Another King James Bible Believer

The Book of the Judges - Some examples of the Bible Babel Buffet

These are just a few examples taken from the book of Judges that show how not all bible versions say the same things but with different words. It is my contention that the King James Bible is always correct. It is the preserved, inerrant word of God and all other modern English versions are inferior and often wrong.

Not all Bible versions are as ridiculous as this following example, but you have to admit the New English Bible of 1970 goes beyond the bounds of the usual blunders found in most inferior versions of God's word. (For several examples of bonehead blunders in such versions as the NASB, NIV, NKJV, Holman Standard see my article here: 

  http://brandplucked.webs.com/blundernasnkjnivhol.htm

Judges 1:14 KJB - "...and she lighted from off her ass; and Caleb said unto her, What wilt thou?"

In Judges 1:14 all versions I have consulted say basically the same thing, except the NEB - New English Bible of 1970. In the King James Bible we read of Achsah, the daughter of Caleb, who had just been given in marriage to Othniel. "And it came to pass, when she came to him (her new husband) that she moved him to ask of her father a field: and SHE LIGHTED FROM OFF HER ASS; and Caleb said unto her, WHAT WILT THOU?"

However only the NEB says: "When she came to him, he incited her to ask her father for a piece of land. As she sat on the ass, SHE BROKE WIND, and Caleb said, 'WHAT DID YOU MEAN BY THAT?'"  It's hard to make stuff like this up, but when somebody tells you that all bibles say essentially the same things, they really haven't studied the issue very much.  

However, thankfully, the Revision of the NEB was done in 1989 and the Revised English Bible now says: "She dismounted from her donkey, and Caleb asked her, 'What do you want?'"  

Judges 3:22 - "and THE DIRT came out"

King James Bible - "And the haft also went in after the blade; and the fat closed upon the blade, so that he could not draw the dagger out of his belly; and THE DIRT CAME OUT."

The word "dirt" is a euphemistic term which means his excrement. It is not even an archaic word. Webster's 1999 dictionary defines dirt as "any foul or filthy substance, as mud, grime or excrement."

The New Oxford American Dictionary gives one of the definitions of "the dirt" as "informal - excrement: a lawn covered in dog dirt."

The first definition given for dirt in Webster's Collegiate dictionary 1967 here on my desk is 1. excrement.

Not only does the KJB tell us that Ehud stuck the dagger into the belly of the very fat king Eglon and that "the dirt came out" but so also do Wycliffe 1395, the Great Bible 1540 - "but the dyrt came out.", Matthew's bible 1549 - "And the dyrt came out.", the Bishops' Bible 1568, Geneva Bible 1599, Webster's translation 1833, The Jewish Family Bible 1864, The Smith Bible 1876, The Revised English Bible 1877, Darby's translation 1890, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, the 1936 Hebrew Publishing Company translation - "and THE DIRT came out", the RSV "and THE DIRT came out", NRSV 1989, the Spanish Sagradas Escrituras 1569,  Reina Valera 1995 - "y salió el estiércol", La Biblia de las Américas 1997 - "y se le salieron los excrementos.", Italian Diodati 1649 - "e lo sterco uscì fuori.", the Amplified Bible 1987- "Ehud did not draw the sword out of his belly, and THE DIRT came out.", the Third Millennium Bible 1998 - and THE DIRT came out.", The Biblos Interlinear Bible 2011,  and the Modern Greek Bible - "και εξηλθε κοπρος.” = "and went out manure".

 

The New Jewish Version 1985 - "and THE FILTH came out."

The Jubilee Bible 2010 = "and the EXCREMENT came out."

The ESV 2001-2011  says: "and THE DUNG came out."

The Judaica Press Tanach 2004 - "he did not draw the sword out of his belly; and THE EXCREMENT came out."

The Douay-Rheims 1610 says: "THE EXCREMENTS of the belly came out."

The Voice 2012 - "and the contents of Eglon’s intestines spilled out."

New Living Translation 2013 - “and the king’s bowels emptied.


Adam Clarke comments: "The original, parshedonah, occurs only here, and is supposed to be compounded of peresh, dung, and shadah, to shed, and may be very well applied to his having an evacuation in the natural way through fright and anguish."

David Guzik's Commentary notes: " Without being coarse, we can see how real and true-to-life the Bible is; in the Bible (unlike most moves and television programs) people go to the bathroom."

John Gill comments: "and the dirt came out -the margin of our Bibles is, "it came out at the fundament"; that is, the dagger did, the thrust being so strong and vehement; but that is not so likely, the dagger being so short, and Eglon a very fat man. The Targum is "his food went out'' which was in his bowels; but as the wound was closed up through fat, and the dagger stuck fast in it, it could not come out that way: rather therefore this is to be understood of his excrements, and of their coming out at the usual place, it being common for persons that die a violent death, and indeed others, to purge upon it."  

Matthew Pooles' English Annotations - "His excrements came forth, not at the wound, which closed up, as is usual when persons die either a natural or violent death.”


The BIBLE BABBLE BUFFET VERSIONS

 

However many other versions give us totally different meanings for this verse, and don't even agree with each other.

The NKJV 1982 says: "and HIS ENTRAILS came out." 

New Living Translation - "So Ehud did not pull out the dagger, and the king's bowels emptied." (Good paraphrase) 

Darby 1890 - “for he did not draw the sword out of his belly, and IT came out between the legs.”


Good News Translation 1992 - “Ehud did not pull it out of the king's belly, and IT STUCK OUT BEHIND, BETWEEN HIS LEGS. “ (Ouch!)

 

Revised Version 1881,  ASV 1901  - "for he drew not the sword out of his belly; and IT came out behind."

The NASB 1995 has: "and THE REFUSE came out." (More than a little vague. What exactly is "refuse", empty soup cans and sandwich bags?)

Common English Bible 2011 - “the fat closed over the blade, and HIS GUTS SPILLED OUT.”  Footnote- Hebrew uncertain


Rotherham's Emphasized bible of 1902 gives us a totally different meaning with: "for he withdrew not the sword out of his body, - and HE CAME OUT INTO THE ANTE-CHAMBER."

NIVs 1978 and 1984 editions read - "Even the handle sank in after the blade, WHICH CAME OUT HIS BACK."

BUT the NIV 2011 now reads - "Even the handle sank in after the blade, AND HIS BOWELS DISCHARGED."

So, were two previous the NIV editions wrong and this late$t one finally got it right?

The Message 2002 - "The fat closed in over it so he couldn't pull IT out."

Names of God Bible 2011 - “The BLADE STUCK OUT IN BACK."  Footnote “Hebrew meaning uncertain.”


International Standard Version - “the sword point exited from Eglon's entrails.”

 

Holman Standard - "And Eglon's INSIDES came out.

Lamsa's translation of the Syriac Peshitta says "...the fat closed upon the blade, because he did not draw the sword out of his belly; AND HE WENT OUT HASTILY."

The 1961 Bible in Basic English actually reads this way - "he did not take the sword out of his stomach. And he went out into the ..."  That's how it really reads.  It just ends with three dots... "and he went out into the..."  That's it!

Young's - "that he hath not drawn the sword out of his belly, AND IT GOETH OUT AT THE FUNDAMENT." (Say What?!)

Dan Wallace and Company's NET version reads - "for EHUD did not pull the sword out of his belly."

This made up version by Daniel Wallace and Friends adds the word "Ehud", and gives a meaning different from all the other versions. The "scholars" who put together this NET thing just omit the phrase altogether.  Wait till you see what they did with Judges 5:8!

The Catholic Connection

The Catholic versions exhibit their usual confusion and constant change.  The earlier Douay-Rheims 1610 and the 1950 Douay read - "So that he did not draw out the dagger, but left it in the body as he had struck it in: and forthwith, BY THE SECRET PARTS OF NATURE, THE EXCREMENTS OF THE BELLY CAME OUT."  

But the 1968 Jerusalem bible says: "...and the fat closed over the blade, for Ehud left the dagger in his belly; THEN HE WENT OUT THROUGH THE WINDOW."

Then the 1970 St. Joseph NAB has - "...and the fat closed over the blade BECAUSE HE DID NOT WITHDRAW THE DAGGER FROM HIS BELLY."

This is also how the New Jerusalem bible 1985 reads and then tells us in a footnote that this reading comes from the Greek Septuagint, but that the Hebrew adds other words that seem to be a "euphemism - to relieve nature".

And now in 2009, once again a Catholic translator has changed his latest version, the Catholic Public Domain Version (The Sacred Scriptures) and it now reads - "Instead, he left it in the body just as he had struck with it. And immediately, BY THE PRIVATE PARTS OF NATURE, THE FILTH OF THE BOWELS WENT OUT."

 

 

So did THE DIRT (the EXCREMENT) come out of the very fat king Eglon (KJB, RSV, NRSV, ESV, NIV 2011 and others), or was it his ENTRAILS AND INTESTINES (NKJV, Holman), or was it THE DAGGER ITSELF that came out (NIV 1978, 1984  editions, RV, ASV), or was it Ehud who "went out INTO THE ANTE-CHAMBER", or "OUT THROUGH THE WINDOW",  or was it as Young translated "it goeth OUT AT THE FUNDAMENT"?

There is a simple fact recorded in the Scriptures here that excludes the idea found in the NKJV and Holman versions of it being his entrails or his insides. The verse tells us that the fat closed upon both the blade and the haft. There was no open wound through which his intestines could pour out of his body. His belly was sealed shut.

It is also noted that Eglon was a very fat man, so it is highly unlikely that the dagger itself came out the other side of his body as the previous NIVs and ASV have it. The only thing the phrase "and the dirt came out" can logically refer to is the fact often observed in those who die in a violent manner is that the king defecated from shock.

John Gill and other commentators take this view and support the reading found in the King James Bible.

The King James Bible is correct and the NKJV, Holman, NET, NIVs 1978 and 1984 editions and many others are simply wrong.

 

Judges 5:2 KJB - "Praise ye the Lord for the AVENGING of Israel, when the people willingly offered themselves."

After God had given a great victory to His people in overcoming their enemies, Deborah and Barak sang this song of praise.

