, The Hebraic Transliteration Scripture 2010 - "let not thy soul spare FOR HIS CRYING.",  The Biblos Bible 2013 - "Chasten your son while there is hope, and FOR HIS CRYING do not spare your soul.", and The Modern English Version 2014 - "and let not your soul spare FOR HIS CRYING."

Also this online Hebrew Interlinear Old Testament reads - "for HIS CRYING"

http://studybible.info/IHOT/Proverbs%2019:18 


The Jewish Virtual Library, The Tanakh (Full Text) 1998

“…and let not thy soul SPARE FOR HIS CRYING.”


http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/the-tanakh-full-text

 



The Bishops' Bible 1568 - "Chasten thy sonne whyle there is hope: and LET NOT THY SOULE SPARE FOR HIS CRYING." 

Geneva Bible 1599 - "Chasten thy sonne while there is hope, and let not thy soule spare FOR HIS MURMURING."

The Julia Smith Translation 1855 - "Correct thy son when there is hope, and thy soul shall not LIFT UP FOR HIS SIGHING."

The Hebrew Publishing Company Holy Scriptures 1936 "Chasten thy son while there is hope, and LET NOT THY SOUL SPARE FOR HIS CRYING."

New Life Version 1977 "Punish your son if he needs it while there is hope, and DO NOT WORRY ABOUT HIS CRYING."

The  Urim-Thummin Version of 2001 -“Discipline your son while there is hope, and LET NOT YOUR HEART SPARE FOR HIS CRYING."

 

 Foreign Language Bibles 

The Spanish Reina Valera Gómez Bible 2010 reads like the KJB - “Castiga a tu hijo en tanto que hay esperanza, y no dejes que tu alma se detenga por causa de su llanto.” = “and let not your soul detain itself because of HIS CRYING.”

The Romanian Fidela Bible 2014 also agrees with the KJB - "Disciplinează pe fiul tău cât este speranţă şi nu lăsa sufletul tău să cedeze din cauza plânsului său." = "let not thy soul surrender because of HIS CRYING." 

The Polish Updated Gdansk Bible 2013 - “Karz swego syna, dopóki jest nadzieja, i niech twoja dusza mu nie pobłaża z powodu jego płaczu.” = “and let not your soul surrender BECAUSE OF HIS CRYING.”

The Russian Synodal Version - “ Наказывай сына своего, доколе есть надежда, и не возмущайся криком его.” = “and let not your soul spare FOR HIS CRYING.”

John Gill comments: "and let not thy soul spare for his crying...the noise he makes, the tears he sheds, the entreaties he uses to keep off the rod; let not a foolish pity and tenderness prevail to lay it aside on that account the consequence of which may be bad to parent and child;....GERSOM INTERPRETS THE WORD "OF CRYING", AS WE DO."

 

Adam Clarke agrees with the King James reading. He says: "Let not thy soul spare for his crying. This is a hard precept for a parent. Nothing affects the heart of a parent so much as a child's cries and tears. But it is better that the child may be caused to cry, when the correction may be healthful to his soul, than that the parent should cry afterwards, when the child is grown to man's estate, and his evil habits are sealed for life."

Matthew Henry - “and let not thy soul spare for his crying. It is better that he should cry under thy rod than under the sword of the magistrate, or, which is more fearful, that of divine vengeance."


Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary - “The child may cry, and cry bitterly, previously to the correction; but, when you have reason to think the crying is for the rod rather than for the fault, and that, but for the threatened chastisement, the heart would probably have been unmoved, and the eyes dry;—then you must not allow yourselves to be so unmanned by his tears, as to suspend your purpose, and decline its infliction.”


Even Daniel Wallace notes: "The traditional rendering was “and let not your soul spare for his crying.” This involved a different reading than “causing his death” (J. H. Greenstone, Proverbs, 206-7).

The Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament also mentions this different reading - "But Oetinger (for he translates: lift not thy soul TO HIS CRY, for which Euchel: let not his complaining move thy compassion) follows the derivation from המה suggested by Kimchi, Meîri, and Immanuel, and preferred by Ragbag"  

And Matthew Poole's English Annotations remarks: "Let not thy soul spare, forbear not to give him due and necessary correction for his crying, which oft stirs up a foolish and pernicious pity in parents towards them. This word, with some small difference in the points, is used in this sense Isaiah 24:11."  

Which reads: "There is A CRYING for wine in the streets; all joy is darkened, the mirth of the land is gone."

 

Proverbs 21:4 "the PLOWING of the wicked is sin"

In the King James Bible we read: "An high look, and a proud heart, AND THE PLOWING of the wicked is sin." This particular Hebrew word is #5215 and the noun is found only one time in the Hebrew text. It comes from the verb #5214 which is used twice in the expression found both in Jeremiah 4:3 and Hosea 10:12 where we read: "BREAK UP your fallow ground, and sow not among thorns." (Jeremiah 4:3)

The saying "the plowing of the wicked is sin", does not mean that the simple act of plowing a field is in itself sinful, but rather, as John Gill notes: "to plough; it only denotes that all the civil actions of a wicked man, one being put for all, are attended with sin; he sins in all he does."

John Wesley likewise comments: "The plowing - Even their civil or natural actions, which in themselves are lawful, are made sinful as they are managed by ungodly men, without any regard to the glory of God, which ought to be the end of all our actions."

Matthew Henry comments: "The Authorized Version takes the reading נִר (nir), which means "tillage' (Proverbs 13:23), or, as Delitzsch supposes, "land ploughed for the first time". The proverb, taken thus, will mean, "high look, proud heart, even all the field which the godless cultivate, all that they do, is sin."

"The PLOWING of the wicked is sin"

This is the reading found in the Great Bible (Cranmer) of 1540 - "and the PLOWYNGE of the vngodly is synne.", the Bishops' Bible 1568 - "An high looke, a proude heart, and THE PLOWING of the vngodly is sinne.", the King James Bible, Webster's 1833, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, Green's Modern KJV 1998, the NKJV 1982, the 1998 Complete Jewish Bible - "Haughty looks, a proud heart -WHAT THE WICKED PLOW is sin.", The Word of Yah 1993, the KJV 21st Century version 1994, The Revised Webster Bible 1995, the Third Millennium Bible 1998, the Bond Slave Version 2009, The Hebraic Transliteration Scripture 2010, The Holy Scriptures VW edition 2010, The Natural Israelite Bible 2012, The Hebraic Roots Bible 2012, The Biblos Bible 2013 - "the PLOWING of the wicked is sin.", and The Modern English Version 2014.

And this online Interlinear Hebrew Old Testament - "the PLOWING of the wicked is sin."

http://studybible.info/IHOT/Proverbs%2021:4 

 

The Jewish Publication Society 1917 translation reads: "the TILLAGE of the wicked is sin", as do Young's, and the Catholic New American Bible (St. Joseph) 1970, The New Jewish Version 1985 and the Judaica Press Tanach 2004 - "Haughty eyes and unlimited lust - THE TILLAGE of the wicked is sin."  Rashi then notes "Their plowing and their thoughts is their sin."

However such versions as the NASB, NIV 1978 and 1984 editions, RSV, AV, ASV, ESV, the Catholic Douay-Rheims 1582 and Douay 1950, the Jehovah Witness New World Translation and the Holman Standard all read something different:

 

The Geneva bible 1587 read like many of the modern versions: "THE LIGHT of the wicked is sin." So the KJB translators obviously knew of this reading and rejected it.

 

NIV CONFUSION

 

Proverbs 21:4 =- "Haughty eyes and a proud heart, the LAMP of the wicked ARE sin." (NIV 1978, 1984 editions).

But now the NIV 2011 edition has changed this verse to now read: "Haughty eyes and a proud heart --THE UNPLOWED FIELD of the wicked PRODUCE sin."  

The "scholars" behind the NIV had "THE LAMP of the wicked" in their 1978 and 1984 editions, and now in 2011 they went with "THE UNPLOWED FIELD of the wicked".  Why this textual change?

The Amplified Bible of 1987 apparently wanted to cover all the bases so it reads: "Haughtiness of eyes and a proud heart, even the TILLAGE of the wicked OR THE LAMP [of joy] to them [whatever it may be], are sin [in the eyes of God]."

 

The New English Bible of 1970 simply omits the word altogether saying: "Haughty looks and a proud heart - THESE MARK mark a wicked man."

The International Standard Version 2014 likewise omits the word altogether and says: “A proud attitude, accompanied by a haughty look, is sin; they reveal wicked people.”

The Longman Version 1841 reads like no other, with: "Haughty looks and a proud heart, and THE SPLENDOUR of the wicked are sin."

Lamsa's 1936 translation of the Syriac Peshitta is different from them all, reading: "Haughty eyes, a proud heart, and THE POSTERITY of the wicked are sinful."

Then the Revised English Bible of 1989 changed this to: "Haughty looks and a proud heart --THESE SINS BRAND the wicked."

The 2002 The Message also omits the Hebrew word, and is similar with: "Arrogance and pride--distinguishing marks in the wicked--are just plain sin."

The Contemporary English Version 1995 has: "Evil people are proud and arrogant, but SIN IS THE ONLY CROP THEY PRODUCE."

The New Century Version reads: "Proud looks, proud thoughts, and EVIL ACTIONS are sin."


The Easy To Read Version 2006 likewise just omits the Hebrew reading altogether, saying: “Proud looks and proud thoughts are sins. They show a person is evil.”


The Easy English Bible 2010 just dumbs the whole verse down and comes up with a total paraphrase, reading: “Bad people think that they are better than anyone else. That is a sin.”  Hey, it’s “easy to understand”, and that is what people want. Who cares if it’s accurate or not?



J.P. GREEN'S CONFUSION

J.P. Green also seems to be more than a little confused, or at least wishy-washy. In his interlinear translation of 1985 edition he goes with "the LAMP of the wicked is sin.", but in his 1998 Modern KJV translation he goes back to "THE PLOWING of the wicked is sin." And then in his "Literal" version, J.P. Green changes this same verse to - "High eyes, a proud heart, and THE UNCULTIVATED MIND of the wicked, is sin.", and then once more before his death, his 2005 edition says: “High eyes, a proud heart, and THE FALLOW GROUND  of the wicked ones, is sin.”


Surprisingly, even Daniel Wallace's NET bible version leans toward the reading found in the King James Bible. His NET version says: " Haughty eyes and a proud heart— THE AGRICULTURAL PRODUCT of the wicked is sin."

Wallace then has some footnotes of interest when he notes: " Heb “the tillage of the wicked is sin.” ... Some (NASB, NIV, NRSV) have followed the LXX and Tg. Prov 21:4 to read “lamp” instead"

The Holman Standard also changes the text and reads: "The LAMP THAT GUIDES the wicked - haughty eyes and an arrogant heart- is sin." Then the Holmand footnotes: "Some Hebrew manuscripts and ancient versions read 'tillage'."

The 2001 - 2011 ESVs also reads "LAMP" in their text, but then footnote "or THE PLOWING."

The New Berkeley Version in Modern English 1969 has: "Haughty eyes, a lustful heart and the TILLING of the wicked are sin."

The Jubilee Bible 2010 says: "A high look and a proud heart, WHICH IS THE FIRE of the wicked, is sin."

The Living Bible 1971 is interesting. Notice what it does -  "Pride, lust, and EVIL ACTIONS[a] are all sin." Footnotes: 'evil actions', literally "the TILLAGE of the wicked."

Foreign language translations that agree with the King James Bible's "the PLOWING of the wicked is sin" are the Spanish Reina Valera Gómez 2004-2010 - "Altivez de ojos, y orgullo de corazón, y EL LABRAR de los impíos, son pecado." = "the PLOWING of the wicked",  the Portuguese Almeida Corregida E Fiel and A Biblia Sagrada em Portugués - "Olhar altivo, corao orgulhoso e at A LAVOURA dos mpios so pecado." = "the TILLING or FARMING of the wicked", the Dutch Staten Vertaling Bible - "en DE PLOEGING der goddelozen, zijn zonde." and the 2009 Romanian Fidela Bible - "si aratura celui stricat, sunt pacat."

 

Let's see..."plowing", "tillage", "lamp", "the agricultural product", "the uncultivated mind", "evil actions", "the fire", "the posterity", "the unplowed field"...Yep, all pretty much the same things, right? This is the "science" of textual criticism in action.


Proverbs 22:20 "excellent things", "three times" or "thirty sayings"?

Proverbs 22:20-21 "Have not I written to thee EXCELLENT THINGS in counsels and knowledge, that I might make thee know the certainty of THE WORDS OF TRUTH; that thou mightest answer THE WORDS OF TRUTH to them that send unto thee."

