Another King James Bible Believer

Subtitle

Bible Babble Buffet Eight



Amos 3:2 "You only HAVE I KNOWN of all the families of the earth: therefore I will punish you for all your iniquities."


"You only HAVE I KNOWN" is the reading of the Bishops Bible 1568 - "You only haue I KNOWEN of al the families of the earth, therfore I will visite you for all your iniquities.", the Geneva Bible 1587, Douay-Rheims 1610, The Boothroyd 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 RV 1885, ASV 1901, RSV, NRSV, ESV, Holman Standard, NKJV 1982, Darby 1890, Young's 1898 and the Jewish translations like the 1917 Jewish Publication Society bible, the Complete Jewish Bible 1936, The Apostolic Polyglot Bible 2003 and the Orthodox Jewish Bible of 2011.  


 


Also correctly reading "You only HAVE I KNOWN of all the families of the earth" are The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, The Complete Jewish Bible 1998, The Sacred Scriptures Family of Yah 2001, Green's literal 2000, The Yah Sacred Scriptures 2001, The Word of Yah 1993, The Revised Geneva Bible 2005, Bond Slave Version 2009, Hebraic Transliteration Scripture 2010, Holy Scriptures VW Edition 2010, Biblos Interlinear Bible 2011, The Work of God's Children Illustrated Bible 2011, Orthodox Jewish Bible 2011, Conservative Bible 2011 - "You only have I KNOWN", and the Holy Bible, Modern English Version 2014.  

 

Foreign Language Bibles = KJB

 

Foreign language Bibles that follow the Hebrew text and read like the KJB are The Spanish Cipriano de Valera 1602 - “A vosotros solamente HE CONOCIDO de todas las familias de la tierra; por tanto visitaré contra vosotros todas vuestras maldades.", the Spanish Reina Valera 1960-2015 editions, The Italian Diodato 1991 and Italian Nuova Riveduta 2006 - “Soltanto voi HO CONOSCIUTO fra tutte le famiglie della terra; perciò io vi punirò per tutte le vostre iniquità»., the French Martin bible 1744 and French Ostervald bible 1996 - “Je vous ai CONNUS vous seuls d'entre toutes les familles de la terre”, the Portuguese Almeida Corrigida 2009 - “De todas as famílias da terra a vós somente CONHECI; portanto, todas as vossas injustiças visitarei sobre vós."and the Latin Vulgate Bible - “tantummodo vos COGNOVI ex omnibus cognationibus terrae idcirco visitabo super vos omnes iniquitates vestras”



The word "to know" is # 3045 yah-dag, and means to know, as is Genesis 4:1 "And Adam KNEW his wife Eve"; Genesis 22:12 "Now I KNOW that thou fearest God"; " I KNOW not the Lord" Exodus 5:2, and Jeremiah 1:5 "before I formed thee in the belly, I KNEW thee." 


However the NASB of 1972 and 1973 editions said: "You ONLY HAVE ME of all the families of the earth."


Then in 1977 the NASB changed to read like the NIV and NET versions: "You only HAVE I CHOSEN of all the families...". Both readings are wrong. The Hebrew words does not mean "to have" or "to chose". It means "to know someone or something intimately".


Dan Wallace and company's NET version is like the NIV. It says: "I HAVE CHOSEN you alone from all the clans of the earth"  He then footnotes "Hebrew - You only have I known"


The Lexham English Bible 2011 does the same thing. I says: "You only HAVE I CHOSEN of all the clans of the earth" and then it footnotes: "Literally 'known'"


The Common English Bible of 2011 (another critical text Vatican Version) completely paraphrases it and says: "You only HAVE I LOVED SO DEEPLY of all the families of the earth. Therefore, I will punish you for all your wrongdoing."


The Message 2002 again paraphrases and says: "Out of all the families on earth, I PICKED YOU."

 

THE CATHOLIC CONNECTION


The Catholic versions continue to change as well. The older Douay-Rheims of 1610 and the 1950 Douay correctly read: "You only HAVE I KNOWN", but the 1968 Jerusalem bible says "You alone HAVE I ACKNOWLEDGED" and the 1970 St. Joseph NAB has: "You alone HAVE I FAVORED", but the 2009 Catholic Public Domain Version goes back to "I HAVE KNOWN only you" and so does The Revised Douay-Rheims Bible 2012.