King James Bible - "Praise ye the LORD FOR THE AVENGING OF ISRAEL, when the people willingly offered themselves. "

So read the Great Bible 1540 - “Prayse ye þe Lord, for the AUENGYNG of Israel, and for the people that became so wylling.”, the Bishops' Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1599 - "Praise ye the Lord for the AUENGING of Israel", Webster's Translation 1833, Lamsa's 1933 translation of the Syriac Peshitta - "With requital has Israel been avenged; praise the LORD with a song for avenging Israel.", Green's Modern KJV 1998, The Word of Yah 1993, the KJV 21st Century 1994, the Third Millennium Bible 1998, The Bond Slave Version 2009, the Jubilee Bible 2010 - “PRAISE YE THE LORD FOR THE AVENGING OF ISRAEL, when the people willingly offered themselves.”, and the BRG Bible 2012. 

The word for "AVENGING" (which is where the Bible Babble Buffet versions really go wild - as we will see in a moment) is # 6546 pray-gohth, and it is only found twice in the entire Old Testament.  The other time is in Deuteronomy 32:42 where we read of "the beginning of REVENGES."

 

Many foreign language Bibles also read as does the KJB.  

Among these are the Spanish Cipriano de Valera of 1602 and the Reina Valera 1909 and the Reina Valera Gómez of 2010 "Load a Jehovah porque HA VENGADO las injurias de Israel" (but not the 1960 edition),  the Italian Diodati 1649 - "Benedite il Signore: Perciocchè egli HA FATTE LE VENDETTE in Israele", the French Martin Bible 1744 - "Bénissez l'Eternel de ce quil A FAIT DE TELLES VENGEANCES en Israël, et de ce que le peuple a été porté de bonne volonté.", The Dutch Staten Vertaling Bible - “Looft den HEERE, van het wreken der wraken in Israel, van dat het volk zich gewillig heeft aangeboden.” = “Praise ye the LORD, FOR THE AVENGING OF ISRAEL,when the people willingly offered themselves.”, The Czech BKR bible - “Pro pomstu učiněnou v Izraeli, a pro lid, kterýž se k tomu dobrovolně měl, dobrořečte Hospodinu.” and the Russian Synodal Translation - “Израиль отмщен, народ показал рвение; прославьте Господа! = “…the AVENGING of Israel…” and the Romanian Fidela Bible 2014 - "Lăudaţi pe DOMNUL pentru răzbunarea lui Israel, când poporul s-a oferit de bunăvoie." =  "...for the AVENGING OF Israel..."


However there is a wide variety of meanings found in other translations other than "for the avenging of Israel".

J.P. Green's is interesting in that his 1998 Modern King James Version read like the KJB with - " Praise the LORD FOR THE AVENGING OF Israel, when the people willingly offered themselves."  

But then he came out with his KJ3 "Literal" version in 2005 and he then changed it to read: “FOR THE LOOSING OF THE LOCKS OF HAIR IN Israel; for the willing offering of the people, bless Jehovah!”

(Yeah, that's pretty much the same thing, right?)  


NKJV 1982 - "WHEN LEADERS LEAD IN Israel, When the people willingly offer themselves, Bless the LORD!"

This is basically the reading also found in the RSV, NASB, and Holman Standard.

The NET version is the same with: "WHEN THE LEADERS TOOK THE LEAD (2) in Israel, When the people answered the call to war – Praise the Lord!" 

But then he footnotes (2): "The meaning of the Hebrew expression בִּפְרֹעַ פְּרָעוֹת (bifroa’ pÿra’ot) is uncertain. Numerous proposals are offered by commentators."  

In other words, they are just guessing.

The NIV is similar with: "WHEN THE PRINCES IN ISRAEL TAKE THE LEAD, when the people willingly offer themselves - praise the LORD."

ESV - “THAT LEADERS TOOK THE LEAD in Israel, that the people offered themselves willingly,  bless the Lord!”

 
But the NRSV 1989 says: "WHEN THE LOCKS ARE LONG IN Israel, when the people offer themselves willingly - bless the Lord!"

The 2011 critical text Common English Bible is about the same, reading: "WHEN HAIR IS LONG IN ISRAEL, when people willingly offer themselves—bless the Lord!"

The Bible in Basic English says: "BECAUSE OF THE FLOWING HAIR OF THE FIGHTERS IN Israel, because the people gave themselves freely, give praise to the Lord. "

The Judaica Press Tanach has: "WHEN BREACHES ARE MADE IN ISRAEL, when the people offer themselves willingly, bless the Lord."

God’s First Truth 1999 - “Praise the Lord in them that were willing WHILE OTHER SAT STILL.”

The Work of God’s Children Illustrated Bible 2011 - “O YOU OF Israel, that have willingly offered YOUR LIVES TO DANGER, bless the Lord.”

 

Good News Translation 1992 - “Praise the Lord! THE ISRAELITES WERE DETERMINED TO FIGHT;  the people gladly volunteered.”

 

Ancient Roots Translinear Bible 2008 - “FOR UNCOVERING THE DISRESPECT IN ISRAEL and for the people DONATING— bless Yahweh?”


The Message 2002 - "When THEY LET DOWN THEIR HAIR IN ISRAEL, THEY LET IT BLOW IN THE WIND. The people volunteered with abandon, bless God!

The Lesser Bible 1853 said: “WHEN DEPRAVITY HAS BROKEN OUT IN ISRAEL, then did the people offer themselves willingly; therefore praise ye the Lord."

Young's "literal" (ha!) - "FOR FREEING FREEMEN in Israel, For a people willingly offering themselves Bless ye Jehovah."

Coverdale 1535 - "NOW THAT YE ARE COME TO REST, YE QUIET MEN in Israel, praise the LORD, among such of the people as be free willing."

Matthew's bible 1549 (modern spelling) had: "Praise the Lord in them that were willing WHILE OTHER SAT STILL IN ISRAEL." 

And Brenton’s so called Greek Septuagint it totally different from the others. It reads: “A REVELATION WAS MADE IN ISRAEL when the people were made willing: Praise ye the Lord."

Boothroyd Bible 1853 - “IN THE NAKED DEFENSELESS STATE of Israel - for the VOLUNTARY EXERTIONS of the people, Praise ye Jehovah.”

Lamsa's translation of the Syriac says: "WITH REQUITAL HAS ISRAEL BEEN AVENGED; praise the LORD WITH A SONG FOR AVENGING ISRAEL."

Names of God Bible 2011 - “Praise Yahweh! MEN IN ISRAEL VOWED TO FIGHT, and people volunteered for service.”

Hebraic Roots Bible 2012 - “FOR THE ABSOLVING OF THE LEADERSHIP of Israel; for the volunteering of the people, bless YAHWEH! 


The Catholic Connection 

 

The Douay-Rheims of 1610 and the 1950 Douay both read - “O you of Israel, THAT HAVE WILLINGLY OFFERED YOUR LIVES TO DANGER, bless the Lord.”

 

But the 1968 Jerusalem bible says: “THAT WARRIORS OF ISRAEL UNBOUND THEIR HAIR, that the people came forward with a will, for this, bless Yahweh.”

 

And then the 1970 St. Joseph New American bible changed this to read: “OF CHIEFS WHO TOOK THE LEAD IN ISRAEL, OF NOBLE DEEDS BY THE PEOPLE WHO BLESS THE LORD.”

 

And now once again in 2009 the Sacred Scriptures have gone back to - “All you of Israel WHO HAVE WILLINGLY OFFERED YOUR LIVES TO DANGER, bless the Lord!”

Now, aren't you glad we have (as James White loves to tell us) such "an embarrassment of riches" that we can now understand the passage so much better by using a variety of translations? Everything is immediately cleared up for us. Right?

 

Judges 5:8 KJB -  "THEY CHOSE NEW GODS; then was war in the gates: was there a shield or spear seen among forty thousand in Israel."

NIV 1978 and 1984 editions - "WHEN THEY CHOSE NEW GODS, war came to the city gates, and not a shield or spear was seen among forty thousand in Israel."

NIV 2011 edition - "GOD CHOSE NEW LEADERS WHEN WAR CAME TO the city gates, but not a shield or spear was seen among forty thousand in Israel."

 

Reading "THEY CHOSE NEW GODS; THEN WAS WAR IN THE GATES" are the Great Bible 1540, Bishops' Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1587, The Jewish Family Bible 1864, The Revised English Bible 1877, Darby 1890, Young's 1898, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, the Jewish Publication Society bible 1917, the NKJV, RV, ASV, RSV, NRSV, The Word of Yah Bible 1993, the ESV 2011, Complete Jewish Bible 1998, World English Bible 2000, The Complete Jewish Tanach 2004, Complete Apostle's Bible 2005, New Heart English Bible 2010, the Jubilee Bible 2010, The Hebrew Transliteration Bible 2010, The New American Bible 2010, The New European Version 2010, the Common English Bible 2011, the Holman Standard, Names of God Bible 2011, The Katapi New Standard Bible 2012, The Biblos Bible 2013, The Voice 2012 - "They had chosen new gods, so war came to their gates.", The Far Above All Translation 2014, The Hebrew Names Version 2014 and The Modern English Version 2014. 

The NASB is very similar with: "NEW GODS WERE CHOSEN, THEN WAS WAR IN THE GATES,

AND the NIV 1978 and 1984 editions have: "WHEN THEY CHOSE NEW GODS, war came to the city gates." All these versions say basically the same thing.

John Gill comments: They chose new gods…That is, Israel, as most of the Jewish commentators interpret it;... this they did after the death of Joshua; it refers to their first idolatry, begun by Micah, (Judges 17:1) they chose other gods than the true God. then was war in the gates - when they fell into idolatry, then God suffered the judgment of war to come upon them, even into the gates of their fortified cities.

However the brand new NIV 2011 edition has totally changed the meaning of the verse and now reads: "GOD CHOSE NEW LEADERS WHEN WAR CAME TO the city gates." 


Daniel Wallace's NET version is very similar with: "GOD CHOSE NEW LEADERS, then fighters appeared in the city gates."

Not quite the same meaning, is it? So are the OLD NIVs now wrong and the NEW NIV correct? 

 

Bible Babble Buffet

The NEB (New English Bible) 1970 and the 1989 Revised English bible both say: "They chose new gods, THEY CONSORTED WITH DEMONS."