 

The King James Bible is actually the first English Bible to translate this verse in this way.  The previous English Bibles like Coverdale 1535, The Great Bible 1540, Matthew's Bible 1549 and the Bishops' Bible all say "VERY OFT", while the Geneva Bible 1587 had - "THREE TIMES" and Wycliffe 1395 read "IN THREE MANNERS"


"Have not I written unto thee EXCELLENT THINGS" is the reading found in Webster's Bible 1833, the Longman Version 1841, the Lesser Old Testament 1853, The Jewish Family Bible 1864, the Noyes Translation 1869, The Revised English Bible 1877, 
the Revised Version 1885, Darby 1890, the American Standard Version of 1901, Rotherham's Emphasized bible 1902, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, the Jewish translations of 1917 JPS (Jewish Publication Society), the 1936 Hebrew Publishing Company, the NKJV 1982, the Amplified bible 1987, The Word of Yah 1993, the NASB 1972-1995, Green's MKJV 1998, the Updated Bible version 2004, the Third Millennium Bible 1998, the 1998 Complete Jewish Bible, The World English Bible 2000, A Conservative Version 2005, the Context Group Version 2007, the Bond Slave Version 2009, the Hebraic Transliteration Scripture 2010, The Hebrew Names Version 2014 and The Modern English Version 2014 "Have not I written to you EXCELLENT THINGS".


NASB 1995 - Have I not written to you EXCELLENT THINGS Of counsels and knowledge

Darby 1890 - Have not I written to thee EXCELLENT THINGS, in counsels and knowledge

Complete Jewish Bible 1998 - I have written you WORTHWHILE THINGS full of good counsel and knowledge

21st Century KJV 1994 - Have I not written to thee 
EXCELLENT THINGS of counsel and knowledge


Amplified Bible 1987 - Have I not written to you long ago 
EXCELLENT THINGS in counsels and knowledge


However there are several very different ways other Bible versions have translated this verse.  Here are some of them:  

 

J.P. Green's Confusion

J.P. Green's Literal Translation 1985 - "Have not I written to you THE THIRD TIME with counsels and knowledge"

J.P. Green's translation 2000 - "Have I not written to you YESTERDAY AND THE DAY BEFORE with counsels and knowledge"  

J.P. Green's 2005 Literal edition - "Have not I written to you THREE DAYS AGO with counsels and knowledge"


Young's 1898 - "Have I not written to thee THREE TIMES with counsels and knowledge?  

Julia Smith Translation 1855 - "Did I not write to thee THREE DAYS AGO in counsels and knowledge?"

Rotherham’s Emphasized bible 1902 - “Have I not written for thee NOBLE THINGS, with counsels and knowledge” 

Bishops' Bible 1568 - Haue not I warned thee VERY OFT with counsayle and learning

Geneva Bible 1587 - Haue not I written vnto thee THREE TIMES in counsels and knowledge

Catholic Douay-Rheims 1610 - Behold I have described it to thee THREE MANNER OF WAYS, in thoughts and knowledge

RSV 1946 - Have I not written for you THIRTY SAYINGS of admonition and knowledge

ESV 2011 - Have I not written for you THIRTY SAYINGS of counsel and knowledge

NIV 2011, NET 2006 - Have I not written THIRTY SAYINGS for you, 
sayings of counsel and knowledge

New Living Translation 2007 - I have written THIRTY SAYINGS for you, filled with advice and knowledge. Footnote: Or excellent sayings; the meaning of the Hebrew is uncertain.

Jehovah Witness New World Translation - "Have not I written you HERETOFORE with counselings and knowledge"

Knox Bible 2012 - NOT ONCE NOR TWICE  have I warned thee and instructed thee  

The New European Version 2010 and The World English Bible 2012 apparently want to cover all bases so they say: "Haven't I written to you THIRTY EXCELLENT THINGS of counsel and knowledge"

Holman Standard 2009 - Haven’t I written for you THIRTY SAYINGS about counsel and knowledge" 

Footnote: Text emended; one Hb tradition reads you PREVIOUSLY; alt Hb tradition reads you EXCELLENT THINGS; LXX, Syr, Vg read you THREE TIMES.

 

The Catholic versions are all over the board. The Douay says "THREE MANNER OF WAYS"; while the St. Joseph New American Bible has "Have not I written to you "THE THIRTY"?, and the Jerusalem Bible has "to you the THIRTY CHAPTERS?"


Foreign Language Bibles -

Spanish Reina Valera 1995 - ¿Acaso no te he escrito TRES VECES, con consejos y ciencia = I have written to you THREE TIMES

Spanish La Biblia de las Américas 1997 (Lockman Foundation) - ¿No te he escrito COSAS EXCELENTES  de consejo y conocimiento = EXCELLENT THINGS

Spanish La Nueva Biblia de los Hispanos 2005 - ¿No te he escrito COSAS EXCELENTESS De consejo y conocimiento = EXCELLENT THINGS

Spanish Reina Valera Gómez 2010 - ¿No te he escrito COSAS EXCELENTES de consejo y conocimiento = EXCELLENT THINGS

Spanish Reina Valera 2011 - ¿Acaso no te he escrito TREINTA DICHOS para impartirte consejos y conocimientos? = I have written to you THIRTY SAYINGS...

Portuguese de Almeida Atualizada - Porventura não te escrevi EXCELENTES COISASS acerca dos conselhos e do conhecimento - EXCELLENT THINGS

Portuguese A Biblia Sagrada 1681 - Porventura näo te escrevi EXCELENTES COISAS, acerca de todo conselho e conhecimento = EXCELLENT THINGS

NIV Portuguese edition 2000 - Já não lhe escrevi
 conselhos e instruções = Have I not written to you counsels and instructions - (They just omit the phrase altogether! Notice that the NIV Portuguese version does not match the NIV English editions)

Portuguese O Livro 2000 - Não é verdade que te tenho escrito já COISAS EXCELENTES referentes ao conhecimento e à experiência da vida? = EXCELLENT THINGS

Italian Diodati 1649 - Non ti ho io scritto COSE ECCELLENTI In consigli e in dottrina? = EXCELLENT THINGS

There seems to be some differences of opinion among the commentators as to which Hebrew word is used here in Proverbs 22:20 and how it should be translated. Some tell us that it has to do with the critical pronunciation marks that are placed in the word.  Even Wigram’s Englishman’s Hebrew Concordance lists this verse under two different Hebrew words.

 

One is the Hebrew word shal-leesh # 7991 a noun, and it means “prince, captains, great lords and excellent things.  But the other one is shil-shohm # 8032 and adverb, which can mean “in times past, the third day, three days, before and heretofore."

Though bible commentators differ among themselves, as they often do, yet most seem to side with the accuracy of the King James Bible reading of "EXCELLENT THINGS".

 

John Gill discusses the various views and sides with "EXCELLENT THINGS" - The New John Gill Exposition of the Entire Bible - Proverbs 22:20 - Have not I written to thee excellent things…
In the Scriptures. Some render it, "three things"; and think that Solomon refers to the three divisions of the Scriptures among the Jews, the law, the prophets, and holy writings; so Jarchi; but some of those writings then were not: or to the three books wrote by him; the Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and Song of Songs. Others render it, "in a threefold way", as the Targum and several versions; that is, in various ways, in different forms and styles, in order the better to inform and instruct. BUT IT IS BEST, WITH KIMCHI, GERSOM, AND BEN MELECH, TO RENDER IT  "EXCELLENT THINGS", as we do."

Matthew Henry - they are excellent things, which concern the glory of God, the holiness and happiness of our souls, the welfare of mankind and all communities; they are princely things (so the word is), fit for kings to speak and senates to hear."

 

Adam Clarke Commentary - “But perhaps it is safer to apply it to the Scriptures, and the excellent doctrines they contain: for שלשים shalishim signifies also EXCELLENT, princely things; things which become a king to speak.”


John Trapp’s Commentary (English Puritan) - “Have not I written to thee excellent things? Heb., Princely things; principles for princes, rare and royal sentences. The word signifies, say some, the third man in the kingdom for authority and dignity. Others read the words thus: Have not I three times written for thee concerning counsels and knowledge, - meaning his three books, proverbial, penitential, nuptial. “


Kretzmann’s Popular Commentary - “v. 20. Have not I written to thee excellent things in counsels and knowledge, most excellent maxims of proper behavior”


Haydock’s Commentary - “"Shalishim," perfect, (Pagnin) or "three things," (Montanus) means also (Haydock) such as might suit princes and great officers. (Calmet)”


Matthew Pool’s Annotations on the Holy Bible - “Excellent things; or, princely things, as they are called, the great things of God’s law, as Hosea 8:12.”


Benson’s Commentary mentions the different views, and sides with the reading of “EXCELLENT THINGS”. He comments - “excellent things — שׁלישׁים, princely things, or leading things, “words fit for a prince to speak,” says Bishop Patrick, “and the best men of the world to hear, and therefore truly excellent.” Many of the ancient versions, however, read three-fold things, in which they are followed by Schultens and Grotius: the Jews distinguishing philosophy into three branches, morality, physics, and divinity; and Solomon having written in all those branches, as appears from 1 Kings 4., although most of his writings are lost. But, as the Hebrew word above quoted always signifies great captains, generals, nobles, or the best sort of musical instruments, “I look upon this,” namely, that first given, says the bishop, “the most proper interpretation of it.” 


 

Agreeing with the KJB in translating both phrases as “the words of truth” are the Geneva Bible, the Jewish translations of Jewish Publication Society 1917, the Hebrew Publishing Company 1936 translation, the Complete Jewish Bible, the Judaica Press Tanach 2004, the RV, ASV, Darby, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, the NKJV 1982, Green’s literal 2000, the French Martin 1744, Louis Segond 1910 and the 1996 Ostervald - “paroles de vérité”, Italian Diodati -”palavras de verdade”, the Portuguese Almeida -”palavras de verdade”, and the Spanish Reina Valera 1960, 1995 - “las palabras de verdad”.

However instead of the definite and authoritative “the words of truth” many modern versions weaken, dilute, downgrade and obscure the meaning of this phrase. Instead of “the words of truth” we now have “reliable and sound answers”, “correctly answer” and“ a dependable report”.

The NIV says: “Have I not written THIRTY SAYINGS for you, sayings of counsel and knowledge, teaching you TRUE AND RELIABLE WORDS, so that you can give SOUND ANSWERS to him who sent you? “

The NASB also weakens and downgrades the “words of truth” to this: “Have I not written to you EXCELLENT THINGS of counsels and knowledge, To make you know the certainty of the words of truth That you may CORRECTLY ANSWER him who sent you?”

The Holman Standard has: “Haven't I written for you THIRTY SAYINGS about counsel and knowledge, in order to teach you true and reliable words, so that you may give A DEPENDABLE REPORT to those who sent you?”

 

 

Proverbs 23:6-7 KJB "Eat thou not the bread of him that hath AN EVIL EYE, neither desire thou his dainty meats: FOR AS HE THINKETH IN HIS HEART, SO IS HE: Eat and drink, saith he to thee; but his heart is not with thee."

 

Proverbs 23:6-7 NIV 1984/2011 editions "Do not eat the food of A STINGY MAN (1984) [OF A BEGRUDGING HOST  - 2011] do not crave his delicacies; FOR HE IS THE KIND OF MAN WHO IS ALWAYS THINKING ABOUT THE COST. Eat and drink, he says to you, but his heart is not with you."

 

Proverbs 23:6-7 NKJV 1982 - "Do not eat the bread OF A MISER, Nor desire his delicacies, For as he thinks in him heart, so is he. Eat and drink, he says to you. But his heart is not with you."  Footnote - Literally one who has an evil eye.

My Note: The miser would not give you of his dainty meats to eat in the first place, but a man with an evil eye towards you would. Besides not translating what the text actually says, the NKJV is pointless.

 

Proverbs 23:6-7 New Revised Standard Version 1989 (New English Bible 1970, Revised English Bible 1989, Common English Bible 2011) - "Do not eat the bread of the STINGY; do not desire their delicacies; FOR LIKE A HAIR IN THE THROAT, SO ARE THEY. Eat and drink! they say to you; but they don't mean it."

 

Proverbs 23:6-7 ESV - "Do not eat the bread of A STINGY MAN; do not desire his delicacies,  FOR HE IS LIKE ONE WHO IS INWARDLY CALCULATING. Eat and drink, he says to you, but his heart is not with you."

 

Proverbs 23:6-7 NASB - "Do not eat the bread of A SELFISH MAN, Or desire his delicacies; FOR AS HE THINKS WITHIN HIMSELF, SO IS HE.  He says to you, Eat and drink! But his heart is not with you."

 

Proverbs 23:6-7 Catholic Douay-Rheims 1610, Douay Version 1950, Catholic Public Domain Version 2009  - "Eat not with AN ENVIOUS MAN, and desire not his meats; BECAUSE LIKE A SOOTHSAYER, AND DIVINER, HE THINKETH THAT WHICH HE KNOWETH NOT."    (Yeah, that sounds pretty much the same, right?)

 

Proverbs 23:6-7 St. Joseph New American Bible 1970 - "Do not take food with A GRUDGING MAN, and do not desire his dainties; FOR IN HIS GREED HE IS LIKE A STORM. Eat and drink, he says to you, though his heart is not with you."