 


Folks, they are not making these changes for the sake of accuracy, but they need to change about 20% of their wording in order to get a copyright and thus make money and they are being used by the enemy to blur the lines of clarity and bring about confusion.

 


Amos 3:3 "Can two walk together, EXCEPT THEY BE AGREED?


In Amos 3:3 God is rebuking his people for their sin of departing from him and being rebellious. The Lord says: "Can two walk together, except they BE AGREED?"


In other words, we must be in agreement with God, see things the way He does, and assent to walk in fellowship with Him or we shall surely suffer the consequences.


Bibles = King James Bible in Amos 3:3


Other versions that agree with the KJB here are Coverdale 1535, the Great Bible 1540 and Matthew's Bible 1549 both read: - "Maye twayne walke together EXCEPTE THEY BE AGREED AMONGE THEM SELVES?", Bishops' Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1587 - "Can two walke together except they bee agreed?", Douay-Rheims 1610, The Thomson Bible 1808,  Webster's Bible 1833, The Boothroyd Bible 1853, The Jewish Family Bible 1864, the ASV 1901 (the version so highly praised by the NASB as being the Rock of Biblical Honesty), Noyes Translation 1869 - "Can two walk together, Unless they agree together?", The Sharpe Bible 1883, Revised Version 1885, both the 1917 Jewish Publication Society (JPS) and 1936 Hebrew-English versions, Darby 1890, Douay 1950, New Life Version 1969, NKJV 1982, Green's interlinear, Orthodox Jewish Bible 1998 "except they be agreed?", World English Bible 2000,  the English Jubilee Bible 2010 - "Can two walk together EXCEPT THEY BE AGREED?", The Natural Israelite Bible 2012 (online) "Can two walk together unless they are agreed?"


 


Other Bible translations that also read "Can two walk together, EXCEPT THEY BE AGREED?" are The Revised English Bible 1877, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, The Word of Yah 1993, God's First Truth 1999, Sacred Scriptures Family of Yah 2001, the Judaica Press Complete Tanach 2004, The Revised Geneva Bible 2005, Green's Literal 2005, Bond Slave Version 2009, Hebraic Transliteration Scripture 2010, Holy Scriptures VW Edition 2010, Conservative Bible 2011, The Work of God's Children Illustrated Bible 2011, World English Bible 2012, The Biblos Bible 2013, and The Holy Bible, Modern English Version 2014. 


Foreign Language Bibles

 

Among the foreign language Bible that agree with the meaning found in the King James Bible are the Spanish Sagradas Escrituras 1569, Cipriano de Valera 1602, the Reina Valera 1960, 1995, the Reina Valera Gómez of 2010 - "¿Andarán dos juntos, si no estuvieren de acuerdo?" = Can two walk together, UNLESS THEY ARE IN AGREEMENT?,  the French Martin 1744  - "s'ils ne s'en sont accordés?" = "unless they are in agreement"?, the Italian Diodati 1649 and New Diodati 1991 - "Due cammineranno essi insieme, se prima non si son convenuti l’uno con l’altro?" = "unless they are in agreement the one with the other?", the Portuguese Almeida - "Acaso andarão dois juntos, se não estiverem de acordo? = "unless they are in agreement?" and the Modern Greek translation - "Δυνανται δυο να περιπατησωσιν ομου, εαν δεν ηναι συμφωνοι;" = "Can two walk together, UNLESS THEY ARE OF THE SAME MIND.?"


 

However the NASB says: "Do two men walk together unless they HAVE MADE AN APPOINTMENT?"  

 

The NASB matches the Jehovah Witness New World Translation that says: "Will two people walk together unless they HAVE MET BY APPOINTMENT?"


There is no word for "men" or "people" in the Hebrew, so the meaning that this is talking about God and his people walking together is lost. The NASB is speaking about just two men. The phrase "they have made an appointment" completely changes the meaning. People can make an appointment to meet together physically, yet they can totally disagree with each other and hold opposite views. The whole meaning of the verse has been changed.