Bible in Basic English 1961 - "THEY HAD NO ONE TO MAKE ARMS, THERE WERE NO MORE ARMED MEN IN THE TOWNS; was there a body-cover or a spear to be seen among forty thousand in Israel? 

Lamsa's 1936 translation of the Syriac tells us "THE LORD WILL CHOOSE NEW THINGS; THEN THE BARLEY BREAD AND A SWORD OR A SPEAR shall not be seen among 40,000 in Israel."  (Say what?!)  

God's First Truth 1999 - "GOD CHOSE NEW FASHIONS OF WAR, FOR WHEN THEY HAD WAR AT THEIR GATES: there was not seen among forty thousand, either shield or spear in Israel."

 

The Catholic Connection

This may be hard to believe, but these are the actual Catholic translations of this one verse.  The older Douay-Rheims 1610 and the 1950 Douay both read: "THE LORD CHOSE NEW WARS, AND HE HIMSELF OVERTHREW THE GATES OF THE ENEMIES:  a shield and spear was not seen among forty thousand of Israel.”  

Then the 1968 Jerusalem bible changed this to - "THOSE THAT SHOULD STAND FOR GOD WERE DUMB, FROM FIVE CITIES, NOT ONE SHIELD! Not one spear from forty thousand in Israel!"

And after that the 1970 St. Joseph NAB read - "NEW GODS WERE THEIR CHOICE, then the war was at their gates. Not a shield could be seen, nor a lance, among forty thousand in Israel."  You will notice the St. Joseph is very much like most Bible versions.  

 

 

Judges 5:10 - "ye that sit in judgment"

 Judges 5:10 KJB - “Speak, ye that ride on white asses, YE THAT SIT IN JUDGMENT, and walk by the way.”


NIV - “You who ride on white donkeys, SITTING ON YOUR SADDLE BLANKETS, and you who walk along the road.”


Dan Wallace’s NET version also says “who SIT ON SADDLE BLANKETS” and then he Footnotes: “The meaning of the Hebrew word in this context is uncertain.” 


ESV 2011 - “Tell of it, you who ride on white donkeys, you who SIT ON RICH CARPETS and you who walk by the way.”  


Footnote -“The meaning of the Hebrew word is uncertain.”



NKJV 1982, the Natural Israelite Bible 2012, Modern English Version 2014 - “Speak, you who ride on white donkeys, Who SIT IN JUDGES’ ATTIRE, And who walk along the road.”


The Hebrew word used here apparently has a pretty wide variety of meanings, as others have translated it. In the KJB it is variously translated as “garment”, “armour”, “clothes”, “judgment” and “measure” (see Job 11:9; Jer. 13:25)


The so called Greek Septuagint has “ye that sit ON THE JUDGMENT SEAT”.


Lamsa’s 1933 translation of the Syriac Peshitta has “YOU WHO DWELL IN HOUSES”


Agreeing with the King James Bible’s “ye that SIT IN JUDGMENT” are Coverdale 1535, The Great Bible 1540 -“sit uppermost in judgement”, Matthew’s Bible 1549, Douay-Rheims 1582, Webster’s Translation 1833, The Lesser Bible 1853 “sit in JUDGMENT”, The 1936 Hebrew Publishing Company Bible, The Word of Yah 1993, The KJV 21st Century Version 1994, Third Millennium Bible 1998, God’s First Truth 1999, The Judaica Press Complete Tanach 2004,  the Bond Slave Version 2009, the Jubilee Bible 2010, The Work of God’s Children Illustrated Bible 2011, the Interlinear Hebrew-Greek Scriptures 2012 (Mebust)  


The Modern Greek Bible - οι επιβαινοντες επι λευκων ονων, οι καθημενοι εις το κρινειν = “those sitting on white asses, THOSE SITTING FOR JUDGMENT”


FOREIGN LANGUAGE BIBLES


Foreign language bibles that also read “SITTING IN JUDGMENT” are the Spanish Sagradas Escrituras 1569, Cipriano de Valera 1602, Reina Valera 1909 to 1995, R.V. Gómez 2010 - “los que presiden en juicio”, the Portuguese Almeida Corrigenda 2009 - “que vos assentais em juízo” = “that sit FOR JUDGMENT”, the French Martin 1744 - “et qui êtes assis dans le siège de la justice”, The Italian Diodati 1649- “Che sedete in sul luogo del giudicio”,  the Afrikaans Bible 1953 - “ wat op tapyte sit” = “who sit in judgment”, the Russian Synodal Bible 1876 -  сидящие на коврах и ходящие по дороге = “that SIT IN JUDGMENT and walk by the way”.


Some Odd Translations -


Bishops’ Bible 1568, Geneva bible 1587 -  “ye that DWELL BY MIDDIN”


Young’s 1898 - “SITTERS ON A LONG ROBE” 


Ancient Roots Translinear Bible 2008 - Riders on tawny donkeys going over the way, DWELL AND MEDITATE OVER THE MEASURE.”


The Hebraic Transliteration Scriptue 2010 - “…ye that sit IN MISHPATIM, and walk by the way.”

 

In Judges 5:14 and continuing the song of Deborah and Barak we read:

 

Judges 5:14 KJB - "Out of Ephraim was there a root of them against AMALEK; after thee, Benjamin, among the people; out of Machir came down governors, and out of Zebulon they THAT HANDLE THE PEN OF THE WRITER."

One little note here. Instead of AMALEK, the ESV reads "THE VALLEY" and then footnotes that "the valley" comes from the Greek Septuagint, but the Hebrew reads AMALEK.

 

Also rejecting the Hebrew AMALEK and following the Greek Septuagint with "THE VALLEY" are the RSV, NRSV, Jehovah Witness New World Translation, and the Catholic St. Joseph NAB 1970 and the New Jerusalem bible 1985.

BUT other critical text versions like the NASB, NET, Holman, The Voice, The Biblos Interlinear Bible 2011 and even the NIV retain the word AMALEK.

 

Agreeing with the King James Bible's "they that handle the PEN OF THE WRITER" is Coverdale 1535, The Great Bible 1540, Matthew's Bible 1549, the Bishops' Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible - "of Zebulun they yt handle THE PEN OF THE WRITER.", the Lesser Bible 1853, The Jewish Family Bible 1864, Young's 1898, The Word of Yah 1993, The Third Millennium Bible 1998, God's First Truth 1999, the 2011 Orthodox Jewish Bible - "of Zevulun they that hold the shevet of the sofer (scribe).", the 2004 Judaica Press Tanach - "and out of Zebulun they that handle the pen of the scribe.", the Amplified Bible 1987 - "and out of Zebulun those who handle the pen or stylus of the writer.", the Bond Slave Version 2009,  the Hebraic Transliteration Scripture 2010, Jubilee Bible 2010, The Interlinear Hebrew-Greek Scriptures 2010 (Mebust), the Biblos Interlinear Bible 2011, and the BRG Bible 2012.

The Complete Apostle’s Bible 2005 - “and from Zebulun came those that draw with THE SCRIBE’S PEN OF RECORD.” 

 

Foreign Language Bibles that read "THE PEN OF THE WRITER" are the Spanish Reina Valera of 1909 - de Zabulón los que solían manejar punzón de escribiente.", the French Martin Bible of 1744 and the Ostervald of 1996 - "et de Zabulon ceux qui manient la plume du Scribe.", the Portuguese A Biblia Sagrada em Portugues and the Portuguese Almeida Corrigida E Fiel - "os que levaram a cana do escriba." and the Italian Diodati of 1649 - "con bacchette da scriba." 

The Amplified Bible reads just like the KJB and then footnotes: "Writing, and alphabetical writing at that, had been practiced for some centuries along the Syrian Coast... Quantities of papyrus [the pith of papyrus was used for writing] were exported from Egypt to Phoenicia at around 1100 b.c. (Judg. 8:14) (F. Davidson, ed., The New Bible Commentary). “Zebulun, formerly known only for its experts with the ciphering-pencil, had now become a people courageous unto death” (J.P. Lange, A Commentary).

John Gill comments - "and out of Zebulun they that handle the pen of the writer; - which being a maritime tribe, and employed in trade and navigation, had many clerks famous for their readiness in handling the pen; but these through a zeal for the common cause dropped their pens, and took to the sword, in vindication of the rights and liberties of themselves and their brethren; for which they are justly commended."

But the NIV says: "from Zebulun those who bear A COMMANDER'S STAFF."

The ESV has: "those who bear THE LIEUTENANT'S STAFF."

The NASB reads: "from Zebulun those who WIELD THE STAFF OF OFFICE."

And the NKJV says: "And from Zebulun those who BEAR THE RECRUITER'S STAFF."

Green's 2005, The Holy Scriptures VW Edition 2010 -"and from Zebulun those who bear THE STAFF OF SCRIBES."

The International Standard Version 2014 - “…from Zebulun who carry A BADGE OF OFFICE.”

 

Judges 5:16 "the bleatings of the flocks?"

In the King James Bible we read: "Why abodest thou among the sheepfolds, to hear the BLEATINGS OF THE FLOCKS? For the divisions of Reuben there were great searchings of heart." 

 

It should be obvious that the verse is speaking about the bleating or the noise the sheep themselves make. 

So also read Coverdale 1535, The Great Bible 1540, Matthew's Bible 1549, Bishops' Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1587, the Douay-Rheims 1582, Webster's Bible 1833, The Lesser Bible 1853, The Jewish Family Bible 1864, Darby 1890, Youngs 1898, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, Douay 1950, The Word of Yah 1993, KJV 21st Century 1994,  the Third Millennium Bible 1998, God's First Truth 1999, The Evidence Bible 2003, Green's literal 2005, the 2004 Judaica Press Tanach 2004 - "to hear the bleatings of the flocks?", Bond Slave Version 2009, the Hebraic Transliteration Scripture 2010, the Jubilee Bible 2010, The Work of God's Children Illustrated Bible 2011, the Biblos Interlinear Bible 2011 - "to hear THE BLEATINGS OF THE FLOCKS", The Orthodox Jewish Bible 2011, The Hebraic Roots Bible 2012 and The International Standard Version 2014.  

 

The Greek Septuagint reads "THE BLEATING OF THE FLOCKS?"

 

The Modern Greek Bible - “δια να ακουης τα βελασματα των ποιμνιων” = "to hear the BLEATING OF THE FLOCKS?"

and Lamsa's 1933 translation of the Syriac Peshitta has "the BLEATING of the wild asses?" 