 

Proverbs 23:6-7 New Jerusalem bible 1985 - "Do not eat the food of anyone WHOSE EYE IS JEALOUS, do not hanker for his delicacies. FOR WHAT HE IS REALLY THINKING IS ABOUT HIMSELF. Eat and drink, he tells you, but his heart is not with you."

 

Proverbs 23:6-7 Lamsa's translation of Syriac 1933 -"Do not eat with A HYPOCRITE, neither desire his food;  FOR HE IS LIKE HIM THAT SWALLOWS PITCH; in like manner you will eat and drink with him, but his heart is not with you."

(Yep, pretty much the same meaning but in different words ;-) It looks like James White is right, after all. We can get a much better sense of the meaning of the passage by comparing different versions, huh?

So, is it "an evil eye", "a stingy man", "a begrudging host", "an envious man", "whose eye is jealous", "a hypocrite" or "a miser"?

Well, none of the above. It is literally "him that hath AN EVIL EYE".

 

Agreeing with the King James Bible are the Bishops' Bible 1568, Geneva Bible 1587, Noyes Translation 1869, Revised Version 1885, Darby 1890, Young's literal 1898,  ASV 1901 "Eat thou not the bread of him that hath an evil eye, Neither desire thou his dainties: For as he thinketh within himself, so is he", The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, JPS 1917, Bible in Basic English 1969, Green's literal translation, KJV 21st Century Version 1994, the Koster Scriptures 1998, Third Millennium Bible 1998, Updated Bible Version 2003 and the Jubilee Bible 2010.

  

Proverbs 24:21 King James Bible  - "My son, fear thou the LORD and the king: AND MEDDLE NOT WITH THEM THAT ARE GIVEN TO CHANGE."

The simple, face value meaning of this verse is to recognize the authority and unchanging nature of the Lord God and His king, who is now our King eternal, the Lord Jesus Christ, and not be carried away or mixed up with those who have so such fixed and unchanging authority but are always looking for something new.

As John Gill comments - "who are given to change in religious things; make innovations in doctrine and practice, always love to hear or say some new thing; turn with every wind, and shift as that does; are tossed about with every wind of doctrine, fickle and inconstant, carried about like meteors in the air, with "divers and strange doctrines"; such as disagree with the perfections of God, the doctrines of Christ and his apostles, the Scriptures of truth."

Matthew Henry - “Have nothing to do, he does not say, with those that that are given to change, that affect change for change-sake, out of a peevish discontent with that which is and a fondness for novelty”

Coffman’s Commentary - “Every church is plagued by a certain element within it which identifies change with 'progress.' They are never willing for anything to continue very long without demanding a change.”


The King James Bible was actually the first Bible to get this verse right. God's words have been purified seven times. Psalms 12:6-7.  See "What were the Seven Purifications of the words of God?"

http://brandplucked.webs.com/7purificationsofwords.htm

Wycliffe 1395 read: “My sone, drede thou God, and the kyng; and BE NOT THOU MEDDLED WITH BACKBITERS.”

 

Coverdale 1535  and Matthew’s Bible 1540 both read: “My sonne, feare thou ye LORDE & ye kinge, AND KEEP NO COMPANY WITH THE SLANDEROUS.”

 

The Great Bible 1540 and The Bishops’ Bible 1568 read: “My sonne, feare thou the Lorde and the kyng, and KEEP NO COMPANY WITH THEM THAT SLIDE BACK FROM HIS FEAR.”

 

And the Geneva Bible  1587 had: - “and meddle not with them that are SEDITIOUS.”


"My son, fear thou the LORD and the king: and DO NOT MEDDLE WITH THOSE THAT ARE GIVEN TO CHANGE." Proverbs 24:21


Bible translations that say the same thing are: 
Webster's 1833 translation, the Lesser Bible 1853, The Jewish Family Bible 1864 - "and DO NOT MEDDLE WITH THOSE THAT ARE GIVEN TO CHANGE.", the Noyes Translation 1869, Youngs 1898 - "Fear Jehovah, my son, and the king, With changers mix not up thyself", the Sharpe Bible 1883, The Revised English Bible 1877 - "Mix not with them that are given to change.",  the 1885 Revised Version - "My son, fear thou the LORD and the king: and meddle not with them that are given to change", Darby 1890, the ASV of 1901, Rotherham's Emphasized bible of 1902, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907 - "and MEDDLE NOT WITH THOSE THAT ARE GIVEN TO CHANGE.", the NKJV 1982, the Amplified bible 1987, The Word of Yah 1993, the NASB 1995 - "Do not associate with those who are given to change", the Third Millennium Bible 1998, the Koster Scriptures 1998 - "and DO NOT MINGLE WITH THOSE WHO ARE GIVEN TO CHANGE.", the Updated Bible of 2004, Green's Literal Bible 2005, the Bond Slave Version 2009, Jubilee Bible 2010, the Hebraic Transliteration Scripture 2010 - “Do not associate with those given to change”, the Names of God Bible 2011, the Lexham English Bible 2012, The Hebraic Roots Bible 2012, The Interlinear Hebrew-Greek Scriptures 2012 (Mebust) - "Do not associate with those that are given to change.", The Biblos Bible 2013, and the Modern English Version 2014 - “My son, fear the Lord and the king; AND DO NOT MEDDLE WITH THOSE WHO ARE GIVEN TO CHANGE.”.


However many versions read quite differently.  The Revised Standard Version and NRSV of 1989 read: "My son, fear the LORD and the king, AND DO NOT DISOBEY EITHER OF THEM."

Then the NRSV footnotes that this reading of theirs comes from the Greek Septuagint but the Hebrew reads as it stands in the KJB  - "Gk: Heb - DO NOT ASSOCIATE WITH THOSE WHO CHANGE."

The Greek Septuagint reads: - "My son, fear God and the king, and DISOBEY NEITHER OF THEM."


ESV -  But now the revision of the revision of the revision - the ESV - reads: "My son, fear the Lord and the king, and DO NOT JOIN WITH THOSE WHO DO OTHERWISE."

The NIV keeps changing from one edition to the next.  The 1984 NIV edition reads: "Fear the LORD and the king, my son, AND DO NOT JOIN WITH THE REBELLIOUS."

However the NIV 2011 edition now reads: "Fear the LORD and the king, my son, AND DO NOT JOIN WITH THE REBELLIOUS OFFICIALS."

The Revised English Bible of 1989 (critical text version) says: "My son, fear the LORD and fear the king. HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH PERSONS OF HIGH RANK."

The New American Bible 2010 is totally different from them all, saying: “My son, fear the Lord and the king;  HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THOSE WHO HATE THEM.”  (Huh?. Where did that come from?)


Dan Wallace and company's NET version and the Holman Standard say: "Fear the Lord, my child, as well as the king, and DO NOT ASSOCIATE WITH THE REBELS." 

But then Dan Wallace footnotes that the Hebrew reads "son" (not child) and that "rebels" is actually in the Hebrew "the Qal active participle, plural, from שָׁנָה (shanah), “to change” – “THOSE WHO CHANGE."


The Catholic Douay Version 1950 and The Work of God's Children Illustrated bible 2011 both say: "My son, fear the Lord and the king AND HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THE DETRACTORS."

 

The King James Bible is right, as always. 

 

Proverbs 25:20 KJB - “As he that taketh away a garment in cold weather, and as vinegar upon NITRE, so is he that singeth songs to an heavy heart.”

 

First we should define what is meant by the word "nitre".  Nitre is another way of spelling the word "niter". Both are acceptable English. "Niter" 1. potassium nitrate, a crystalline salt found in nature and used as a preservative, in making gunpowder. Also spelled "nitre" 

 

“nitre” is found in Douay-Rheims 1582, the Geneva Bible 1587, Webster's Bible 1833, the Revised Version 1885, Noyes Translation 1869, Darby 1890, Young's 1898, Rotherham's Emphasized bible 1902, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, JPS 1917 (Jewish Publication Society) 

 

"soda" in ASV, NASB, NET, ESV, Holman. The word "soda" is fine. I have no real problem with this word.

 

 

Proverbs 25:20 NIV, 1978 1984 editions - “Like one who takes away a garment on a cold day, or like vinegar poured ON SODA, is one who sings songs to a heavy heart.”

 

Proverbs 25:20 NIV 2011 edition - “Like one who takes away a garment on a cold day, or like vinegar poured on A WOUND, is one who sings songs to a heavy heart.

 

The NIV 2011 has once again changed its text and this time chose to follow PART of the so called Greek Septuagint reading which is “SORE”.

 

The previous liberal RSV, the NRSV 1989 read like the NIV 2011 edition and so does the Message 2003, The Voice 2012 and the Common English Bible 2011 (all critical text versions). 

The Common English Bible 2011 says: “or putting vinegar on A WOUND.”[a]

Footnotes:

  1. Proverbs 25:20 LXX; MT vinegar on natron (a detergent)

The NIV 2011 chose to reject the Hebrew text and use just PART of the LXX. 

 

The liberal NRSV of 1989 went with the rest of the verse as found in the LXX which adds 17 more words to the verse and says:

 

Proverbs 25:20 NRSV 1989 - "Like vinegar on a WOUND is one who sings songs to a heavy heart. LIKE A MOTH IN CLOTHING OR A WORM IN WOOD, SORROW GNAWS AT THE HUMAN HEART."  (NONE of these capitalized words are found in the Hebrew text.)

 

Then it footnotes that this whole reading comes from the Greek but that the Hebrew reads “Like one who takes off a garment on a cold day, like vinegar on lye”, which is essentially what is found in the KJB.

 

The so called Greek Septuagint actually reads VERY differently than the Hebrew text.  Here again is Proverbs 25:20 in the King James Bible - " As he that taketh away a garment in cold weather, and as vinegar upon mitre, so is he that singeth songs to an heavy heart."  

 

Yet the so called Greek Septuagint (Benton's) reads: "AS VINEGAR IS BAD FOR A SORE, SO TROUBLE BEFALLING THE BODY AFFLICTS THE HEART. AS A MOTH IN A GARMENT, AND A WORM IN WOOD, SO THE GRIEF OF A MAN HURTS THE HEART."!!!  

 

And out of this totally confused mess, the NIV translators chose to pick ONE word out of it - "A SORE" - and to put it in their "bible" translation.  Such are the ways of modern "scholarship".

 

So, which other bible version chose to reject the Hebrew reading and follow part of the Greek instead? Yep, right again. The Catholic New Jerusalem bible 1985 says: “you are pouring vinegar ON A WOUND when you sing songs to a heavy heart”.   

 

The Catholic St. Joseph NAB 1970 rendering of Proverbs 25:20 is virtually unrecognizable. It actually says: "Like a moth in clothing, or a maggot in wood, sorrow gnaws at the human heart."  Yep, I am not lying. That is what it says.

 

And the 2009 Catholic Public Domain Version now reads: "and like one who loosens his garment in cold weather. Whoever sings verses to a wicked heart is like vinegar on BAKING SODA. Just like a moth to a garment, and a worm to wood, so too does the sadness of a man do harm to the heart."

 

So, aren't you glad that we have been "blessed" with all these multiple versions and the "embarrassment of riches" James White likes to tell us about, so that we can get a much better idea of what the passage is REALLY saying? 

 

 

Proverbs 25:23 - King James Bible  1611 - “The north wind DRIVETH AWAY rain: so doth an angry countenance a backbiting tongue. “

 

 


Proverbs 25:23 - NEW King James Version 1982 - “The north wind BRINGS FORTH rain, And a backbiting tongue an angry countenance. “

You will notice that the NKJV not only teaches the exact opposite, but it also reverses the second half of the verse making it have the opposite meaning.  So, which is right?

As we will see, most older translations agree with the King James Bible and some modern ones too, but many modern versions like the ASV, RSV, NRSV, ESV, NIV, NASB, Holman Standard, Jehovah Witness NWT and the MODERN Catholic versions agree with the sense found in the NKJV.

Commentators as well as bible versions are often in direct opposition to each other.  The question to ask ourselves is this: Has God been in control of the keeping of His words preserved, intact and 100% true or are we adrift in the constantly changing sea of men’s speculations, personal preferences and opinions?  

Some bible agnostics (and this is anybody who is not a King James Bible believer) will try to cast doubt on the certainty of meaning in the verse by pointing out that the marginal reading in the KJB says: “or, bringeth forth rain”.

However the marginal notes are not part of the TEXT of the King James Bible.  Among the 47 learned translators God used to give us His masterpiece, not all of them were always in agreement on how a word or passage should be translated.  This is the human side of things.  But we Bible believers maintain that God Himself guided these same 47 translators to put into the TEXT what He wanted there, and thus we have a truly inspired and infallible Bible.


I believe God has given us a complete and 100% inspired and true Bible and it is the King James Holy Bible.  So too do many  thousands of other Bible believing Christians all over the world.