The Holman Standard is like the NASB with: "Can two walk together WITHOUT AGREEING TO MEET?" Then it gives this false footnote saying "LXX reads 'without meeting'  Brenton's copy of the so called LXX says "Can two walk together, if THEY DO NOT KNOW ONE ANOTHER?" 


Dan Wallace's NET version and Young's 'literal' are just plain goofy, with: "Do two walk together WITHOUT HAVING MET?", and obviously (if you think about it) they disagree with the meaning found in the NASB, NIV and ESVs.


The NIV has: "Do two walk together unless THEY HAVE AGREED TO DO SO?

 

The ESV has "Do two walk together, UNLESS THEY HAVE AGREED TO MEET?"

 

Complete Apostle's Bible 2003 - "Shall two walk together at all, IF THEY DO NOT KNOW ONE ANOTHER?"

(You can obviously know another person without agreeing with them)

 

 

The Message 2002 - "Do two people walk hand in hand IF THEY AREN'T GOING TO THE SAME PLACE?"


 

The Living Bible 1971 is different still, with: “ For how can WE walk together WITH YOUR SINS BETWEEN US?"  

 

But, not to worry, now the "NEW" Living Bible of 2013 has come out and cleared everything up for us by stating: "Can two people walk together WITHOUT AGREEING ON THE DIRECTION?"

 

The Voice 2012 has the unique and incomprehensible - “Do two people travel together IF THEY HAD TO SET UP A TIME TO MEET?” (Say What?!?) 

 

So we have at least FIVE completely different meanings among todays Bible Babble Buffet versions.  


Looks like the James White clones are right when they tell us they can get a better understanding of the word nuances of what the originals said by comparing several different versions, huh?


The Catholic Connection


These modern Vatican Versions are in fact just like their modern Catholic counterparts. The older Catholic Douay-Rheims 1610 and 1950 Douay read like the KJB with "Can two walk together, except THEY BE AGREED?",

 

BUT the Catholic Jerusalem bible 1968 and the New Jerusalem bibles 1985 and the 2009 Catholic Public Domain Version all say: "Do two MEN TAKE THE ROAD TOGETHER IF THEY HAVE NOT PLANNED TO DO SO?" (AGREED TO DO SO) = NIV, ESV, NASB, Holman.  

 

BUT The Revised Douay-Rheims Bible 2012 goes back to "You only have I KNOWN of all the families of the earth: therefore will I visit upon you all your iniquities.  Shall two walk together EXCEPT THEY BE AGREED?"

 

Modern versions are not getting better; they are getting worse and most Christians are either unaware of it, can't see it or just don't care.


John Gill comments on the meaning of Amos 3:3 saying: "The design of these words is to show, that without friendship there is no fellowship, and without concord no communion; as this is the case between man and man, so between God and man; and that Israel could not expect that God should walk with them, and show himself friendly to them, and continue his favours with them, when they walked contrary to him; when they were so disagreeable to him in their sentiments of religion, in their worship, and the rites of it, and in the whole of their conduct and behaviour. And to a spiritual walk with God, and communion with him, agreement is requisite."


Not only John Gill but also Adam Clarke, Matthew Henry, Jamieson, Faussett and Brown and John Wesley all expressed the same thoughts regarding the meaning of this verse. For example, Adam Clarke says: "While ye loved and served me, I dwelt in you and walked among you. Now ye are become alienated from me, your nature and mine are totally opposite. I am holy, ye are unholy. We are no longer agreed, and can no longer walk together. I can no longer hold communion with you."


Amos 4:12 "Thus saith the LORD; As the shepherd taketh out of the mouth of a lion two legs, or a piece of an ear; so shall the children of Israel be taken out that dwell in Samaria, and IN DAMASCUS in a couch."


Jamieson, Faussett and Brown commentary remarks: in Damascus in a couch--Jeroboam II had lately restored Damascus to Israel (2 Kings 14:25, 28). So the Israelites are represented as not merely in "the corner of a bed," as in Samaria, but "in a (whole) couch," at Damascus, living in luxurious ease."


John Wesley's commentary says: "Damascus - The chief city of Syria taken by Tiglath - Pilneser about the time when he wasted Israel."