 

The Spanish Sagradas Escrituras 1569 and the Reina Valera 1909 - 2011 also agree with the KJB saying - "Para oir los balidos de los rebaños?" = "to hear THE BLEATINGS OF THE FLOCKS?"

However many modern versions have changed the meaning of the verse.  The NKJV says - "Why did you sit among the sheepfolds, To hear THE PIPINGS FOR THE FLOCKS?"  This is also the reading of the RSV, NRSV, Holman Standard, Catholic Jerusalem bible and the NASB. 

But the ESV, Catholic New Jerusalem bible and NIV say: "to hear THE WHISTLING FOR THE FLOCKS?"

 The Easy-to-Read Version 2001 - “ But they stayed home LISTENING TO THE MUSIC THEY PLAYED FOR THEIR SHEEP.”

The Jehovah Witness New World Translation is even weirder. It says - "Why did you sit down BETWEEN THE TWO SADDLE BAGS TO LISTEN TO THE PIPINGS FOR THE FLOCKS?"

The Names of God Bible 2011 (Critical text version)  - “Why did you SIT BETWEEN THE SADDLEBAGS?  WAS IT TO LISTEN TO THE SHEPHERDS PLAYING THEIR FLUTES?”

The New English Bible has "to listen to THE SHRILL CALLING OF THE SHEPHERDS?"

Rotherham's Emphasized bible 1902 (a critical text version) has - " to hear THE MOCKING OF THE FLOCKS?" (Huh?)

The Common English Bible 2011 - "listening to the MUSIC FOR THE FLOCKS?"

The Voice 2012 - "to hear WHISTLING FOR THE FLOCKS?"

 

The Message 2002 is virtually unrecognizable with its -"Why all those campfire discussions? Diverted and distracted, Reuben's divisions couldn't make up their minds." 

Well, it looks like the Bible Babble Buffet Versionists can't make up their minds either, doesn't it.

 

Judges 8:13 "And Gideon the son of Joash returned from the battle BEFORE THE SUN WAS UP", "AFORE THE SUN WAS DOWN" or "FROM THE ASCENT OF HERES"?

In the King James Bible we read: "And Gideon the son of Joash returned from battle BEFORE THE SUN WAS UP."

Agreeing with the King James reading of "before the sun was up" are the following Bible versions: Wycliffe 1395 - "And he turnede ayen fro batel BIFOR THE RISYNG OF THE SUNNE", Bishops' Bible 1568, Webster's Translation 1833 - "BEFORE THE SUN HAD RISEN", the Lesser Bible 1853, The Jewish Family Bible 1864 - "before the solar orb was up.", The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, the Spanish Reina Valera 1909 and 1960 (antes que el sol subiere), the Hebrew Publishing Company 1936 translation, The Word of Yah 1993, the KJV 21st Century Version 1994, The Third Millennium Bible 1998, the Bond Slave Version 2009, the Jubilee Bible - "BEFORE THE SUN WAS UP.", The Hebraic Transliteration Scripture 2010, The Work of God's Children Illustrated Bible 2011 - "BEFORE THE SUN RISING.", the BRG Bible 2012, 

 

Some translate the phrase as to mean that the battle was indeed at night, but when it ended the sun was just beginning to appear.

The Biblos Interlinear Bible 2011 - "returned from battle BY THE ASCENT OF THE SUN."

Concordant Literal Version - "returned from battle AT THE GOING UP OF THE SUN."

The Holy Scriptures VW Edition 2010 "returned from the battle AT SUNRISE."

The Ancient Roots Translinear Bible 2008 - “returned from war WITH THE ASCENT OF THE SUNLIGHT.”

Youngs is similar with: "And Gideon son of Joash turneth back from the battle, AT THE GOING UP OF THE SUN."

However versions such as the RV, ASV, NKJV, RSV, NIV, ESV, NET, NASB and Holman say something like "Then Gideon the son of Joash returned from battle FROM THE ASCENT OF HERES."  So too do the Jehovah Witness New World Translation - "by THE PASS THAT GOES UP TO HERES."  

The so called Greek Septuagint just adds to the confusion, saying:

"And Gideon returned from the battle, DOWN FROM THE BATTLE OF ARES."

 

The Catholic Connection

The older Douay Rheims of 1610 and the Douay Version of 1950 both read that Gideon returned from the battle "BEFORE THE SUN RISING."

BUT the St. Joseph New American bible 1970 and the New Jerusalem bible 1985 changed this to "Gideon came back BY THE ASCENT OF HERES."

 

Others have the opposite meaning of the KJB.

The Geneva bible says "So Gideon the sonne of Ioash returned from battel, THE SUNNE BEING YET HIE (HIGH)" 

The Great Bible 1540 had - “And Gedeon the sonne of Ioas returned from battell, AFORE THE SONNE WAS DOWNE.”

And Matthew's Bible 1549 had: "And Gedeon the sonne of Ioas returned from battel, THE SONNE BEYING YET UP" 

 

Though the NKJV, NIV, NASB etc. have "FROM THE ASCENT OF HERES" yet have all translated this same word as "sun" in other places. See Judges 14:18 and Job 9:7 "Which commandeth THE SUN, and it riseth not."

 

FOREIGN LANGUAGE BIBLES  that read like the King James Bible are the Spanish Las Sagradas Escrituras 1569, the Spanish Cipriano de Valera 1602, Spanish Reina Valera 1909 - 1995 "Gedeón hijo de Joás regresaba de la batalla, antes que el sol subiera" = "before the sun rose", The Latin Vulgate - “revertensque de bello ante solis ortum”, The Portuguese Almeida Corrigenda 2009 - “Voltando, pois, Gideão, filho de Joás, da peleja, ANTES DO NASCER DO SOL”, Luther’s German Bible 1545 - “Da nun Gideon, der Sohn Joas, wiederkam vom Streit, ehe die Sonne heraufgekommen war” - “BEFORE THE SUN HAD COME UP”, the Czech BKR Bible - "I navracel se Gedeon syn Joasův z bitvy před východem slunce." = "BEFORE THE SUNRISE." and the Romanian Fidela Bible 2014.


 

As usual, the commentators all give their contradictory opinions on what this verse means and how it should be translated. What one confidently affirms to be the true reading, another just as confidently denies.

The Thomas Coke Commentary on the Bible mentions - “Before the sun was up Very different and contrary interpretations are given of this passage.”

Support for the truth of the King James reading "before the sun was up" comes from several commentaries.

Coffman Commentary on the Old and New Testaments.

He says: "Gideon ... returned from the battle from the ascent of Heres" (Judges 8:13). WE DEFINITELY PREFER THE KJV RENDITION HERE WHICH READS: "BEFORE THE SUN WAS UP." As Hervey said, "This rendition may be well defended and gives excellent sense." Without any doubt the word "Heres is an ancient word for "sun"; and the foolish excuse for making this a proper name of some place is based totally upon what some scholar imagines to be the customary use of "up" or "ascent." However, where is the scholar who knows ALL the uses of such words? Furthermore, when they have made a place-name out of it, WHERE is the place? Of course, THERE IS NO SUCH PLACE. Furthermore, the mention of sunrise here indicates, what is almost a certainty, namely, that Gideon attacked the kings at Karkor AT NIGHT. Is that not what he did previously? Why would he have changed his tactics?"

 

Benson’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments - “Judges 8:13. Gideon returned BEFORE THE SUN WAS UP — By which it may be gathered, that he came upon them in the night, which was most convenient for him who had so small a number with him, and most likely to terrify them by the remembrance of the last night’s sad work. It must be acknowledged, however, that different interpretations are given of this passage. The Seventy, the Syriac, and Arabic versions take החרס, hechares, here rendered sun, for the name of a place, in which they are followed by Houbigant, who translates the words, By that place which is above Hares. IT IS WELL KNOWN, HOWEVER, THAT THE WORD JUST QUOTED DOES PROPERLY MEAN THE SUN, AND IT IS SO TRANSLATED IN OTHER PASSAGES OF SCRIPTURE, AND THE TRANSLATING IS SO HERE BOTH GIVES A MORE IMPORTANT SENSE TO THE PASSAGE, AND IS MORE AGREEABLE TO THE CONTEXT THAN THE AMENDMENT PROPOSED.”

John Wesley - “Before the sun was up - By which it might be gathered, that he came upon them in the night, which was most convenient for him who had so small a number with him"

 

The King James Bible is right, as always.

 

Judges 9:53 "And a certain woman cast A PIECE OF millstone upon Abimelech's head, and all to brake his skull"

Here is an example of another clear error found in many modern versions, including the NKJV.

In Judges chapter nine we are told of Abimelech coming to war against the city of Thebez. Within this city was a strong tower and all the men and women fled into it and went up to the top of the tower. Abimelech then attempts to burn the tower down. Then we read in the King James Bible: "And a certain woman cast A PIECE of a millstone upon Abimelech's head, and all to brake his skull."

It is so ironic to see many anti-King James Bible sites post this verse as an example of how poorly the King James Bible is translated by saying the woman "all to brake his skull", and yet there is a glaring error found in most modern versions that they conveniently overlook in their blindness to God's Book of final authority.

In the first place, who really has a problem understanding what the phrase means when it tells us the woman cast a piece of a millstone on his head and "all to brake his skull"? It simply means she really smashed his head up badly and totally ruined it. I remember reading this as a young man and had no problem understanding it at all, nor did any of the other new believers in Christ.

Not only does the King James Bible correctly say "A PIECE OF a millstone" but so do Wycliffe 1395 - "cast A GOBBET OF A millstone" (a "gobbet" is a fragment or a bit of something), Coverdale 1535, the Bishops' Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1587, the Greek Septuagint (klasma epimulion),  Lamsa's 1933 translation of the Syriac Peshitta, The Lesser Bible 1853, Young's 1898, Websters 1833, The Smith Bible 1876, Douay 1950, The Word of Yah 1993, the Third Millennium Bible 1998, God’s First Truth 1999 - “But a woman cast A PIECE OF a millstone upon his head and ALL TO BRAKE HIS BRAIN PAN.”, Green's Literal 2005 - "A PIECE OF a riding millstone", The Online Interlinear 2010 (André de Mol), The Hebraic Transliteration Scriptures 2010, the Jubilee Bible 2010, the Biblos Interlinear Bible 2011, The Work of God's Children Illustrated Bible 2011, the Interlinear Hebrew-Greek Scriptures 2012 (Mebust) 

 

The 1568 Bishops' Bible says: "And a certayne woman cast A PEECE OF A mylstone vpon his head, & all to brake his brayne panne."