 

"The north wind DRIVETH AWAY the rain"

 Agreeing with the meaning found in the text of the King James Bible are Wycliffe 1395 - “The north wind scatereth reynes; and a sorewful face distrieth a tunge bacbitinge.”, Coverdale 1535 - “The north wynde dryueth awaye the rayne, euen so doth an earnest sober countenauce a backbyters tonge.”, The Great Bible 1540, Matthew's Bible 1549,  the Bishops’ Bible of 1568 - “The northwinde dryueth away the rayne”, the Geneva Bible of 1587 and 1599 - “As the Northwinde driueth away the raine, so doeth an angry countenance the slandering tongue.”, Webster’s translation 1833, The Longman Version 1841, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, The New English Bible 1971, The Revised English Bible 1989, the KJV 21st Century 1994, the 2012 Knox Bible - “The north wind stops rain, and a frown the backbiter.”, the Third Millennium Bible of 1998, The Hebrew Transliteration Bible 2010, The Work of God's Children Bible 2011 - "The north wind DRIVES AWAY rain.", The Biblos Bible 2013 - "The north wind DRIVES  AWAY rain; so does an angry countenance a backbiting tongue."

The Jewish Virtual Library - The Tanakh Full Text Bible 1998

25:23 The north wind driveth away rain: so doth an angry countenance a backbiting tongue. 

And this online Hebrew Interlinear Bible - "the north wind DRIVETH AWAY rain."

http://studybible.info/IHOT/Proverbs%2025:23


Foreign Language Bibles = KJB

Among foreign language bible translations we see the same confusion and differences of meaning. However agreeing with the sense of the verse as found in the King James Bible that “the north wind DRIVETH AWAY rain” are the following:

The French Martin Bible of 1744 - “Le vent de bise chasse la pluie”, the Italian Diodati of 1649 -”Il vento settentrionale dissipa la pioggia”, the Spanish Sagradas Escrituras of 1569, the Reina Valera of 1602, 1909 and 1960 (but the 1995 edition changed the meaning) and the Spanish Reina Valera Gómez of 2010 - “El viento del norte AHUYENTA la lluvia, Y el rostro airado la lengua detractora.”, the Dutch Staten Vertaling bible - “De noordenwind verdrijft den regen”, the Portuguese Almeida of 1681 and the Portuguese A Biblia Sagrada em Portugues - “O vento norte AFUGENTA a chuva, e a face irada, a língua fingida.” = “the north wind chases away the rain”, and the Romanian Fidela Bible 2014 - "
Vântul de nord alungă ploaia" = "The north wind DRIVES AWAY  the rain"

the  Modern Greek translation -, "Ο βορρας ανεμος εκδιωκει την βροχην·" =   "The north wind DRIVES AWAY the rain"

 

The Catholic Connection


The  Catholic Versions are in their usual disarray.  The older Douay-Rheims of 1610 and the Douay Version of 1950 both read like the King James Bible - “the north wind DRIVETH AWAY the rain”

BUT the newer Catholic Versions, like the Jerusalem bible 1969, St. Joseph NAB 1970, the New Jerusalem of 1985 and the 2009 Catholic Public Domain Version line up with most modern English versions like the NIV, NASB, ESV and say something like: “The north wind BRINGS FORTH the rain, and a sorrowful face brings forth a detracting tongue.” (Catholic Public Domain Version 2009)


John Gill is totally aware of the different interpretations of this verse and he supports the reading found in the King James Bible. He comments: “The north wind driveth away rain…So the geographere says, the swift north wind drives away the moist clouds; which usually come from the opposite quarter, the south. The word used has the signification of conceiving, and begetting, and bringing forth; hence some render it to a different sense, and so the Targum - “the north wind bringeth forth rain;''... But in (Job 37:22) , fair, fine, golden, serene, "weather", is said to "come out of the north"; agreeably to which, the north wind is by Homer called (aiyrhgenethv) the producer of serene weather; and by Virgil "clarus aquilo", i.e. what makes serene. The first reading and sense of the words seem best and agree with what follows: so doth an angry countenance a backbiting tongue.”

 

Proverbs 26:10 - King James Bible - “THE GREAT GOD THAT FORMED ALL THINGS BOTH REWARDETH THE FOOL, AND REWARDETH TRANSGRESSORS."



NET version 2006 by Dan Wallace and company - “LIKE AN ARCHER WHO WOUNDS AT RANDOM, SO IS THE ONE WHO HIRES A FOOL OR HIRES ANY PASSER-BY."  (Say what?)


He then footnotes: “A similar rendering is given by ASV, NAB, NIV, NRSV, and NLT; it is the only one that makes sense out of a verse that most commentators consider hopelessly corrupt. That is not to say it is the correct rendering, only that it makes sense...”

This is the mindset of bible agnostics like Dan Wallace. They have NO complete, inspired and 100% true Holy Bible in ANY language to give you, but believe that many verses in the Bible, not just this one, are “hopelessly corrupt”. That is why these modern Vatican Versions so often reject the clear Hebrew readings, and not even in the same places.  Then men like Dan Wallace tell us that not even their “rendering” may be the correct one, but only that it makes sense.

Well, there are a whole lot of different “renderings” of this verse and many of them “make sense” but they give us a multitude of totally different meanings that allegedly “make sense” - Just not THE SAME sense. 

Let’s take a comparative look at the different “renderings” out there today, and see if other Bible Agnostics like James White are right when they tell us that we need to read, compare and consult a variety of translations in order to clarify and understand what God REALLY said, OK?

 

Agreeing with the sense and meaning found in the King James Bible - “The great God that formed all things both rewardeth the fool, and rewardeth transgressors.” are the following: the Bishops’ Bible 1568 - “The mightie that fourmed al thinges, rewardeth the fooles & transgressours.”, the Geneva Bible 1587 - “The excellent that formed all things, both rewardeth the foole & rewardeth the transgressers.”, The Bill Bible 1671, Webster’s 1833 translation - “The great God that formed all things both rewardeth the fool, and rewardeth transgressors.”, Young’s translation 1898 - “Great is the Former of all, And He is rewarding a fool, And is rewarding transgressors.”,  the NKJV 1982 - “The great God who formed everything Gives the fool his hire and the transgressor his wages.”, the KJV 21st Century Version, the Third Millennium Bible of 1998, the Jubilee Bible 2010 - "The great God that formed all things rewards both the fool and transgressors."

 

“The great God that formed all things both rewardeth the fool, and rewardeth transgressors.”  

Also reading like the KJB are The Word of Yah 1993, the Bond Slave Version 2009, the Hebraic Transliteration Scripture 2010 - “The great [Elohim (אלהים)] that formed all [things] both rewardeth the fool, and rewardeth transgressors.”, The Natural Israelite Bible 2012 - “The great Yahweh who formed everything Gives the fool his hire and the transgressor his wages.” and The Modern English Version 2014 - “The great God who formed all things  rewards the fool and rewards the transgressor.”

and this online Interlinear Hebrew Old Testament - http://studybible.info/IHOT/Proverbs%2026:10


Foreign Language Bibles

 

Among foreign language Bible translations that agree with the sense found in the King James Bible are the following: La  Nuova Diodati of 1991 - “ Il grande Dio che ha formato tutte le cose è colui che dà la retribuzione allo stolto e ai trasgressori.”, the 1569 Spanish Sagradas Escrituras - “El gran Dios cría todas las cosas; y al loco da la paga, y a los transgresores da el salario.” the 1602 Spanish Reina Valera - “El Grande cria todas las cosas; y al insensato da la paga, y a los transgresores da el salario”, the 1909 Reina Valera, the 2010 Reina Valera Gómez Bible - “El grande Dios que creó todas las cosas; da la paga al insensato, y da la paga a los transgresores.” and the Portuguese Almeida Corrigida E Fiel of 1681 - “O Poderoso, que formou todas as coisas, paga ao tolo, e recompensa ao transgressor. “ 


Adam Clarke comments on this verse - “The rab may mean either the great God, or a great man”.  

John Wesley comments: “Rewardeth - Will certainly give that recompence which is deserved by fools and transgressors, by such as sin either thro' ignorance, or wilfully.

Matthew Henry comments: “The Master, or Lord (so Rab signifies), or, as we read it, The great God that formed all things at first, and still governs them in infinite wisdom, renders to every man according to his work..”

Now, let's see what others have done with this verse of Scripture. You will soon notice that you can't even recognize the sense of one compared to the other. They are not even in the same Ballpark.

NASB 1995 - Like an archer who wounds everyone, So is he who hires a fool or who hires those who pass by. “

ESV 2011 - “Like an archer who wounds everyone is one who hires a passing fool or drunkard.”

NIV 2011 -  “Like an archer who wounds at random is he who hires a fool or any passer-by.“

The New English Septuagint Translation 2014 - “All flesh of fools is much exposed to winter cold, for their trance is being shattered.”

The New Brenton Translation 2012 - "All the flesh of fools endures much hardship; for their fury is brought to nought." 

Green’s ‘literal’ 2000 - “Great is the Former of all things, but he who hires a fool is like one who hires those passing by.”

The God’s Word Translation 1995 - “Like many people who destroy everything, so is one who hires fools or drifters.”

The Judaica Press Tanach 2004 - “The Master created all, and He hires a fool, and He hires transients.”

 

The Easy English Bible 2010 - “A soldier who fights everyone is no help to his master. The man who gives work to a fool is like that soldier. Someone who gives work to a stranger is as silly.”

The Work of God’s Children Illustrated Bible 2011 - “Judgment determineth causes: and he that putteth a fool to silence, appeaseth anger.” (Say what?!)


Greek Septuagint - “All the flesh of fools endures much hardship; for their fury is brought to nought.” (Huh?!)

The Message 2002 - “Hire a fool or a drunk and you shoot yourself in the foot. “

Catholic Douay-Rheims 1610 and Douay 1950 - “Judgment determineth causes: and he that putteth a fool to silence, appeaseth anger.”

The Longman Version 1841 and the Boothroyd Bible 1853 - “Every drunkard causeth much grief; And the fool and drunkard are transgressors.”

The Jewish Family Bible 1864 - “A master maketh all writhe, but he that hireth a fool hireth passers by.”

The Revised English Bible 1877 - “A master workman formeth all things; But a fool hireth, even hiring passers by.”

 

The Sharpe Bible 1883 - “The quarrelsome man setteth all things wrong; He both hireth the fool, and hireth the passers by.”


Catholic St. Joseph NAB 1970 - “Like an archer wounding all who pass by is he who hires a drunken fool.”

Catholic Public Domain Version 2009 - “Judgment determines cases. And whoever imposes silence on the foolish mitigates anger.

Coverdale 1535 - “A man of experience discerneth all thinges well, but whoso hyreth a foole, hyreth soch one as wyl take no hede.”

Darby’s translation - “A master roughly worketh every one: he both hireth the fool and hireth passers-by.”

Rotherham’s Emphasized Bible 1902 - “As an archer who woundeth every thing, so one who hireth a dullard, and a drunkard crossing the sea.”

God’s Word Translation 1995 - “Like many people who destroy everything, so is one who hires fools or drifters. “

Lamsa’s translation of the Syriac Peshitta - “The body of a fool is greatly afflicted, and a drunkard thinks that he can cross a sea.“ (Yep, that's pretty similar, right?)

The Complete Jewish Bible - “A master can make anything, but hiring a fool is like hiring some passer-by.
 
Easy to Read Bible 2001 - “Hiring a fool or some stranger passing by is dangerous--you don't know who might get hurt. “

The Modern Language New Berkeley 1969 - “A master performs all things, but he who hires a fool, hires a passer-by.”

The JPS (Jewish Publication Society) 1917 translation - “A master performeth all things; But he that stoppeth a fool is as on that stoppeth a flood.”

Proverbs 27:15-16 The principal problems with these verses is found in verse 16; but to give the context we will include them both.

Proverbs 27:15-16 - KJB - "A continual dropping in a very rainy day and a contentious woman are alike. Whosoever hideth her hideth the wind, AND THE OINTMENT OF HIS RIGHT HAND, WHICH BEWRAYETH ITSELF."

NKJV, ESV, NIV, NASB - Proverbs 27:15-16 - "A continual dripping on a very rainy day And a contentious woman are alike; Whoever restrains her restrains the wind, AND GRASPS OIL WITH HIS RIGHT HAND."

Lamsa's 1933 (translation of Syriac) Proverbs 27:15-16 - "Like a continual dripping on a rainy day, so is a quarrelsome woman. THE NORTH WIND IS SEVERE, BUT IT IS CALLED THE RIGHT WIND." (Yep, pretty close, huh?)  

The Catholic Connection 

The Douay-Rheims 1610, Douay 1950 Pro. 27:15-16 -"ROOFS DROPPING THROUGH ON A COLD DAY, and a contentious woman are alike. He that retaineth her, is as he that would hold the wind, AND SHALL CALL THE OIL OF HIS RIGHT HAND."