"and IN DAMASCUS IN A COUCH" is the reading of Coverdale 1535, Bishops's Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1599, the 1936 Hebrew Publishing Company's translation, Young's, THE NIV, and TNIV!!!, Douay, Green's interlinear, the Modern KJV, Lamsa's 1933 translation of the Syriac Peshitta, Webster's 1833 translation, Luther's German, Calvin's Latin translation, and the Third Millenium Bible.


The Holman Standard notes that Damascus is the reading even of the Greek Septuagint, the Syriac, the Hebrew Targums and the Vulgate. However instead of "Damascus" the NKJV says: "ON THE EDGE of a couch", then footnotes that the Hebrew is uncertain. Even Daniel Wallace notes that the NKJV reading of "on the edge" is an emended (changed) text "based on a Hebrew term not attested in the Bible." The NASB has: "a COVER of a couch", the RV and ASV say: "ON SILKEN CUSHIONS of a bed", Holman Standard "the CUSHIONS of a couch"; the RSV, ESV have: "ON PART of a bed"; Darby - "on THE DAMASK of a bed", New English Bible 1970 "A CHIP FROM THE LEG of a bed"; The Message, as usual, differs from them all saying: - "A couple of old chairs at most, THE BROKEN LEG OF A TABLE."  


Amos 9:6 “he hath founded his TROOP in the earth”


“Troop”, or “foundation” (NIV) or “strata” (NKJV) or “vault” (ESV) or “vaulted dome” (NASB) or “storeroom” (The Voice, Footnote: “Hebrew is uncertain” ) or “foundation supports” (NET) or “his gathering” (Jubilee bible 2010) or “his globe of elements” (Geneva bible) or “his bundle” (Douay-Rheims) or “his tabernacle” (Coverdale) or establishes “His promise” on the earth (Complete Apostle’s bible 2005, Greek  Septuagint) or “founded HIS GATHERING on the earth” (Jubilee bible 2010)?


Some KJB critics don’t like the word “TROOP” and tell us that it is an error.  But all they really reveal about themselves is the fact that not one of them has any Bible in any language - including “the” Greek and “the” Hebrew - that they will EVER show you that they honestly believe is the complete and inerrant words of God.


They are version rummaging Bible Agnostics (they don’t know for sure what God said) and they are their own authorities.


The NIV says he “sets its FOUNDATION on the earth”, but then footnotes: “The meaning of the Hebrew for this phrase is uncertain.”  (Bible agnostics)


The Hebrew word used here for “TROOP” is # 92 agud-dah, and is variously translated as “a bunch, “one TROOP” (2 Samuel 2:25 - “and became one TROOP”), and “burdens”.


Even the NASB has translated it as “band” in 2 Samuel 2:25 “and became one BAND”, meaning a group or unit or troop of men.


Not only does the KJB correctly translate this word in Amos 9:6 as TROOP but so too do the following Bibles, to name but a few -  the Webster bible 1833, Young’s literal 1898, the 21st Century KJV 1994, The Third Millennium Bible 1998, The Hebrew Transliteration Bible 2010 - “and has founded his TROOP in the earth”

http://www.messianic-torah-truth-seeker.org/Scriptures/Tenakh/Amos/Amos09.htm


The Biblos Bible 2013 - “he has founded his TROOP in the earth”


This online Hebrew interlinear - “his TROOP in the earth”


http://studybible.info/IHOT/Amos%209:6


And The Jewish Virtual Library Complete Tanach 1994 - “he hath founded HIS TROOP in the earth”


http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/book-of-amos#9


The Complete Tanach 2005 - “has founded HIS COMPANY on earth” 


http://www.chabad.org/library/bible_cdo/aid/16181#showrashi=true


Foreign Language Bibles = KJB


The French Martin bible 1744 - “a établi ses armées sur la terre” = “he established his ARMIES on the earth”, Spanish Las Sagradas Escrituras 1569 - “y su ayuntamiento fundó sobre la tierra” = “his gathering” or “group”

The Commentators

Just to give you some idea of the wildly varied ways of looking at the meaning of this passage, John Gill comments: “and hath founded his troop in the earth; this Kimchi interprets of the three above elements. So the words are translated in the Bishops' Bible in Queen Elizabeth's time,"he buildeth his spheres in the heaven, and hath laid the foundation of his globe of elements in the earth.'