Matthew's Bible of 1549 with updated spelling says: "But a woman cast A PIECE OF A millstone upon his head and all to brake his brain pan."

 

FOREIGN LANGUAGE BIBLES that also read "A PIECE OF A MILLSTONE" are the Spanish Reina Valera 1909-2011 - "UN PEDAZO DE rueda de molino), the Italian Diodati 1649 and La Nuova Riveduta 2007 - "UN PEZZO DI macina sulla testa di Abimelec e gli spezzò il cranio.", The French Louis Second 2007 - "Alors une femme lança sur sa tête UN MORCEAU DE meule de moulin et lui brisa ainsi le crâne.", the Portuguese Almeida Corrigenda 2009 - “Porém uma mulher lançou UM PEDACO DE uma mó sobre a cabeça de Abimeleque e quebrou-lhe o crânio.”

 

In all Hebrew texts there is a necessary word that has been omitted by such versions as the RV, ASV, NKJV, NASB, NIV, RSV, ESV, Holman, ISV, modern Catholic versions, the Jehovah Witness NWT and Dan Wallace's NET version.

NKJV - "But a certain woman dropped AN UPPER MILLSTONE on Abimelech's head, and crushed his skull. "

An "upper millstone" is also the reading of the RV, ASV, RSV, NASB, ESV, NET, Jehovah Witness NWT, modern Catholic versions and the NIV.

The Catholic Connection

 

The older Douay-Rheims 1610 and the Douay 1950 both had it right with "cast A PIECE OF a millstone", but the modern Catholic versions like the St. Joseph New American bible 1970 says "the upper part of a millstone" and the New Jerusalem bible 1985 goes all the way with "she threw down A MILLSTONE on his head and cracked his skull".

The Jehovah Witness New World Translation also reads "a certain woman pitched AN UPPER MILLSTONE upon Abimelech's head and broke his skull in pieces."

The Holman Standard says: "But a woman threw THE UPPER PORTION OF A MILLSTONE on Abimelech's head and fractured his skull." This is still wrong as we shall soon see.  

Young's got it right, with: - "a certain woman doth cast A PIECE OF A RIDER on the head of Abimelech, and breaketh his skull." (A "rider" would be the "upper" millstone. It "rides" on top of the lower one.)

This little word is "A PIECE OF" a millstone. The Hebrew word is #6400 (peh'lagh) and is found six times in the Hebrew Scriptures. Every time it is correctly translated as "a piece of" in the King James Bible.

It is used both here and in 2 Samuel 11:21 where the same event is referred to. It is used in 1 Samuel 30:12 where David and his men gave "A PIECE of a cake of figs" to a starving man. It is found in Job 41:24 where leviathan is described as: "His heart is as firm as a stone; yea, as hard as A PIECE of the nether millstone."

It is finally found two more times in the Song of Solomon where he describes his love whose "temples are like A PIECE OF a pomegranate." (Song of Solomon 4:3 and 6:7)

A millstone consisted of two very large stones, often weighing hundreds of pounds each. Each stone was very heavy in order to break up the grain into fine powder. Such millstones today can weigh from a minimum of 200 pounds each for the smallest versions, and up to thousands of pounds each for the larger ones.

The Bible speaks of both stones in Deuteronomy 24:6 - "No man shall take the nether or the upper millstone to pledge; for he taketh a man's life to pledge." There is the nether or lower stone, which formed the round base, and the upper stone, which looked like a very wide, smooth tire and was often made up of several pieces. This big stone was moved around in circles to crush the grain.

Job 41 speaks of "his heart is as hard..as a piece of the nether millstone".

Versions like the NKJV, NIV, NET, NASB, RSV, ESV, the modern Catholic versions and the JW bible all omit this necessary word and tell us a certain woman threw AN UPPER MILLSTONE upon the head of Abimelech. This woman must have been Arnold Swartzenegger's equal in strength to have been able lift this huge stone and throw it at ol' Abimelech's head. It is a physical impossibility for most men, let alone for a woman.

Besides, what would a whole millstone be doing at the top of a tower in the midst of the city? The people would logically have rocks like pieces of a millstone to throw down at an attacking enemy, but not an entire millstone.

The NASB concordance shows they have twice omitted the Hebrew word for "a piece of" and translated it as "upper", but in the other places they have translated it as "A PIECE of cake" (1 Samuel 30:12) and "a SLICE of pomegranate" in Song of Solomon.

Likewise the NIV has omitted the word both here in Judges 9:53 and in 2 Samuel 11:21, but has translated it as "A PART of a cake of figs" in 1 Samuel 30:12 and "the HALVES of a pomegranate" in the Song of Solomon.

The NKJV contradicts itself in translating the same Hebrew phrase in two different ways. In Judges 9:53 the NKJV says the woman dropped "AN UPPER MILLSTONE" on his head, but in 2 Samuel 11:21 it says: "Who struck Abimelech the son of Jerubbesheth? Was it not a woman who cast A PIECE OF A MILLSTONE on him from the wall, so that he died in Thebez?"

So, was it a piece of a millstone that the woman threw, or was it an entire upper millstone that weighed at least a couple hundred pounds or more?

file:///Users/willkinney/Desktop/Screen%20Shot%202015-04-26%20at%2010.01.46%20AM.png

Some people have tried to defend the erroneous versions by saying that a millstone could have been two small rocks, the bottom one being like a plate and the top one a small roller. It looks like the picture shown here.

http://hearstmuseum.berkeley.edu/exhibitions/ncc/images/1_food/4_food_processing/a_plant_processing/1_4272_and_1_4273.jpg

But I do not buy it. Just look up the word "millstone" in the KJB. In the N.T. Jesus says in Mark 9:42 of one who "shall offend one of these little ones that believe in me, it is better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he were cast into the sea."


I seriously doubt a little rock like this hand carried "millstone" would hopelessly sink a man into the depths of the sea.  And it still doesn't explain the FACT that the Hebrew word itself "A PIECE OF" is in the text; the corrupt versions just didn't translate it, and the KJB did.


And in Revelation 18:21 we read: "And a mighty angel took up a stone like a great millstone, and cast it into the sea, saying, Thus with violence shall that great city Babylon be thrown down, and shall be found no more at all."

 

 

 Some Weird Versions

The Ancient Roots Translinear Bible 2008 - “One woman cast A SLICE OF A CHARIOT over Abimelech's head and battered his skull.” (Do some of these “scholars” mind altering take drugs?)

 

The King James Bible is right, as always, and these other modern versions are wrong. It is as simple as that.

Judges 14:15 - Samson’s Riddle

"And it came to pass ON THE SEVENTH DAY, that they said unto Samson's wife, Entice thy husband, that he may declare unto us the riddle..."

ALL Hebrew texts read "the seventh day" and so do the Jewish Publication Society Bible 1917, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, the RV, ASV, Geneva, Diodati, Spanish Reina Valera, The Jewish Family Bible 1864, The Smith Bible 1876, Young's 1898, Darby 1890 and Douay versions. The NKJV also reads "the 7th day" footnotes "some ancient authorities read FOURTH day".

This false reading of "on the FOURTH day" comes from SOME Greek Septuagint copies and the Syriac, as the NIV footnote tells us. The following versions have rejected the clear Hebrew reading of the 7th day, and say "on the FOURTH day": The RSV, NRSV, ESV, NASB, NIV, Holman Standard.

For a full explanation of why the King James Bible is correct and the other modern versions are wrong and contradictory, please see my article at this site: 

http://brandplucked.webs.com/jud1415samsonsriddle.htm

 

Judges 15:8 KJB  Speaking of Samson who did battle with the Philistines we read: "And he smote them HIP AND THIGH with a great slaughter: and he went down and dwelt in the top of the rock Etam."

Judges 15:8 NIV (NASB) - "He attacked them VICIOUSLY (RUTHLESSLY - NASB) and slaughtered many of them. Then he went down and stayed in a cave in the rock Etam."

Dan Wallace and company's NET version - "He struck them down and DEFEATED THEM." Then the good doctor informs us that the meaning of the literal Hebrew is uncertain.

The Hebrew words here are literally "HIP" and "THIGH" and they are translated as "HIP AND THIGH" in the Geneva Bible 1587, The Lesser Bible 1853, The Jewish Family Bible 1864, The Revised English Bible 1877, Darby 1890, the Revised Version 1881, Young's literal 1898, the ASV 1901 - "he smote them HIP AND THIGH with a great slaughter", The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, the 1917 Jewish Publication Society Bible "smote them hip and thigh", Lamsa's 1933 translation of the Syriac Peshitta - "he smote them HIP AND THIGH with a great slaughter", The New Berkeley Version in Modern English 1969, the RSV 1952 - 1971 - "he smote them HIP AND THIGH with a great slaughter", the NRSV 1989,  the ESV 2011 - "he struck them HIP AND THIGH", the NKJV 1982, Third Millennium Bible 1998, Green's Interlinear Hebrew-English Bible 1985, The Word of Yah 1993, Sacred Scriptures Family of Yah 2001, the Concordant Group Version 2007, the Ancient Roots Translinear Bible 2008, the Hebraic Transliteration Scripture 2010, the Orthodox Jewish Bible 2011 - "he struck them HIP AND THIGH", The Holy Scriptures VW Edition 2010, The Biblos Interlinear Bible 2011, the Interlinear Hebrew-Greek Scriptures 2012 (Mebust), World English Bible 2012,  the 2012 Natural Israelite Bible - "HIP AND THIGH".

The Paraphrases

Judges 15:8 NIV (NASB) - "He attacked them VICIOUSLY (RUTHLESSLY - NASB) and slaughtered many of them. Then he went down and stayed in a cave in the rock Etam." 