Jerusalem bible 1968, New Jerusalem bible 1985 Pro. 27:15-16 - "The STEADY DRIPPING OF A GUTTER ON A RAINY DAY, and a scolding woman are alike. Whoever can restrain her, can restrain the wind, AND WITH HIS RIGHT HAND GRASP OIL." (= NKJV, NIV, NASB, ESV) 

The 1970 Catholic St. Joseph New American Bible Pro. 27:15-16- "For a persistent leak on a rainy day, the match is a quarrelsome woman. He who keeps her STORES UP A STORMWIND; HE CANNOT TELL NORTH FROM SOUTH." (Yeah, that's pretty similar, right?)

The so called Greek Septuagint - Believe it or not, but this utterly corrupt "translation" actually says:

Proverbs 27:15-16 "On a stormy day drops of rain DRIVE A MAN OUT OF HIS HOUSE; so also does a railing woman drive A MAN OUT OF HIS HOUSE. THE NORTH WIND IS SHARP, BUT IT IS CALLED BY NAME PROPITIOUS."

(Yeah, that's REALLY close, huh?)


Let's take a closer look

Proverbs 27:15-16 King James Bible - "A continual dropping in a very rainy day and a contentious woman are alike.  Whosoever hideth her hideth the wind, and the ointment of his right hand, which bewrayeth itself." 

Perhaps the first thing we should do is look at the meaning of that old and now archaic word "bewray". The word is found four times in the King James Bible and it simply means "to reveal, to disclose, or betray (in the sense of revealing itself)". Any good modern dictionary contains this word and tells you its meaning.

Webster's online dictionary 1913 says: Bewray - To expose; to reveal; to disclose; to betray. [Obs. or Archaic]

The murder being once done, he is in less fear, and in more hope that the deed shall not be bewrayed or known. Robynson (More's Utopia. )

Thy speech bewrayeth thee. Matt. xxvi. 73.

The meaning as found in the King James Bible, and several other translations, is quite simple. Just as you cannot hide or conceal the wind or the smell of the ointment on your hands, so too you cannot hide a loud and contentious woman.

John Gill comments: "and the ointment of his right hand, which bewrayeth itself: or "will call" or "calls", and says, in effect, Here am I; for the smell of it, which cannot be hid when held in a man's hand, betrays it;... the more it diffuses its savour, and is known to be where it is; and so all attempts to stop the mouth of a brawling woman does but cause her to brawl the louder."

Adam Clarke comments: "You can no more conceal such a woman's conduct, than you can the smell of the aromatic oil with which your hand has been anointed."

Jamieson, Fausset and Brown - "the ointment of his right hand— His right hand endeavors to repress perfume, but vainly." 

Matthew Henry - "A wise man would hide it if he could, for the sake both of his own and his wife's reputation, but he cannot, any more than he can conceal the noise of the wind when it blows or the smell of a strong perfume. Those that are froward and brawling will proclaim their own shame, even when their friends, in kindness to them, would cover it."

Agreeing with the reading or meaning found in the King James Bible are Wycliffe 1395, the Bishops' Bible of 1568, the Geneva Bible 1599, Young's "literal" translation, the ASV footnote, the Jewish Publication Society 1917 translation "He that would hide her hideth the wind, and the ointment of his right hand betrayeth itself.", the 1998 Complete Jewish Bible, Webster's 1833, the Longman Version 1841, The Boothroyd Bible 1853, the Lesser Bible 1853 - "He that would conceal her might conceal the wind, and as fragrant oil on his right hand, which would betray itself.", Rotherham's Emphasized Bible 1902, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907 - "Whosoever hideth her hideth the wind and the ointment of his right hand, which bewrayeth itself.", The Word of Yah 1993, the KJV 21st Century 1994, Third Millennium Bible 1998, The Complete Jewish Bible 1998, Green's Literal 2005, the Bond Slave Version 2009, The Revised Geneva Bible 2009, the Jubilee Bible 2010, the Hebraic Transliteration Scripture 2010, The Holy Scriptures VW edition 2010, and The Biblos Bible 2013 "and the ointment of his right hand which betrays itself." 

The following Bible translations agree with the sense found in the KJB:

The 1998 Complete Jewish Bible says: "whoever can restrain her can restrain the wind or keep perfume on his hand from making itself known." 

The New Berkeley Version in Modern English 1969 - "to restrain her is like restraining the wind; the oil of his right hand betrays him."

Young's 'literal' translation - "Whoso is hiding her hath hidden the wind, And the ointment of his right hand calleth out."

The Bishops' Bible 1568 - "He that stilleth her, stilleth the winde, and stoppeth the smell of the oyntment in his hande."

The Geneva Bible - "He that hideth her, hideth the winde, & she is as ye oyle in his right hand, that vttereth it selfe."

Rotherham's 1902 Emphasized Bible is similar to the KJB - "He that hideth her, hideth the wind, and, perfume, his right hand may proclaim."

J.P. Green's 'literal' Translation - "he who hides her hides the wind, and the ointment of his right hand cries out."

The Jubilee Bible 2000-2010 - "Whosoever hides her hides the wind, because the oil in his right hand cries out."

HOWEVER, such versions as the NKJV, NASB, NIV, RSV, ESV, and Holman all change the meaning as found in the King James Bible. These versions all read basically the same with the NKJV telling us: "A continual dripping on a very rainy day And a contentious woman are alike; Whoever restrains her restrains the wind, AND GRASPS OIL WITH HIS RIGHT HAND."

Several of the versions tell us in a footnote that the Hebrew is obscure, but it really isn't. The word translated as "bewrayeth itself" in the King James Bible is the Hebrew word #7121 qara. It is variously translated, not only in the KJB but also in the NASB, NIV, NKJV, as "to call, to cry out, to give, to proclaim, to shout, to scream, to make a proclamation, to read, to invite, or to announce."

Only ONE TIME have the NASB, NIV and NKJV translated this Hebrew word as "to grasp". It doesn't mean "to grasp", but rather the idea is that the oil on the right hand announces, calls out or proclaims itself by its fragrance. The King James Bible reading is the correct one, and the NKJV, NIV, RSV, NASB missed the point.

Other translations give totally different meanings to the verse.

The Bible in Basic English 1961 has: "He who keeps secret the secret of his friend, WILL GET HIMSELF A NAME FOR GOOD FAITH."

Peterson's ridiculous 2002 paraphrase The Message says: "A nagging spouse is like the drip, drip, drip of a leaky faucet; You can't turn it off, and you can't get away from it. YOUR FACE MIRRORS YOUR HEART."

This is just one of many examples of where we either hold on to the sometimes "archaic" but accurate King James Bible (bewrayeth), or we abandon it for a more modern speech version that is inaccurate (grasp). I'll stick with the old but tried and true King James Bible.

 

Proverbs 29:10 “The bloodthirsty hate the upright: BUT THE JUST SEEK HIS SOUL.”

Agreeing word for word or in sense with the King James Bible are Wycliffe 1395 - "but iust men seken his soule., Coverdale 1535, Bishops’s Bible 1568 - "The bloodthirstie hate the righteous: but the iust seeke his soule.", the Geneva Bible, the RV 1881, Darby 1890, Youngs 1898, ASV 1901, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, Douay 1950, NKJV 1982, the Third Millennium Bible 1998, Green's Literal 2005, the NET version 2006, Holman Standard 2009.

There is a contrast between the bloodthirsty who hates the upright, and the just man who seeks the benefit of his soul.

NASB - “Men of bloodshed hate the blameless, But the UPRIGHT ARE CONCERNED FOR HIS LIFE.” Footnote: Literally “seek his soul”

However the NIV says the exact opposite with: - “Bloodthirsty men hate a man of integrity AND SEEK TO KILL THE UPRIGHT.”  NOT at all the same, is it?

The NRSV and ESV are basically like the NIV, which teaches the exact opposite of the KJB, RV, ASV, NASB, Holman, NET and NKJV. They also read: “The bloodthirsty hate the blameless, and THEY SEEK THE LIFE OF THE UPRIGHT.” - ESV 2001.

The RSV actually says: "Bloodthirsty men hate one who is blameless, and THE WICKED seek his life." Then it footnotes that they have altered the text and that the Hebrew reads "the upright" instead of "the wicked". Just a slight change in meaning, huh?

Holman Standard - “Bloodthirsty men hate an honest person, BUT THE UPRIGHT CARE ABOUT HIM.”

The Message - “Murderers hate honest people; MORAL FOLKS ENCOURAGE THEM.”

NKJV - “The bloodthirsty hate the blameless, BUT THE UPRIGHT SEEK HIS WELL-BEING.” ** Footnote: Literally soul.

 

Proverbs 28:3 KJB - "A POOR MAN that oppresseth the poor is like a sweeping rain which leaveth no food."  

NIV 1978, 1984, 2011 editions, NRSV 1989 "A RULER who oppresses the poor is like a driving rain that leaves no crops." NRSV footnote "text emended. Hebrew - a poor man"

Holman Standard 2009 - "A DESTITUTE LEADER who oppresses the poor is like a driving rain that leaves no food."

 Then the Holman Standard gives this "helpful" footnote - "LXX reads "a wicked man".  So where did the Holman Standard "scholars" get this reading of "A DESTITUTE LEADER"?  They just made it up out of their own fertile imagination!  

 

The Message 2002 rejects the Hebrew text and goes with the so called Greek Septuagint and says: "THE WICKED who oppress the poor are like a hailstorm that beats down the harvest."

 

The Catholic Connection  

The older Douay-Rheims 1610 and the 1950 Douay both correctly read "THE POOR MAN that oppresseth the poor".  But the 1968 Jerusalem bible and 1985 New Jerusalem both have "THE WICKED MAN that oppresses the poor..." with a footnote telling us that the Hebrew text reads "poor man". The St. Joseph New American bible 1970 says: "A RICH MAN who oppresses the poor...." - the exact opposite meaning with no footnote. 

Agreeing the the Hebrew text and the King James Bible's "A POOR MAN" are Wycliffe 1395, Coverdale 1535, the Great Bible 1540, Matthew's Bible 1549, the Bishops' Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1587,  Darby 1890, Young's 1898, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, Jewish Publication Society bible 1917, the RSV, ESV, NASB, NKJB, NET, Complete Jewish Bible 1998, the Koster Scriptures 1998, Common English Bible 2011, Names of God Bible 2011, the Orthodox Jewish Bible 2011, The Voice 2012, Lexham English Bible 2012, the New Living Translation 2013, the  Modern English Version 2014, ISV 2014, just to name a few. 

 

Even Dan Wallace's NET version reads "a poor man".  He then footnotes in reference to the strange reading found in the NIV. "The MT reads “a poor man,” גֶּבֶר רָשׁ (gever rash); cf. KJV, NASB, NLT. The problem is that the poor in the book of Proverbs is not an oppressor and does not have the power to be such. So commentators assume the word is incorrect. By a slight change to רָשָׁע (rasha’) the reading becomes “a wicked ruler” [Heb “a wicked mighty man”]. THERE IS NO TEXTUAL SUPPORT FOR THIS CHANGE. The LXX, however, reads, “A courageous man oppresses the poor with impieties.” If “a poor man” is retained, then the oppression would include betrayal – one would expect a poor man to have sympathy for others who are impoverished, but in fact that is not the case. It is a sad commentary on human nature that the truly oppressed people can also be oppressed by other poor people."

Notice too that the RSV followed the Hebrew text here with "A POOR MAN". Then the NRSV went with "A RULER", but then the ESV went back to "A POOR MAN".

 

The NIV is one of the worst perversions of God's pure words out there, and yet many professing Christians are using this Vatican Rag and really don't care. When not even Dan Wallace agrees with it, then you know it's got to be bad.

 

Proverbs 29:21 "He that delicately bringeth up his servant from a child SHALL HAVE HIM BECOME HIS SON at the length."


This is the reading or meaning found in such versions as the Geneva Bible - “He that delicately bringeth vp his seruant from youth, at length he will be euen as his sone.”, the Longman Version 1841, the Boothroyd Bible 1853, the Lesser Bible 1853, Julia Smith Translation 1855, The Jewish Family Bible 1864, the Smith Bible 1876, The Revised English Bible 1877, the Sharpe Bible 1883, the Revised Version 1885, Darby 1890, American Standard Version 1901 -"He that delicately bringeth up his servant from a child SHALL HAVE HIM BECOME A SON AT THE LAST.", Rotherham's Emphasized Bible 1902, 
The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907,  World English Bible 2000, the NASB 1995 - "He who pampers his slave from childhood WILL IN THE END FIND HIM TO BE A SON.", the NKJV 1982, the Jewish translations of 1917 (JPS), 1936 Hebrew Names Version, The Word of Yah 1993, the Third Millennium Bible 1998, The Koster Scriptures 1998, The New European Version 2010, the Updated Bible Version of 2004 - “He that delicately brings up his slave from a child SHALL HAVE HIM BECOME A SON AT THE LAST.", the Bond Slave Version 2009, the Hebraic Transliteration Scripture 2010, The New European Version 2010 - “He who pampers his servant from youth will have him become a son in the end.”, the Orthodox Jewish Bible of 2011 - “ He that pampers his eved (servant) from youth up shall have him as his ben (son) at the acharit (end).", The World English Bible 2012, the Natural Israelite Bible 2012 - “He who pampers his servant from childhood  Will have him as a son in the end.”, The Biblos Bible 2013,  and The Modern English Version 2014 - “He who delicately brings up his servant from a child WILL HAVE HIM AS A SON IN THE END."