Aben Ezra interprets it of animals; it may take in the whole compass of created beings on earth; so Jarchi explains it of the collection of his creatures; though he takes notice of another sense given, a collection of the righteous, which are the foundation of the earth, and for whose sake all things stand.

Abarbinel interprets it of the whole of the tribe of Israel; and so the Targum paraphrases it of his congregation or church on earth: he beautifies his elect, which are "his bundle”, as it may be rendered; who are bound up in the bundle of life with the Lord their God, and are closely knit and united, as to God and Christ, so to one another; and perhaps is the best sense of the words”


And Matthew Henry comments: “ He has founded his troop in the earth, his troop of guards, which he has at command, and makes use of for the protection of his subjects and the punishment of his enemies. All the creatures on earth make one bundle (as the margin reads it), one bundle of arrows, out of which he takes what he pleases to discharge against the persecutors, Psalm 7:13.  They are all one army, one body, so closely are they connected, and so harmoniously and so much in concert do they act for the accomplishing of their Creator's purposes.” 


Habakkuk 2:4 "the just shall live BY FAITH."


 


Habakkuk 2:4 KJB - "Behold, his soul which is lifted up is not upright in him: but the just shall live BY HIS FAITH."


NIV 1978 and 1982 editions - "See, HE is puffed up; his desires are not upright - but the righteous will live BY HIS FAITH."  


NIV 2011 edition - "See, THE ENEMY is puffed up; his desires are not upright - but the righteous PERSON will live by HIS FAITHFULNESS."


There is a world of difference between the just living by faith and the just living by his faithfulness. The first is the principle of living by the faith God has given us to believe the gospel of the grace of God in redeeming us through the sacrifice of Christ on the cross.  The second - "the just shall live by his FAITHFULNESS" - is to remove the entire focus away from what Christ has done for us and to place it on ourselves, our performance and our own works.


This wonderful verse in Habakkuk 2:4 is repeated again in the book of Romans where it is made the centerpiece is the apostles arguments about the difference between being saved by works or by grace. 


 


Romans 1:16-17 "For I am not ashamed of the gospel OF CHRIST: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek. For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live BY FAITH."  


The NIV 2011 completely perverts this truth. First of all, the Hebrew word used in Habakkuk is not "HE" and much less is it "THE ENEMY" but it is "his SOUL" It is the same word used in Genesis 2:7 where we read: "And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living SOUL."  

 

 

 

 

Secondly, the verse in Romans 1:16 is changed in the NIV and other critical text Vatican Versions as well. There we read: "For I am not ashamed of the gospel OF CHRIST."


The NIV, NASB, ESV, RSV, NET, Holman and ALL Catholic versions omit the words "OF CHRIST" because not found in Sinaitucus, Vaticanus, A or C.  


But the words "of Christ" are found in the Majority of all Greek manuscripts including K, L, P, Psi, Lamsa's translation of the Syriac  Peshitta, Tyndale 1525, Coverdale, the Great Bible 1540, Matthew's Bible 1549, the Bishops' Bible, the Geneva Bible, NKJV and in the Modern Greek Bible - Διοτι δεν αισχυνομαι το ευαγγελιον του Χριστου· , as well as the Modern Hebrew Bible - כי אינני בוש מבשורת המשיח באשר גבורת אלהים היא. = "I am not ashamed of the gospel teachings of the Messiah"


Habakkuk 2:4 "the just shall live by his FAITH"


Agreeing with the reading found in the King James Bible that "the just shall live BY HIS FAITH" are - Wycliffe 1395 - "the iust man schal lyue in his frith.", Coverdale 1535, the Great Bible 1540, Matthew's Bible 1549, the Bishops' Bible, the Geneva Bbile, Darby 1890, the Revised Version 1881 - "the just shall live by his faith.", ASV 1901, JPS 1917 (Jewish Publication Society), the Complete Tanach "the righteous shall live by his faith.", the RSV 1946 - 1971, NRSV 1989, ESV 2001-2011, NASB 1972 - 1995, Holman Standard 2003 - 2009, NKJV 1982, Third Millennium Bible 1998, Jubilee Bible 2000 and the Natural Israelite Bible 2012 - "but the just shall live by his faith." 