The Common English Bible 2011 paraphrases it as: “ He struck them hard, TAKING THEIR LEGS RIGHT OUT FROM UNDER THEM.”  Then it footnotes: “or struck them hip and thigh”

Wycliffe 1395 - "And he smote them WITH GREAT WOUND"

The Complete Jewish bible 1998 says: “Infuriated, he began killing them RIGHT AND LEFT;  it was a massacre.”

The Judaica Press Tanach 2004 - "And he struck them, THE RIDERS AND THE FOOT SOLDIERS, with a great slaughter"

The Holman Standard 2009 has: “ He TORE THEM LIMB FROM LIMB with a great slaughter” and then footnotes “Literally, He struck them hip on thigh”

The Work of God's Children Illustrated Bible 2011 - "he MADE A GREAT SLAUGHTER OF THEM"

Lexham English Bible 2012 says; “And HE GAVE THEM A THOROUGH BEATING.” And then footnotes: “Literally he struck them hip and thigh"

The Voice 2012 - “ So he FOUGHT THEM MERCILESSLY and killed many of them.”

The Complete Jewish Bible 1998 - “And he struck them, THE RIDERS AND THE FOOT SOLDIERS,t with a great slaughter”

The Catholic Connection

Believe it or not, but the Douay-Rheims of 1610 and the 1950 Douay Version both read:

And he made a great slaughter of them, SO THAT IN ASTONISHMENT THEY LAID THE CALF OF THE LEG UPON THE THIGH”.  (Yeah…that sounds pretty close, right?) 

Then the 1970 St. Joseph NAB changed this to: “And WITH REPEATED BLOWS he inflicted a great slaughter on them.” 

And the New Jerusalem bible 1985 has: “And he fell on them SYSTEMATICALLY and caused great havoc.” 

 

Judges 15:16 KJB - "And Samson said, With the jawbone of an ass, HEAPS UPON HEAPS, with the jaw of an ass have I slain a thousand men."  

NIV "Then Samson said, With a donkey's jawbone I HAVE MADE DONKEYS OF THEM. With a donkey's jawbone I have killed a thousand men."

NIV footnote: "The Hebrew for 'donkey' sounds like the Hebrew for 'heap'.  

Oh, well THAT makes sense, right? And "sounds" and "towns" and "mounds" and "clowns" all sound alike too, so they must be the same things!  Duh. And these are the "scholars" who are translating the Bible for you?

Agreeing with the King James Bible and the Hebrew text and referring to "HEAPS UPON HEAPS", which would be the piles of dead bodies of the Philistines Samson had killed are the Great Bible 1540, the Bishops' Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1587, The Jewish Family Bible 1864, The Revised English Bible 1877, the Revised Version 1881, ASV 1901, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, Jewish Publication Society Bible 1917, the RSV 1971, NRSV 1989, ESV 2011 "HEAPS UPON HEAPS", the NASB 1995, NKJV 1982, Lexham English Bible 2012, Third Millennium Bible 1998 and the Jewish Orthodox Bible 2011 - "HEAPS UPON HEAPS".  

Even Dan Wallace's NET, Holman Standard 2009, New Living Translation 2013 and The Voice 2012 versions agree with this reading, and the Common English Bible 2011 says "stacks upon stacks". 

Weird Versions 


NIV - “Then Samson said, “With a donkey’s jawbone I HAVE MADE DONKEYS OF THEM, With a donkey’s jawbone I have killed a thousand men.”


Young’s ‘literal’ (hah!) - “And Samson saith, With a jaw-bone of the ass -- AN ASS UPON ASSES -- with a jaw-bone of the ass I have smitten a thousand men.”

 

The Message 2002 - “With a donkey’s jawbone I MADE HEAPS OF DONKEYS OF THEM. With a donkey’s jawbone I killed an entire company.” 

 

The Biblos Interlinear Bible 2011 - "And Samson said, with the jawbone of a donkey CLAY CLAY, with the jawbone of a donkey I have slain a thousand men."

 


Judges 15:19 - Did God cause water to come out of the jawbone of an ass?  Really?

KJB - "But God clave AN hollow place THAT WAS IN THE JAW, and there came water thereout; and when he had drunk, his spirit came again, and he revived...." 

NKJV (NASB, NIV, NET, Jehovah Witness NWT, Catholic New Jerusalem) -  "So God split THE HOLLOW PLACE that IS IN LEHI, and water came out and he drank, and his spirit returned, and he revived.” 



This reading speaks of the miraculous event when God caused water to spring out of the jawbone of an ass. God had previously caused water to spring out of a rock to give to drink thousands of the children of Israel in the wilderness. Is this too hard for God to do?

Agreeing with the reading found in the King James Bible that God caused the water to spring out of THE  JAWBONE are Wycliffe 1395, Coverdale 1535, Matthew's Bible 1537, the Bishops' Bible 1568, Geneva Bible 1599, the Douay-Rheims 1610, the Bill Bible 1671, Webster's 1833, Julia Smith Translation 1855 - "God will REND THE SOCKET WHICH IS IN THE JAW-BONE, and waters will come forth from it.", The Smith Bible 1876, the Sharpe Bible 1883, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, The Word of Yah 1993, KJV 21st Century Version 1994, The Revised Webster Bible 1995,  the Third Millennium Bible 1998, God’s First Truth 1999 - “But God BRAKE A GREAT TOOTH THAT WAS IN THE JAW, and there came water thereout.”, The Complete Judaica Press Tanach 2004 - “And God CLEAVED THE SOCKET WHICH WAS IN THE JAWBONE, and water came out of it”, the Jubilee Bible 2010 - "God broke A TOOTH THAT WAS IN THE JAW, and water came out there."

The Complete Apostle’s Bible 2005 - “And God broke open a hollow place in THE JAW, and there came out water, and he drank.”, The Revised Geneva Bible 2005, the Bond Slave Version 2009, the Hebraic Transliteration Scripture 2010, the Biblos Interlinear Bible 2011 - "But God CLEAVED A HOLLOW PLACE THAT WAS IN THE JAW and there came therefrom water", The Work of God’s Children Illustrated Bible 2011 - “Then the Lord OPENED A GREAT TOOTH IN THE JAW OF THE DONKEY and waters issued out of it.”, the BRG Bible 2012, The Revised Douay-Rheims Bible 2012, The New Brenton Translation 2012 - "And God broke open a hollow place IN THE JAW, and there came thence water and he drank.", The Biblos Interlinear Bible 2013 - "But God cleaved a hollow place THAT WAS IN THE JAW and there came therefrom water, and he drank"

Wycliffe 1395 - "Therfor the Lord openyde a wang tooth in the cheke boon of the asse"

The Bishops' Bible of 1568 says: "But God brake a great tooth that was in the iawe, & there came water therout, and when he had drunke, his spirite came agayne."

Lamsa's 1933 translation of the Syriac Peshitta entirely agrees with the King James Bible.  It reads: "And the LORD God OPENED THE HOLLOW PLACE THAT WAS IN THE JAWBONE OF THE ASS, and there came water from it."  

And even the so called Greek Septuagint reads like the KJB with: "And God broke open A HOLLOW PLACE IN THE JAW, and there came thence water, and he drank."  

I find it interesting that the modern version promoters will often pit either the Syriac or the Septuagint or both against the KJB when it suits their purpose of discrediting the King James Bible, but simply ignore them when they confirm the readings found in the KJB.

FOREIGN LANGUAGE BIBLES

that agree with the KJB reading that God caused water to come out of the jaw bone of an are the French Martinn 1744 - “Alors Dieu fendit une des grosses dents de cette mâchoire d'âne, et il en sortit de l'eau”, the Spanish Sagradas Escrituras 1569, Cipriano de Valera 1602, the Reina Valera 1909, and R.V. Game 2010 - “Entonces quebró Dios una muela que estaba en la quijada, y salieron de allí aguas, y bebió”, and the Romanian Fidela Bible 2014.


 

The Catholic Connection

The Douay-Rheims version 1610 and the 1950 Douay both say: "Then the Lord opened a great tooth in the jaw of the ass and waters issued out of it."

But later Catholic versions change the sense of the passage to match that found in such versions as the NKJV, RSV, NASB, NIV, and Holman Standard. The Catholic New Jerusalem bible 1985 says: : "The God opened A HOLLOW IN THE GROUND, the hollow there is at Lehi, and water gushed out of it."

 

Likewise the Jehovah Witness New World Translation says: "So God split open A MORTAR-SHAPED HOLLOW that was in Lehi, and water began to come out of it"

The NKJV, NASB, NIV etc. all make the water to come out of A HOLLOW PLACE in Lehi instead of the jawbone of an ass. The NKJV says: "So God split THE HOLLOW PLACE that IS IN LEHI, and water came out and he drank."

The Contemporary English Version 1995 merely has: "But God SENT WATER GUSHING FROM A ROCK and Samson drank some"

The Easy-to-Read Version (And that is sooo important for today’s Comic Book Christians, don’t ya know) 2006 has: “There IS A HOLE IN THE GROUND at Lehi. GOD MADE THAT HOLE CRACK OPEN, and water came out.”

And the New Living Translation 2013 has: “So God caused WATER TO GUSH OUT OF A HOLLOW IN THE GROUND at Lehi, and Samson was revived as he drank.”  

The Commentators

Many commentators accuse the King James Bible of being in error here, and some are quite strong about it. For example, Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers says: “The notion that God made a miraculous fountain in one of the tooth-sockets of the jawbone of the ass is one of the childish misinterpretations with which Scripture exegesis is constantly defaced.”  

 

(Imagine that. How silly to think that God could do a miracle and make water come out of the jawbone of an ass! Who does He think He is... God?)

Every man, I suppose, is entitled to his own opinion. But ask any of these King James Bible correctors to show you a copy of what they honestly believe IS the complete and infallible words of God, and not one of them will ever do it. You see, they are still working on their own peculiar version of what it might be, and all you are going to get from them is their personal opinion.

But other men, like Worthington, have commented on this passage: “It is a greater miracle to draw water out of a dry bone, than out of the earth or stones. But all things are possible to God.” 

John Gill wavers back and forth as he often does, but he first mentions the view of renowned Jewish scholars. Gill says: "And God clave an hollow place that was in the jaw, and there came water thereout…A socket in which was fastened one of the teeth, and was in the form of a mortar; SO JARCHI and BEN MELECH, as the word for an hollow place signifies; one of the grinders was knocked out, and so the place where it had been was left hollow, and out of that sprung a stream or flow of water; which was very wonderful, since out of such a place rather blood, or purulent matter, would naturally have issued."