The Hebrew Roots Bible 2012 is similar with "He who pampers his servant from youth, even afterwards in his days he shall be his successor."

And this Interlinear Hebrew Old Testament - "at the length shall have him become a son."

 http://studybible.info/IHOT/Proverbs%2029:21


Foreign Language Bibles

 

Foreign language Bibles that agree with the King James Bible are the French Martin of 1744 and the French Ostervald of 1996 - “Le serviteur sera A LA FIN LE FILS DE CELUI qui le nourrit délicatement dès la jeunesse.”, the Italian Diodati of 1649 and the Italian Riveduta of 1927, 1994 and 2006  - “Se alcuno alleva delicatamente da fanciullo il suo servo, QUELLO SARA FIGLIUOLO ALLA FINE.”, the Spanish Sagradas Escrituras of 1569, and the Reina Valera of 1602, 1909 - “El que regala a su siervo desde su niñez, A LA POSTRE SERA SU HIJO."  the 1997  Spanish La Biblia de las Américas- “El que mima a su siervo desde la niñez, AL FINAL LO TENDRA POR HIJO.",   the Portuguese Almeida Corrigida E Fiel of 1681 and  A Biblia Sagrada em Portuguese - “Quando alguém cria delicadamente o seu servo desde a mocidade, POR DERRADEIRO ELE QUERERA SER SEU FILHO.", the  Romanian Fidela Bible 2014 - "Cel ce cu grijă creşte pe servitorul său din copilărie, el îi va deveni fiu de-a lungul timpului. = "he will become a son over time.", the Czech BKR  Bible - “Kdo rozkošně chová z dětinství služebníka svého, naposledy bude syn.” = “he will be a son.”, the Russian Synodal Bible - “Если с детства воспитывать раба в неге, то впоследствии он захочет быть сыном.”,  the Dutch Staten Vertaling Bible - “Als men zijn knecht van jongs op weeldig houdt, hij zal in zijn laatste een zoon willen zijn.”, the Hungarian Karoli Bible - “A ki lágyan neveli gyermekségétõl fogva az õ szolgáját, végre az lesz a fiú.”, and the Chinese Union Traditional Bible - 人 將 僕 人 從 小 嬌 養 , 這 僕 人 終 久 必 成 了 他 的 兒 子 。

 

and the Modern Greek Bible - "Εαν τις ανατρεφη παιδιοθεν τον δουλον αυτου τρυφηλως, τελος παντων θελει κατασταθη υιος." = "at the end will cause to be (established) a son."

Commentators are all over the board on what this verse means, and some admit they have no idea. As I understand it, it basically means that when one treats his servant as if he were a son, in the end the servant will love him as a son does his father, rather than serving from the merely mechanical obedience of a servant to his master. God deals with us in this way, so that we are no longer just His "servants" but also His sons and His friends.

By the way, that "archaic expression" - "he that DELICATELY BRINGETH UP" is also found in the Geneva, the RV, ASV, Darby, Youngs, the 2004 Updated Bible and the Jewish translations of 1917 JPS (Jewish Publication Society) the 1936 Hebrew Publishing Company, The Biblos Bible 2013 and The Modern English Bible 2014.

The RSV, NRSV and ESV are interesting. The 1952 RSV and the 2001 ESV both read: "Whoever pampers his servant from childhood will in the end find him HIS HEIR."

However the NRSV of 1989 reads: "A slave pampered from childhood WILL COME TO A BAD END." (Not quite the same, is it?)

Young's is a little weird with: "Whoso is bringing up his servant delicately, from youth, At his latter end ALSO HE IS A CONTINUATOR."

But wait! The NIV 1978 and the NIV 1984 editions tells us: "If a man pampers his servant from youth, HE WILL BRING GRIEF in the end."

BUT the brand new 2011 NIV now says: "A servant pampered from youth WILL TURN OUT TO BE INSOLENT." Then the NIV footnotes: "The meaning of the Hebrew for this word is uncertain."  Well, it certainly is now!

The latest NIV is very similar to the Holman Standard which also says: "A slave pampered from his youth WILL BECOME ARROGANT later on. "

"America's greatest Textual Scholar" Daniel Wallace's NET version reads: "If someone pampers his servant from youth, HE WILL BE A WEAKLING in the end." 

The Judaica Press Tanach says: "If one pampers his slave from childhood, he will ultimately be A RULER."

The Catholic Douay of 1950 and St. Joseph NAB 1970 have: "He that nourisheth his servant delicately from his childhood, afterwards SHALL  FIND HIM STUBBORN."

The Catholic New Jerusalem bible of 1985 reads: "If a slave is pampered from childhood, he will PROVE UNGRATEFUL in the end." Then it footnotes: "Translation uncertain; the word occurs only here."

The so called Greek Septuagint is different from them all (Surprise!). It says: "HE THAT LIVES WANTONLY FROM A CHILD, SHALL BE A SERVANT, and in the end SHALL GRIEVE OVER HIMSELF."

The 1969 New Berkeley Version in Modern Language is similar to the King James Bible, with: “He who pampers his servant from a child, AFTERWARDS SHALL HAVE HIM FOR A SON." 

The 1989 Revised English Bible and 
The International Standard Version 2014 tell us: “If you pamper a servant from his childhood, later on HE’LL BECOME UNGRATEFUL.”

The 2012 The Voice, another critical text edition put out by Thomas Nelson, says: "If you indulge your servant from early in life, in the end IT WON'T GO WELL FOR EITHER OF YOU."

Finally we have Peterson's 2002 The Message, which is totally unrecognizable with: "IF YOU LET PEOPLE TREAT YOU LIKE A DOORMAT, YOU'LL BE QUITE FORGOTTEN IN THE END."

Let’s see....”become a SON”, "will be a RULER", "will be A WEAKLING", “find him HIS HEIR”, “HE WILL BRING GRIEF”, “WILL TURN OUT TO BE INSOLENT”, "WILL BECOME UNGRATEFUL” , "IT WON'T GO WELL FOR EITHER OF YOU" or “YOU'LL BE QUITE FORGOTTEN”.

Yep, it looks like Bible agnostic James White is right once again. By comparing a variety of translations we can get a clearer picture of what God REALLY said, right?

 

Folks, you are not going to believe this one. 

 

Proverbs 30:1-2 "The words of Agur the son of Jakeh, even the prophecy: THE MAN SPAKE UNTO ITHIEL, EVEN UNTO ITHIEL AND UCAL, surely I am more bruthish than any man, and have not the understanding of a man.


Jameson, Faussett and Brown - “Ithiel and Ucal were perhaps pupils.”


John Gill - “unto Ithiel, even unto Ithiel and Ucal; who were either the children of Agur, whom he instructed in the knowledge of divine things; or they were, as Aben Ezra, either his companions with whom he conversed about sacred things, or his disciples who inquired of him about these things, and learned them of him.”


Adam Clarke - “Agur seems to have been a public teacher, and Ithiel and Ucal to have been his scholars.”


John Wesley - “And Ucal - Two friends and co - temporaries of Agur, who desired his instructions.”


Matthew Poole - “Those who take Ithiel and Ucal to be proper names, believe them to be the pupils of Agur, and it is conjectured that the different parts of Agur’s discourse is in answer to questions proposed by these pupils, after the manner of the ancient schools — “hearing them, and asking them questions.”


Matthew Henry mentions - “Ithiel and Ucal are mentioned as the names of his pupils, whom he instructed, or who consulted him as an oracle, having a great opinion of his wisdom and goodness.”



The words "THE MAN SPAKE UNTO ITHIEL, EVEN TO ITHIEL AND UCAL" are found in The Jewish Family Bible 1864, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, the Jewish Publication Society 1917, the Hebrew Publishing Company 1936 translation, The New Jewish Version 1985, 
the Koster Scriptures 1998, the Complete Jewish Bible 1998, The Hebraic Transliteration Scripture 2010, The New European Version 2010, The Orthodox Jewish Bible 2011 - “the gever (man) spoke unto Itiel, even unto Itiel and Uchal”.

 

This is also the reading of the Geneva Bible, the RV 1885, Darby 1890, the ASV 1901, the New Life Version 1969,  the Catholic Jerusalem and New Jerusalem versions, the RSV, NKJV 1982, the NIV 1984 edition, The NASB 1995,  the World English Bible 2000, Dan Wallace’s NET version 2006 - “This man says to Ithiel, to Ithiel and to Ukal”, Holman Standard 2009, the Jubilee Bible 2010, the Lexham English Bible 2012, The Biblos Bible 2013, The Modern English Version 2014, The Hebrew Names Version 2014 and the Amplified Bible 2015 edition - “The man says to Ithiel, to Ithiel and to Ucal”  

 

Foreign Language Bibles

 

Foreign Language Bibles that also say: "THE MAN SPAKE UNTO ITHIEL, EVEN UNTO ITHIEL AND UCAL" are the Italian Nuova Diodati 1991 and the Italian Riveduta 2006 - "Massime pronunciate da quest’uomo per Itiel, per Itiel e Ucal.", the Spanish Reina Valera 1995 - "La profecía que dijo el varón a Itiel, a Itiel y a Ucal.", the Polish Updated Gdansk Bible 2013 - “do Itiela, do Itiela i Ukala.”, the Portuguese Almeida Corrigida 2009 - “Disse este varão a Itiel, a Itiel e a Ucal”, the Romanian Fidela Bible 2014 - “Itiel, pentru Itiel şi pentru Ucal.”, the NIV Portuguese bible (even though the English NIV is VERY different) - “Este homem declarou a Itiel; a Itiel e a Ucal”, the Hungarian Karoli Bible - “Itielnek és Ukálnak.”, the German Schlachter Bible 2000 - “das Manneswort an Itiel, an Itiel und Ukal”, the Tagalog Ang Dating Biblia - “kay Ithiel, at kay Ucal”, and the Norwegian Det Norsk Bibelselskap - “til Itiel og Ukkal”


HOWEVER, even though the RSV of 1952 reads the same as the King James Bible - 
"THE MAN SPAKE UNTO ITHIEL, EVEN TO ITHIEL AND UCAL" -   the  ESV (English Standard Version of 2011) actually say: "The words of Agur son of Jakeh. The oracle. THE MAN DECLARES, I AM WEARY, O GOD; I AM WEARY, O GOD, AND WORN OUT. Surely I am too stupid to be a man. I have not the understanding of a man."

(Not quite the same meaning as "THE MAN SPAKE UNTO ITHIEL, EVEN TO ITHIEL AND UCAL" is it?)


The NIV 1984 edition read the same as the KJB - “The sayings of Agur son of Jakeh - AN ORACLE: This man declared to Ithiel, TO ITHIEL AND TO UCAL: "I AM THE MOST IGNORANT OF MEN; I DO NOT HAVE A MAN’S UNDERSTANDING. “

NIV 2011 edition.

But now the brand new revision of the old NIV - the 2011 NIV -  now says: "The sayings of Agur son of Jakeh - AN INSPIRED UTTERANCE. This man's utterance to Ithiel: I AM WEARY, GOD, BUT I CAN PREVAIL. SURELY I AM ONLY A BRUTE, NOT A MAN; I DO NOT HAVE HUMAN UNDERSTANDING.”

Not only does the new NIV 2011 radically differ from the old NIV, BUT also from the ESV. The "I AM WORN OUT" of the ESV is not the same thing as the NIV 2011 "BUT I CAN PREVAIL." , is it?

Let’s compare the RSV of 1971, the NRSV of 1989 and the ESV of 2011, and then the NIV 1984 edition to the NIV 2011 edition to see how the “scholars game” is really played.

 

RSV 1971 - “The words of Agur son of Jakeh OF MASSA. The man says TO ITHIEL, TO ITHIEL AND UCAL: 2.  Surely I am too stupid to be a man. I have not the understanding of a man.”

 

NRSV 1989 - “The words of Agur son of Jakeh. AN ORACLE. Thus says the man: I AM WEARY, OF GOD, I AM WEARY, O GOD. HOW CAN I PREVAIL?   2. Surely I am too stupid to be human; I do not have human understanding.”  

 

ESV 2011 - “The words of Agur son of Jakeh. THE ORACLE. The man declares, I AM WEARY, O GOD; I AM WEARY, O GOD, AND WORN OUT.  2.  Surely I am too stupid to be a man. I have not the understanding of a man.”  

 

The NIV 1984 edition -  “The sayings of Agur son of Jakeh - AN ORACLE: THE MAN DECLARED to Ithiel, TO ITHIEL AND TO UCAL;  I AM THE MOST IGNORANT OF MEN; I do not have MAN’S understanding.

 

The NIV 2011 edition - “The sayings of Agur son of Jakeh—an INSPIRED UTTERANCE. THIS MAN’S UTTERANCE to Ithiel: “I AM WEARY, O GOD. BUT I CAN PREVAIL. SURELY I AM ONLY A BRUTE, NOT A MAN;  I do not have HUMAN understanding.”

 

The Catholic Connection


Likewise the Catholic versions are all messed up. The newer Jerusalem Bible 1968 and the New Jerusalem bible 1985 both agree with the reading found in the King James Bible,

but the 1950 Douay version reads: "The word of THE GATHERER the son of THE VOMITER. The vision which the man spoke WITH WHOM GOD IS, AND WHO BEING STRENGTHENED BY GOD, ABIDING WITH HIM, said: I am the most foolish of men, and the wisdom OF MEN is not with me."  

It doesn't even remotely agree at all with either the NIV 2011 or the ESV 2011.

But wait! There's more. Now Peterson's Paraphrase of 2003, called The Message, has come out and it says: "THE SKEPTIC SWORE, "THERE IS NO GOD! NO GOD! - I CAN DO ANYTHING I WANT! I'm more animal than human; so-called human intelligence escapes me."

Hey, not to worry - It's all the same "message", right?

In closing, let's compare some of the verses in Proverbs 30, in the modern versions, to see if they contradict each other. In verse 3 we read, "I neither learned wisdom, NOR have the knowledge of the holy." The RV, ASV, Spanish, NIV, NKJV, ESV agree with the KJB.

However the NASB of 1972 says "I have not learned wisdom, BUT I have knowledge of the Holy One." - the exact opposite.

Then in 1977 and again in 1995, the NAS changed again to read like the KJB and others. It now reads: "Neither have I learned wisdom, NOR Do I have the knowledge of the Holy One."

In Proverbs 30:11 we read, "There is A GENERATION that curseth THEIR father, and doth not bless their mother."

It refers to a whole generation of people. "a generation" is the reading of the RV, ASV, NKJV, Young's, Darby, Holman, The New European Version 2010, and the Jewish translations of 1917 and 1936.

However the NASB has, "There is A KIND OF MAN who curses HIS father", and the NIV, ESV say "There are THOSE WHO curse their father. . ." The Hebrew word is generation, as even the ESV footnote tells us - “ Hebrew There is a generation; also verses 12, 13, 14”


In Proverbs 30:17  we read: "The eye that mocketh at his father, and disputes to obey his mother, the ravens of the valley shall pluck it out, and the young EAGLES shall eat it".

"Eagles" is the reading of  Wycliffe 1395, Coverdale 1535, the Bishops' Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1587, the RV 1885, Darby 1890, Youngs 1898, the ASV 1901, Rotherham's Emphasized Bible 1902, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, New Life Version 1969, the NKJV 1982, NASB 1995,  the KJV 21st Century 1994, Third Millennium Bible 1998, World English Bible 2000, Green's literal 2005, Jubilee Bible 2010, The New European Version 2010, Common English Bible 2011, Modern English Bible 2014.

 

But the RSV, ESV, NIV, NET, ISV and Holman have "the eye....will be eaten by the (young) VULTURES".


Proverbs 30:26 "The CONIES are but a feeble folk"

Conies are a kind of rabbit; it is not an archaic word. CONIES is the reading found in Coverdale, Bishops's Bible, the Geneva Bible, the RV, ASV, Young's, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, the New Berkeley Version 1969, the NIV 1984 edition, Bible in Basic English, Amplified Bible 1987, the Complete Jewish Bible 1998, The New European Version 2010, Knox Bible 2012, KJV 21st Century and Third Millennium Bible 1998.

 

the Portuguese Almeida Corrigida E Fiel, and  A Biblia Sagrada em Portugués, O Livro 2000 and NIV 1999 Nova Versão Internacional - "os coelhos são um povo débil", Luther's German Bible 1545 - "Kaninchen, ein schwach Volk" = "Rabbits are a feeble folk", the 2009 Romanian Fideli Bible - "Iepuriit", the Italian Diodati 1649 and New Diodati 1991 - "I conigli", the French Martinn 1744 and Ostervald 1996 - "Les lapins, qui sont un peuple sans force" = "the rabbits, which are a people without force", the Spanish Las Sagradas Escrituras 1569 and Reina Valera 1909 - "Los conejos, pueblo nada esforzado"

 But the NKJV has "rock badgers" while the NASB of 1972 has "badgers" then in 1995 the NASB once again changed this to now read "THE SHEPHARIM". This along with verse 3 are just two of many examples where the great NASB doesn't even agree with itself from one edition to the next.

Though the NIV 1984 edition has "CONEYS", now the new NIV of 2011 has come out and it, along with the Holman Standard, changes this to "HYRAXES". But the 2004 The Message says these are "MARMOTS".

Proverbs 30:28 KJB -"the SPIDER taketh hold with her hands, and is in kings' palaces."

Proverbs 30:28 ESV, NIV, NASB - "the LIZARD you can take in YOUR hands, yet it is in kings' palaces."





 

Agreeing with the SPIDER as found in the King James Bible are  Coverdale 1535, the Great Bible 1540, Matthew's Bible 1549, the Bishops's Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1587 "The spider taketh holde with her handes, and is in Kings palaces.", Webster's translation 1833, the Lesser Bible 1853, the Boothroyd Bible 1853, The Jewish Family Bible 1864, Young's 1898, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, the 1917 Jewish Publication Society version, 1936 Hebrew Publishing Company version, The Koster Scriptures 1998, The Complete Jewish Bible 1998, the NKJV 1982, the 1994 KJV 21st Century version,  the Third Millennium Bible 1998, God's First Truth 1999, the Jewish translation called the Judaica Press Tanach 2004 also reads: "The SPIDER grasps with her hands, and she is in a king's palaces.", The Revised Geneva Bible 2005, English Jubilee Bible 2010, the 2012 Natural Israelite Bible - "The SPIDER skillfully grasps with its hands, And it is in kings' palaces.", the BRG Bible 2012, The Biblos Bible 2013, the Modern English Version 2014, and the brand new International Standard Version 2014 - "SPIDERS can be caught by the hand, yet they're found in kins' palaces."

FOREIGN LANGUAGE BIBLES

Numerous Foreign language Bibles also read "spider", including  the Portuguese Almeida Corrigida E Fiel 2009 and A Biblia em Portugués - "a aranha, que se apanha com as mãos e está nos paços dos reis.", Luther's German Bible 1545 and 1912, and the German Modernized Bible - "die Spinne wirkt mit ihren Händen" = "the Spider is with her hands", the 2009 Romanian Fideli Bible - "Paianjenul" = "the spider", the French Martin 1744 - "L'araignée" - "the spider", the Spanish Sagradas Escrituras 1569, Cipriano de Valera 1602, the 1865 Cipriano Revisada, the Reina Valeras 1909, 1960, 1995 - "La araña, ase con las manos, Y está en palacios de rey." = "The spider takes hold with her hands, and is in the palaces of the king.", The Polish Updated Gdansk Bible 2013 - “Pająk chwyta rękoma, a bywa w pałacach królewskich.”, the Romanian Fidela Bible 2014 - "Păianjenul se agaţă cu mâinile lui şi este în palatele împăraţilor."


 

Other Foreign language bibles that also have SPIDER are the Afrikaans Bible 1953 - "die geitjie kan jy met die hande gryp" = "the SPIDER takes hold with her hands", the Czech BKR Bible - "Pavouk rukama dělá", the Arabic Smith and Van Dyke Bible - "العنكبوت تمسك بيديها وهي في قصور الملوك", the Dutch Staten Vertaling Bible - "De spinnekop grijpt met de handen," = "the SPIDER takes hold with her hands", the Finnish Bible 1776 - "Hämähäkki kehrää käsillänsä", the Hungarian Karoli Bible - "A pókot kézzel megfoghatod" = "the SPIDER takes hold with her hands", the Lithuanian Bible - "voras audžia savo ransoms", the Indonesian Bible "dan laba-laba itu mencapai dengan kakinya", the Tagalog Ang Dating Biblia 1905 "Ang butiki ay tumatangan ng kaniyang mga kamay," = "the SPIDER takes hold with her hands",  and the Russian Synodal Bible 1876 - "паук лапками цепляется"


But the spider becomes a LIZARD in the RSV, NASB, NIV, Common English bible and Holman Standard. Even Daniel Wallace notes in his NET bible version: "Older English versions, agreeing with Targum. Prov 30:28, translated this term as “spider.” But modern commentators FOLLOWING THE GREEK AND LATIN VERSIONS have “lizard.”   

 

The Catholic Connection

The previous Douay Rheims 1610 and the 1950 Douay Version both read: "The STELLIO supports itself on hands, and dwells in kings' houses."  A stellio is a type of lizard.  The St. Joseph New American Bible 1970, the New Jerusalem bible 1985 and the 2009 Catholic Public Domain Version all say: "LIZARDS - you can catch them with your hands, yet they find their way into kings' palaces."  

Likewise the Jehovah Witness New Word Translations 1961 and 2014 both say: "The GECKO LIZARD takes hold with its own hands and it is in the grand palace of the king."

 

In Proverbs 30:31 we read of four things that are comely in going "A GREYHOUND; an he goat also; and a king, against whom there is no rising up."

The reading of "A GREYHOUND" is found in the Bishops' Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1587, the Bill Bible 1671, the  
The Longman Version 1841, the Lesser Old Testament 1853, the Revised Version 1885, the ASV 1901, Rotherham's 1902 Emphasized Bible, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, The Modern Reader's Bible 1907, The Improved Bible 1913, the 1917 Jewish Publication Society version, the 1936 Hebrew Publishing Company version, the NKJV 1982, the 1998 Complete Jewish Bible, the Spanish Reina Valera of 1909, The New Jewish Version 1985, The Word of Yah 1993, The Koster Scriptures 1998, The Complete Jewish Bible 1998, The World English Bible 2000, The Sacred Scriptures of Yah 2001, the Judaica Press Complete Tanach 2004 - "a GREYHOUND", the Updated Bible Version of 2004, The Revised Geneva Bible 2005, The Context Group Version 2007, Bond Slave Version 2009, Hebraic Transliteration Scripture 2010, The New European Version 2010, the Jubilee Bible 2010, the Natural Israelite Bible 2012, The Concordant Version 2012, and the Hebrew Names Version 2014.


This Online Hebrew Interlinear has "spider"


http://studybible.info/IHOT/Proverbs%2030:28


And the Jewish Virtual Library online translation 1994 - "spider"


http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/mishlei-proverbs...


 

However the RSV of 1952 was the first major version to change "a greyhound" into THE STRUTTING COCK, and this is also found in the NASB. The NIV, NRSV, ESV, NET and Holman also read this as "THE STRUTTING ROOSTER.", but the Holman footnotes "Or, a greyhound"

Now, I'll admit biology is not my strong point, but I'm pretty sure a struting cock is not the same thing as a greyhound.

So where did the reading of "the strutting rooster" come from? Well, the RSV footnote tells us. If you look at the RSV or the NRSV footnotes they both tell us that "the strutting cock" comes from the Greek Septuagint and the Syriac, but that "the Hebrew is obscure".

In other words, this rendering comes from other versions but not from the Hebrew itself. But if we look carefully at the alleged Greek Septuagint version there is more there than just "the strutting cock". The LXX actually reads: "A cock walking in proudly among the hens".

So why didn't the RSV, NASB and NIV completely follow the LXX here and add the whole enchilada? Who knows?

The Holman footnote tells us it may be rendered as "A GREYHOUND", and the ESV tells us it could either be A MAGPIE or a GREYHOUND!

Yeah, I know; a magpie and a greyhound look so much alike that it's often hard to tell the difference between the two. 

But wait.... The Darby version 1890 clears it all up for us and says it's "A HORSE GIRT IN THE LOINS"

Young's 1898 has "A GIRT ONE OF THE LOINS"

The Bible in Basic English 1961 says "A WAR HORSE"

The Living Bible 1971 actually has "A PEACOCK, a male goat, a king as he leads his army."

and the Amplified Bible 1987 lets us know it was  - "A WAR HORSE WELL-KNIT IN THE LOINS"!

Other Weird Versions  

The Ancient Roots Translinear Bible 2008 doesn’t even mention the greyhound or the strutting cock. Instead it actually reads: “Or the HE-GOAT KING WITH HIS NAGGING AND EMERGING WAISTE.” That’s what it says!!! Seriously.