John Wesley waffles a bit by offering both views, but he doesn’t outright reject the miracle of causing water to come out of the jawbone of an ass.  He comments: - “In the Jaw - Either causing the jaw - bone to send forth water, as the rock formerly did, causing a spring to break forth in that Lehi, mentioned Judges 15:14, for Lehi is both the name of a place, and a jaw - bone.”

Matthew Poole’s Annotations - “in the jawbone which he had used, which God could easily effect, either by causing the jawbone to send forth water, as the rock formerly did, the miracle being in effect the same, though in a differing subject”.  

I'm in agreement with the King James Bible, Matthew Poole and Mr. Worthington on this one - "It is a greater miracle to draw water out of a dry bone, than out of the earth or stones. All things are possible to God.” 

 

Judges 16:13 - NASB, NIV, RSV, ESV, NET and Catholic versions all ADD TO the Hebrew text

In this chapter we see a place where such versions as the RSV, NASB, NIV, ESV, and Daniel Wallace's NET version have added some 33 words to the Hebrew text, all taken from the incredibly corrupt Greek Septuagint version.

Actually these extra words come from SOME copies of the LXX as the NIV footnote tells us, but not others, AND, THEY ONLY USE SOME of this so called Greek Septuagint, BUT NOT ALL OF IT.  And they call these scholarly shenanigans "the science of textual criticism"!

In the King James Bible we read in Judges 16:13-14 these words: "And Delilah said unto Samson, Hitherto thou hast mocked me, and told me lies: tell me wherewith thou mightest be bound. And he said unto her, If thou weavest the seven locks of my head with the web. (**NASB, NIV, RSV, ESV, NET and Catholic versions add 33 words at this point**) And she fastened it with the pin and said unto him, The Philistines be upon thee, Samson. And he awaked out of his sleep, and went away with the pin of the beam, and with the web."

This is the reading of ALL Hebrew texts and is found in the Jewish translations of 1917, 1936, the 1998 Complete Jewish Bible, Coverdale 1535, the Great Bible 1540, Matthew's Bible 1549, the Bishops' Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1587, the Revised Version 1881, American Standard Version 1901, Young's 1898, Darby 1890, the NKJV 1982, Lamsa's translation of the Syriac Peshitta, the Judaica Press Tanach 2004, Jubilee Bible 2010, the Hebraic Transliteration Scriptures 2010, the Online Interlinear 2010 (André de Mol), the Orthodox Jewish Bible 2011, the Biblos Interlinear Bible 2011, the Interlinear Hebrew Scriptures 2012 (Mebust), Lexham English Bible 2012, and the World English Bible 2012.  

NONE of these Bibles ADD the extra 33 words that are taken from SOME Greek Septuagint copies.  They all stick to the Hebrew texts.

 

FOREIGN LANGUAGE BIBLES

Foreign language bibles that follow the Hebrew texts and read like the KJB are the Spanish Sagradas Escrituras 1569, Cipriano de Valera 1602, the Spanish Reina Valera 1909-2011 - "Y Dalila dijo a Sansón: Hasta ahora me engañas, y tratas conmigo con mentiras. Descúbreme, pues, ahora, cómo podrás ser atado. El entonces le dijo: Si tejieres siete guedejas de mi cabeza con la tela y las asegurares con la estaca.",  the Italian Diodati 1649, La Nuova Diodati 1991, the Italian Riveduta 1994 and 2006 - "Dalila disse a Sansone: «Fino ad ora tu mi hai beffata e mi hai detto delle bugie; dimmi con che ti si potrebbe legare». Egli le rispose: «Se tesserai le sette trecce del mio capo con il tuo telaio»", the French Martin 1744, French Ostervald 1996, the French Louis Segond of 2007 - "Delila dit à Samson: «Jusqu'à maintenant tu t'es moqué de moi, tu m'as dit des mensonges. Indique-moi avec quoi il faut t’attacher.» Il lui dit: «Tu n'as qu'à tisser les 7 tresses de ma tête avec la chaîne d’un métier à tisser.", the Portuguese Almeida and O Livro 2000 - "Disse Dalila a Sansão: Até agora zombaste de mim, e me disseste mentiras; declara-me pois, agora, com que poderia ser amarrado. E ele lhe disse: Se teceres as sete tranças da minha cabeça com os liços da teia.", Martin Luther's German Bible of 1545 and the German Schlachter Bible of 2000 - "Da sprach Delila zu Simson: Bisher hast du mich betrogen und mir Lügen vorgeschwatzt! Sage mir doch, womit man dich binden kann! Er antwortete ihr: Wenn du die sieben Haarflechten meines Hauptes mit Kettenfäden[a] zusammenflechten würdest!

NONE of these extra 33 words are found in the Modern Greek Bible, nor in the Modern Hebrew Bible, nor in the ancient Syriac Peshitta, nor were they found in the Dead Sea Scrolls.

 

HOWEVER, among the "evangelical versions" beginning with the liberal RSV in 1952 and continuing with the NASB, NIV, NRSV, NET, and the 2001 ESV (English Standard Version), we see about 33 words ADDED to the Hebrew text, and the NIV footnote tells us these extra words come from SOME copies of the LXX, but they are not in the Hebrew texts.

They didn't even follow ALL of what the LXX says in these same verses.  

The NASB frequently departs from the Hebrew Masoretic texts and either follows the LXX, the Syriac, Vulgate or just makes up its own readings, but they never tell you this in their footnotes. You have to consult the other versions to discover this.

But there is one footnote in the NASB Old Testament where they admit what they have done. Here in Judges 16:13 the NASB tells us "The passage in brackets is found in Greek but not in any Hebrew manuscript."

But this is not the whole story, as we shall see in a moment.

 

The Catholic Connection

 

ALL Catholic versions like the Douay-Rheims, the St. Joseph New American Bible, and the Jerusalem Bible also add all these extra words to the Hebrew text. Since the RSV, NASB, NIV, NET and ESV versions are primarily based on the Catholic text of Vaticanus in the New Testament, this comes as no surprise.  

See my article "Undeniable Proof the ESV, NIV, NASB, Holman Standard, NET etc. are  the new "Vatican Versions"


http://brandplucked.webs.com/realcatholicbibles.htm

 

In the NASB, NIV, ESV, Catholic St. Joseph and New Jerusalem bible and The Message we read the following -- (I will capitalize the added words.)

Judges 16:13-14 "Delilah then said to Samson, "Until now, you have been making a fool of me and lying to me. Tell me how you can be tied." He replied, If you weave the seven braids of my head into the fabric ON THE LOOM AND TIGHTEN IT WITH THE PIN,[***] I'LL BECOME AS WEAK AS ANY OTHER MAN." SO WHILE HE WAS SLEEPING, DELILAH TOOK THE SEVEN BRAIDS OF HIS HEAD, WOVE THEM INTO THE FABRIC, and tightened it with the pin. Again she called to him, "Samson, the Philistines are upon you!" He awoke from his sleep and pulled up the pin and the loom, with the fabric." (NIV 2011 edition)

Now an interesting thing to note is the fickleness of modern scholars and their "science of textual criticism".  In Judges 16:13 the Greek Septuagint ADDS the additional extra words "...with the pin INTO THE WALL". YET none of these - the NASB, NIV, ESV, NET - included this part of the LXX in their translations.

You will see what Dan Wallace and company have to say about these words in a moment. In addition to this, Brenton's copy of the Greek Septuagint ALSO adds the phrase "AND THEY SMOTE HIM WITH THEIR HANDS" to the punishment the Philistines gave to Samson in verse 25, but NONE of these modern versions included THAT PART of the Greek Septuagint.  This is how their "science" of textual criticism works, folks.

One of the more recent bible versions to come down the pike is the 2003-2009 Holman Christian Standard. It also omits hundreds of words from the New Testament just like the ESV, NASB, NIV, but when we get to these verses in Judges 16:13-14, the Holman editors decided NOT TO PUT all these extra words from some LXX copies into their late$t ver$ion.

Likewise the Names of God Bible 2011 (another Critical text version) does NOT add these extra 33 words.

 

Dan Wallace and company's NET version 1996-2006

 

One of the goofiest "scholarly" Every Man For Himself Bible Versions, now being heavily promoted by Evangelicals, is the NET version put together by men like Daniel Wallace of Dallas Theological Seminary. He too adds all these extra words to the Hebrew text, and then tells us several revealing things in his "scholarly" footnotes.

Here is what he says (Caps are mine): "The MT of vv. 13b-14a reads simply, “He said to her, ‘If you weave the seven braids of my head with the web.’ And she fastened with the pin and said to him.”

The additional words in the translation, “and secure it with the pin, I will become weak and be like any other man.’ 16:14 So she made him go to sleep, wove the seven braids of his hair into the fabric on the loom,” WHICH WITHOUT DOUBT REPRESENT THE ORIGINAL TEXT, are supplied from the ancient Greek version. In both vv. 13b and 14a THE GREEK VERSION HAS "TO THE WALL" AFTER "WITH THE PIN," BUT THIS IS AN INTERPRETIVE ADDITION THAT REFLECTS A MISUNDERSTANDING of ancient weaving equipment.

The Hebrew textual tradition was ACCIDENTALLY SHORTENED during the copying process. A scribe’s eye jumped from the first instance of “with the web” to the second, causing him to leave out inadvertently the intervening words. 29tn The Hebrew adds, “from his sleep.” This has not been included in the translation for stylistic reasons. 30tn Heb “when your heart is not with me.” [END of Wallace and company's footnotes]

Here we see several things about the mindset of men like Daniel Wallace. He ASSUMES something has been lost from the Hebrew texts, and yet tells us the added words are WITHOUT DOUBT what the originals said, even though he's never seen one scrap of the originals in his life.

He next tells us that the missing words come from the LXX, but he himself then says that some of the words found even in the LXX AND WHICH ARE "WITHOUT DOUBT WHAT THE ORIGINALS SAID" are "AN INTERPRETIVE ADDITION THAT REFLECTS A MISUNDERSTANDING of ancient weaving equipment", and so he chooses to omit PART OF WHAT EVEN THE LXX SAYS - he removed the words "from the wall".