Green's Literal 2005 and the Interlinear Hebrew-Greek Scriptures 2012 (Mebust) - "ONE GIRDED IN THE LOINS"

The Word of God's Children Illustrated Bible 2011 - "A COCK GIRDED ABOUT THE LOINS" ??? - Yep... That IS what it says.

 

Let's see..."a greyhound, a strutting cock, a peacock, one girded in the loins, a magpie and a war horse"... No change in meaning. Just different words that  all pretty much mean the same things, right?

As can be seen from this one chapter of the Bible, the finest modern day scholars do not agree with each other, and come up with totally different translations for the same word.

Not all of them can equally express the mind of God. If I take the modern position, I can pick and choose which rendering I personally like, go back and forth among the versions and become my own final authority for what the word of God says. That is where the "Whateverists" or the "originals only" crowd likes to do.


Proverbs 31:22 KJB - “She maketh herself coverings of tapestry; her clothing is SILK and purple.”


NKJV - “She makes tapestry for herself; Her clothing is FINE LINEN and purple.”


Some have criticized the KJB reading here of “SILK”, telling us that it is not an accurate translation. But there is more to the story. The Hebrew words used here actually has several very different meanings.  It is # 8336 shehsh.  It is variously translated as “fine linen” several times, but also as “marble” (Ester 1:6 and Song of Solomon 5:15) and as “blue” (Ester 1:6) and as “silk” in Proverbs 31:22.


The NASB has translated it as “fine linen” but also as “alabaster” and as “marble” (2 times).  


The NIV translates it as “linen”, “fine linen” and “marble” (3 times).


Was this clothing of literal “silk” or of fine linen that was so pure and white (as are marble and alabaster)  that it was called “silk”?  


Martin Luther’s German Bible of 1545 called it “weiße Seide” or “white SILK”.


Agreeing with the King James Bible reading of “SILK” are Coverdale 1535 - “hir clothige is whyte SYLKE & purple.”, The Great Bible 1540 - “her clothynge is WHYTE SYLKE & purple.”, Matthew’s Bible 1549 - “her clothyng is WHYTE SILKE and purple.”, the Bishops’ Bible 1568 - “her clothyng is white SILKE and purple.”


The Geneva Bible  1587 said “FINE LINEN and purple is her garment”.  So obviously the KJB translators were aware of this translation. But they deliberately chose to go with the word SILK instead.  


Other English Bibles that translated this word as SILK are The Bill Bible 1671, Webster’s 1833 Translation - “her clothing is SILK and purple.”, The Sharpe Bible 1883, Young’s Literal Translation 1898, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, Lamsa’s 1933 translation of the Syriac Peshitta - “her clothing is SILK and purple.”, The Word of Yah 1993, The 21st Century KJV 1994, God’s First Truth 1999 - “her clothing is WHITE SILK and purple.”, the Bond Slave Version 2009, the Biblos Interlinear Bible 2011 = “her clothing is SILK and purple.”, and The Holy Bible, Modern English Version 2014 - “her clothing is SILK and purple.” 


Darby 1890 has “her clothing is BYSSUS and purple.”


The Concordant Literal Version 2009 has - “Her clothing is CAMBRIC and purple.” 


Online Interlinear 2010 (André de Mol) - She makes CAMBRIC SHEEN and purple her clothing.”  


The Voice 2012 says: “she clothes herself in purple and FINE CLOTH.” 


The word SILK found in other parts of the Bible 


Ezekiel 16:10 - I clothed thee also with broidered work, and shod thee with badgers' skin, and I girded thee about with fine linen, and I covered thee with SILK.


Ezekiel 16:13 - Thus wast thou decked with gold and silver; and thy raiment was of fine linen, and SILK, and broidered work; thou didst eat fine flour, and honey, and oil: and thou wast exceeding beautiful, and thou didst prosper into a kingdom.


Revelation 18:12 - The merchandise of gold, and silver, and precious stones, and of pearls, and fine linen, and purple, and SILK, and scarlet, and all thyine wood, and all manner vessels of ivory, and all manner vessels of most precious wood, and of brass, and iron, and marble,


Also found in the ASV, Complete Jewish Bible, Darby, RSV, NRSV, ESV, NET, NASB, Holman Standard and the ISV.


Some Bible versions have the word SILK or SILKY for fabrics that are like silk. 


The Voice of 2011 uses the word SILK in Job 8:15 - “When he leans into his house of SILKEN threads for support, it won’t hold” 


And in Isaiah 3:24 - “…they’ll have bald heads; instead of SILKY-soft fabric—they’ll put on scratchy burlap sacks”  


And in Ezekiel 23:41 - “You reclined on a SILKY couch in front of a table set for your visitors with the incense and oils that belonged to Me.”  


And in Matthew 11:8 - “No? Were you expecting to see a man dressed in the finest SILKS? No, of course not—you find SILK in the sitting rooms of palaces and mansions, not in the middle of the wilderness.” 


The World English Bible in Amos 3:12 - “…so shall the children of Israel be rescued who sit in Samaria on the corner of a couch, and on the SILKEN cushions of a bed.” 


Bible in Basic English 1961  Amos 3:12 - “who are resting in Samaria on seats of honour or on the SILK cushions of a bed.


The Living Bible 1971  Song of Solomon 1:5 - “I am dark but beautiful, O girls of Jerusalem, tanned as the dark tents of Kedar.” King Solomon: “But lovely as the SILKEN tents of Solomon!” 


 Easy To Read Version 2001 Song of Solomon 4:3 - “Your lips are red like SILK.” and 7:5 “the hair of your head is like SILK.”


New Century Version 2005  Song of Solomon 4:3 - “Your lips are like red SILK thread, and your mouth is lovely. Your cheeks behind your veil are like slices of a pomegranate. 


The New International Reader’s Version  2014 Song of Solomon 7:5  - “Your head is like a crown on you. It is as beautiful as Mount Carmel. Your hair is as smooth as purple SILK. I am captured by your flowing curls.”

 

 

 

The early history of silk trade.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silk 

 

The first evidence of the silk trade is the finding of silk in the hair of an Egyptian mummy of the 21st dynasty, c.1070 BC.[14] The silk trade reached as far as the Indian subcontinent, the Middle East, Europe, and North Africa. This trade was so extensive that the major set of trade routes between Europe and Asia came to be known as the Silk Road.

 

Silk has a long history in India. It is known as "Paat" in eastern India, Pattu in southern parts of India, and Resham in north India. Recent archaeological discoveries in Harappa and Chanhu-daro suggest that sericulture, employing wild silk threads from native silkworm species, existed in South Asia during the time of the Indus Valley Civilization dating between 2450 BC and 2000 BC, while "hard and fast evidence" for silk production in China dates back to around 2570 BC.


By the grace and mercy of God Almighty, I and many thousands of other Christians believe His complete  and inspired words are  found preserved in the King James Bible.

Will Kinney

 Return to Articles - http://brandplucked.webs.com/articles.htm

More Bible Babel in the book of Proverbs

 

The second part of these two verses is all confused and messed up in some of the modern versions as well. The King James Bible as well as the Hebrew text itself repeats the same phrase “the words of truth”, that thou mightest answer “the words of truth” to them that send unto thee.”

 


Many of the MT mss read “sovereigns [princes], all the judges of the earth.” (Thus the NKJV ft. is a lie) The LXX has “sovereigns…rule the earth.” But the MT manuscript in the text (the one Wallace has chosen to follow)  has “judges of righteousness.” C. H. Toy suggests that the Hebrew here has assimilated Psalm 148:11 in its construction (Proverbs [ICC], 167). The expression “judges of the earth” is what one would expect, but the more difficult and unexpected reading, the one scribes might change, would be “judges of righteousness."    

 

So  in other words, this guy who is "Toying" around with the Hebrew texts "suggests" that some scribes took "the more difficult reading" and changed it to match what is found in another part.  So we are then left with speculation, guesses, hypothesis and personal preferences rather than the sure and infallible words of the living God.  This all sounds suspiciously like the "Yeah, hath God said....?" syndrome to me.  How about you? 


Many of the MT mss read “sovereigns [princes], all the judges of the earth.” (Thus the NKJV ft. is a lie) The LXX has “sovereigns…rule the earth.” But the MT manuscript in the text (the one Wallace has chosen to follow)  has “judges of righteousness.” C. H. Toy suggests that the Hebrew here has assimilated Psalm 148:11 in its construction (Proverbs [ICC], 167). The expression “judges of the earth” is what one would expect, but the more difficult and unexpected reading, the one scribes might change, would be “judges of righteousness."    

 

So  in other words, this guy who is "Toying" around with the Hebrew texts "suggests" that some scribes took "the more difficult reading" and changed it to match what is found in another part.  So we are then left with speculation, guesses, hypothesis and personal preferences rather than the sure and infallible words of the living God.  This all sounds suspiciously like the "Yeah, hath God said....?" syndrome to me.  How about you? 


Many of the MT mss read “sovereigns [princes], all the judges of the earth.” (Thus the NKJV ft. is a lie) The LXX has “sovereigns…rule the earth.” But the MT manuscript in the text (the one Wallace has chosen to follow)  has “judges of righteousness.” C. H. Toy suggests that the Hebrew here has assimilated Psalm 148:11 in its construction (Proverbs [ICC], 167). The expression “judges of the earth” is what one would expect, but the more difficult and unexpected reading, the one scribes might change, would be “judges of righteousness."    

 

So  in other words, this guy who is "Toying" around with the Hebrew texts "suggests" that some scribes took "the more difficult reading" and changed it to match what is found in another part.  So we are then left with speculation, guesses, hypothesis and personal preferences rather than the sure and infallible words of the living God.  This all sounds suspiciously like the "Yeah, hath God said....?" syndrome to me.  How about you? 

 

It should also be noted that neither the so called Septuagint, nor the Vulgate, nor the Syriac read as does the Hebrew text they call “obscure” NOR do any one of them agree with each other!


The Septuagint copy I have reads like no other Bible version on the face of the earth I am aware of and adds a whole bunch of words besides.  It says: “And he followed her, being gently led on, and that as an ox is led to the slaughter, AND AS A DOG TO BONDS, OR AS A HART SHOT IN THE LIVER WITH AN ARROW.”!!!  Hellooooo?  Is anybody home?

 

And the Syriac, as we have seen, says: “He went after her as A LITTLE CHILD, as an ox that goes to the slaughter, and AS A DOG TO BE MUZZLED.”  So, in other words, their “helpful footnote” is nothing more than a confusing bunch of Baloney.


Dan Wallace and Company’s silly NET version reads: “Suddenly he went after her like an ox that goes to the slaughter, LIKE A STAG PRANCING INTO A TRAPPER’S SNARE.” (This is basically like the NIV, Holman junk)


Jehovah Witness New World Translation 2013 - "To understand a proverb and A PUZZLING SAYING, The words of the wise and their riddles."


Jehovah Witness New World Translation 2013 - "To understand a proverb and A PUZZLING SAYING, The words of the wise and their riddles."


The so called Greek LXX version has a completely different meaning in Proverbs 18:8 and reads: "Fear casts down the slothful; and the souls of the effeminate shall hunger." (Yeah, that's pretty close, huh?) and in Proverbs 26 the LXX is missing all of chapters 25, 26, 27, 28, and only has one verse of chapter 29.  

 

So read the Hebrew texts, as well as The Jewish Family Bible 1864, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, the JPS (Jewish Publication Society) Bible 1917, the 1936 Hebrew Publishing Company translation, The New Jewish Version 1985, The Word of Yah Bible 1993, the Complete Jewish Bible 1998, The Natural Israelite Bible 2010, Coverdale 1535, Matthew’s Bible 1549, the Bishops’ Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1599, The Revised English Bible 1877, the RV 1885, Rotherham’s Emphasized bible 1902, the ASV 1901, the [NASB], Darby 1890, Youngs 1898, New Berkeley Version in Modern English 1969, the KJV 21st Century version 1994, the Third Millennium Bible 1998, The Koster Scriptures 1998, God's First Truth 1999, The Yah Sacred Scriptures 2001, Green's Literal 2005, The Bond Slave Version 2009, the Jubilee Bible 2010, The Hebrew Transliteration Bible 2010, The Biblos Bible 2013, the Modern English Bible 2014 - "as a fool to the correction of the stocks."
Foreign Language Bibles

Foreign language Bibles that read the same as the Hebrew texts and the King James Bible are the Spanish Reina Valera’s 1909, 1960, 1995 - “o como va el necio a prisión para ser castigado”, the French Martin 1744, Louis Segond 1910, Ostervald 1991 and Louis Segond 2007- “Comme un fou qu'on lie pour le châtier”, the Italian Diodati 1649 and 1991, Riveduta 2006 - “come un incatenato alla punizione dello stolto”, the Portuguese Almeida - “como o louco ao castigo das prisões”, and Luther’s German bible 1545 and German Schlachter Bible 2000 - "und wie ein Gefesselter zur Bestrafung der Toren."