In fact, they ALL do this. So they are selectively taking PARTS of the so called Greek Septuagint, even from these same verses, and not others.

Did you hear what he said?  HE SAYS THAT EVEN THE MISSING ORIGINAL WAS WRONG!!! Then he goes on to OMIT several more words from ALL texts "for stylistic reasons", and then he paraphrases more Hebrew words (when your heart is not with me) to "when you will not share your secret with me".

Can you see how totally inconsistent these "scholars" like Dan Wallace are? And people actually read this junk and hold these men in high esteem.  

For much more about Dan Wallace and his NET version, see my article “Dan Wallace Is Messing With The Book”

 

http://brandplucked.webs.com/danwallacenut.htm

 

In view of the fact that God has clearly stated not to add to nor take away from His words, I wonder how the NASB, NIV, ESV, NET, and Catholic bible editors will fare in the day of judgment.

"Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him. Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar." Proverbs 30:5-6

 

Judges 18:30 Manasseh or Moses?

KJB - "And the children of Dan set up the graven image: and Jonathan, the son of Gershom, the son of MANASSEH, he and his sons were priests to the tribe of Dan until the day of the captivity of the land."

ESV (NIV, NET, Holman Standard, Catholic versions, Jehovah Witness NWT) - "And the people of Dan set up the carved image for themselves, and Jonathan the son of Gershom, son of MOSES, and his sons were priests to the tribe of the Danites until the day of the captivity of the land."

 

MANASSEH

Not only does the King James Bible read "the son of MANASSEH" but so also do all Jewish translations - the Jewish Family Bible 1864, The Smith Bible 1876, The Revised English Bible 1877, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, the Jewish Publication Society 1917, the Hebrew Pub. Company 1936, The New Jewish Version 1985, the Complete Jewish Bible 1998, the Koster Scriptures 1998, the Judaica Press Complete Tanach 2004, The Ancient Roots Translinear Bible 2008, the Hebraic Transliteration Scripture 2010, The Orthodox Jewish Bible 2011, The Natural Israelite Bible 2012, and the Hebrew Roots Bible 2012 and The Hebrew Interlinear - "the son of Manasseh מנשׁה  

http://studybible.info/IHOT/Judges%2018:30

 

Agreeing with the correct reading of MANASSEH as found in the King James Bible are also Coverdale, The Great Bible 1540, Matthew's Bible 1549, the Bishops' Bible 1568, Geneva Bible 1587, the Thomson Bible 1808, Young's 1898,  Lamsa's 1933 translation of the Syriac Peshitta, The Revised English Bible 1877, Revised Version 1885, the American Standard Version 1901, New Life Version 1969, NKJV 1982, The Word of Yah 1993, the NASB 1995, the Third Millennium Bible 1998, The Apostolic Polyglot Bible 2003, Green's literal 2005, Complete Apostle's Bible 2005, the Online Interlinear 2010 (André de Mol), the Biblos Interlinear Bible 2011, the Interlinear Hebrew-Greek Scriptures 2012 (Mebust), Lexham English Bible 2012, the ISV (International Standard Version) 2014, and the Modern English Version 2014.  

 

Foreign Language Bibles  

Foreign Language Bibles that also follow the Hebrew texts and say MANASSEH are the Spanish Sagradas Escrituras 1569, Cipriano de Valera 1602, Reina Valera Antigua 1909, the Cipriano de Valera Revised 1865 and the Reina Valera Gómez Bible 2010 - "hijo de Manasés" (but the Reina Valera 1960 changed this to Moisés), La Biblia de Las Américas 1998, the Italian Diodati 1649, La Nuova Diodati 1991 and the Conferenza Episcopale Italiana Bible - "figlio di MANASSE", Martin Luther's German Bible 1545 - "des Sohnes MANASSES", the French Martin Bible 1744, French Ostervald 1996, French Louis Segond 1910 edition - "fils de MANASSE", the Portuguese A Biblia Sagrada and the  Almeida Corrigida 2009 - "o filho de MANASSES",  (but the NIV Portuguese has Moses),  the Dutch Staten Vertaling - "den zoon van MANASSE", the Albanian Bible - "bir i MANASIT", the Finnish Bible 1776 - "MANASSEN pojan", the Lithuanian Bible - "o MANASO", the Myanmar/Burmese Bible 1835 (Adonirum Judson), the Ukranian Bible - " Манасіїного сина", the Hungarian Karoli Bible - "a MANASSE", the Russian Synodal  Versions - "сына Манассии", the Swedish Bible 1917 - "MANASSES son" and the Romanian Fidela Bible 2014 - "fiul lui MANASE" and the Smith & van Dyke Arabic Bible - واقام بنو دان لانفسهم التمثال المنحوت وكان يهوناثان ابن جرشوم بن منسّى هو وبنوه كهنة لسبط الدانيين الى يوم سبي الارض.


 

The Syriac Peshitta says "..and Jonathan, the son of Gershon, the son of MANASSEH"


The Modern Greek Bible clearly says MANASSEH - “και Ιωναθαν ο υιος του Γηρσων, υιου του Μανασση


And the Modern Hebrew Bible also reads MANASSEH, and not Moses. - ויקימו להם בני דן את הפסל ויהונתן בן גרשם בן מנשה הוא ובניו היו כהנים לשבט הדני עד יום גלות הארץ׃

 

MOSES?

The Catholic Connection 

However there are numerous other versions that change the name Manasseh to MOSES. Among these are the RSV, NRSV, ESV, Darby, NIV, the Holman Standard, Daniel Wallace's NET version, The Voice 2012, the World English Bible 2012, the Catholic Douay-Rheims 1610, the Douay 1950, Catholic St. Joseph NAB 1970, New Jerusalem 1985 and the Jehovah Witness New World Translation.

The NIV reads: "and Jonathan son of Gershom, the son of MOSES, and his sons were priests for the tribe of Dan..."

Daniel Wallace of Dallas Theological Whatever's NET version also rejects the Hebrew texts and reads MOSES instead of Manasseh. He then footnotes: "Several ancient textual witnesses, including SOME LXX mss and the Vulgate, support the reading “Moses” here. Many Hebrew mss have a nun (?) suspended above the name between the first two letters suggesting the name Manasseh. This is probably a scribal attempt to protect Moses’ reputation."

So in other words, (according to the likes of Dan Wallace) hundreds of Hebrew manuscripts have been corrupted. God has not preserved His words in any single text, and by human reasoning we must pick and choose for ourselves among some readings but not all of them found in other conflicting witnesses, and even other Bible scholars of equal learning do not agree with our choices.

The "scholars" can't get their act together.

Darbys translation wrongly reads MOSES instead of Manasseh, but he comments: "The LXX and others read Manasseh but Jewish authority, followed by Jerome, supports the opinion that the text was corrupted."

Notice that Darby says the LXX (Greek Septuagint) reads Manasseh. So does my copy of Brenton's LXX - it clearly says Manasseh, just as the King James Bible has it.  And so does The New Brenton Translation 2012.

However the NKJV footnotes: "Septuagint and Vulgate read Moses" -

This is a false footnote. It is a direct contradiction to what Darby and my copy of the LXX clearly say - "Manasseh"

Then the NIV scholars, which also wrongly read "Moses" in their text, tell us in their footnote: "SOME Septuagint manuscripts and Vulgate read Moses, BUT THE HEBREW MASORETIC TEXT HAS MANASSEH."

 

The NASB 1995 correctly reads Manasseh in its text, but then footnotes: "Some ancient versions read Moses." They don't tell us which versions these are, and only create doubt as to what exactly God inspired.

The RSV, NRSV, and ESV, which also incorrectly say MOSES in their text, then tell us in a footnote "another reading is Manasseh", but mention nothing about which texts have this reading or which ones say Moses.

Then we finally come to the brand new Holman Standard 2009 edition, which again incorrectly reads "Moses" in their version, but in their footnote they tell us: "SOME Hebrew manuscripts, the LXX and the Vulgate read Moses, and other Hebrew manuscripts read Manasseh."

Again, this is another lie. My copy of the so called Greek Septuagint clearly says MANASSEH and so does the New Brenton Translation of the Greek Septuagint done in 2012;  It does NOT Moses.

Do you begin to see how confusing and contradictory all these "scholars" are? Somebody is obviously lying about the reading of the so called Greek Septuagint.

 

Matthew Henry rehearses the explanation given by many commentators that the Hebrew text has placed the letter "n" slightly over the name Manasseh and that it should not be read as Manasseh but Moses, and that the rabbis did this so as not to shame the memory of Moses with such an ungodly grandson. However Matthew Henry notes: "But the learned bishop Patrick takes this to be an idle conceit of the rabbin, and supposes this Jonathan to be of some other family of the Levites."

Commentators are a funny bunch. What one affirms with all confidence is absolutely denied by another. Only the Holy Bible is inspired, not the commentators. It is silly to suppose God would direct rabbis to alter His word "to protect the honour of Moses".

This is a totally humanistic view of Scripture. The sins of Moses himself stain the very pages of Holy Writ. Moses murdered an Egyptian and had to flee for his life. (Exodus 2:12).  It was because Moses rebelled against the word of the LORD and did not believe Him that God did not allow him to enter the promised land. (Numbers 24:12, 24).

God has no qualms about recording the sins of even His greatest prophets, let alone one of their grandsons.

If we go to the Scriptures themselves we see that the Hebrew text says Manasseh and not Moses, and the only grandson of Moses mentioned in the Bible is a man named Shebuel, not Jonathan as mentioned here. See 1 Chronicles 23:15-16 and 26:24.

In the Bible there are three different people named Gershom and three different men named Manasseh, let alone all the ones so named that are not recorded in Scripture.

"Scholars", bible translators and commentators are all in disagreement with each other and none of them are inspired by God. Only God in His sovereignty and faithfulness to His promises can put together the true Holy Bible, and He has already done so in the greatest Bible in history - the Authorized King James Holy Bible.

The very last verse in this interesting book of Judges also applies to the modern day Bible Babel Buffet we see.

"In those days there was no king in Israel: every man did that which was right in his own eyes."  Judges 21:25

Will Kinney

 Return to Articles - http://brandplucked.webs.com/kjbarticles.htm