Other perverted bible versions are -


The Jehovah Witness New World Translation - "the righteous one, BY HIS FAITHFULNESS HE WILL KEEP LIVING."


Youngs 1898 - "And the righteous by HIS STEDFASTNESS liveth." 


Catholic Jerusalem bible 1968, New Jerusalem bible 1985 - "the upright will live THROUGH FAITHFULNESS."


Dan Wallace's goofy NET version - "Look, the one whose desires are not upright will faint from exhaustion, but THE PERSON OF INTEGRITY WILL LIVE BECAUSE OF HIS FAITHFULNESS."

 

The Common English Bible 2011 (another Critical Text version) - "Some people’s desires are truly audacious; they don’t do the right thing. But the righteous person WILL LIVE HONESTLY."

 

 


The big theological question to ask is this - Does the just live by FAITH, meaning by what he believes about what God has done for us in Christ, or by his FAITHFULNESS, meaning how he lives? 

The King James Bible is always right.


 See the full article on this verse here Habakkuk 2:4 "the just shall live by his FAITH" OR "by his FAITHFULNESS"?

 

http://brandplucked.webs.com/habakkuk24.htm

 

Zephaniah 2:14 The Bible Babble Buffet at its Best

 

 

The NKJV adds to this mess by reading differently than the KJB and saying it was a PELICAN and a BITTERN. None of these 5 English versions match any of the others. Ain't $cholar$hip Grand!


And in Isaiah 34:11 the KJB has the same two birds mentioned - "But the CORMORANT and the BITTERN shall possess it", but this time the NKJV says: "But the PELICAN and THE PORCUPINE shall posses it"


The exact same Hebrew word the NKJV has as BITTERN in Zephaniah 2:14 it now has as A PORCUPINE in Isaiah 34:11.


Now, I have to admit that zoology is not my strong point, but I'm pretty sure there is a difference between a bittern, which is a heron-like wading bird, and a porcupine.  But I could be wrong about that;-)



Zephaniah 2:14 


KJB -  CORMORANT (a large sea bird) and THE BITTERN (similar to the heron) - both aquatic birds.


NIV - DESERT OWL and SCREECH OWL  


NIV Spanish version (Nueva Versión Internacional) 2015 - “el pelícano como la garza.” = PELICAN and the HERON.



NASB - PELICAN and THE HEDGEHOG - revision of the ASV


ASV 1901 - THE PELICAN AND THE PORCUPINE


ESV 2011- THE OWL and THE HEDGEHOG - revision of the RSV


RSV 1971- THE VULTURE and THE HEDGEHOG


NRSV 1989 - THE DESERT OWL and THE SCREECH OWL - revision of the RSV


NKJV - PELICAN and THE BITTERN - But translates the same word as A PORCUPINE in Isaiah.


Holman Christian Standard 2003 Edition - DESERT OWL AND THE SCREECH OWL


Holman Christian Standard bible 2017 Edition - EAGLE OWLS AND HERONS


Easy-to-Read Version 2006 - OWLS and CROW


NET bible 2006 - OWLS (that’s it)


The Thomson Translation 1808 - CHAMELEONS and PORCUPINES


Greek Septuagint, Complete Apostle’s bible 2005 - CHAMELEONS and HEDGEHOGS 


Living Bible 1971 - THE VULTURES and THE OWLS


God’s First Truth Translation 1999 - PELICANS and STORKS


Names of God Bible 2011 - PELICANS AND HERONS  


The Katapi New Standard Bible 2012 - THE VULTURE and THE HEDGEHOG


The Catholic Connection


The Catholic Douay-Rheims 1610 and Douay 1950 both read “THE BITTERN and THE URCHIN”


The Jerusalem bible 1968 says: “THE PELICAN and THE HERON”


The St. Joseph New American bible 1970 has: “THE SCREECH OWL and THE DESERT OWL”


And the New Jerusalem bible 1985 now goes with: “THE PELICAN and THE PORCUPINE”


Famous Mantra of the Bible Agnostics - “We need to go to the Hebrew to find out what God really said.”



the CORMORANT AND THE BITTERN = KJB


Reading like the King James Bible are  The Webster Bible 1833, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907 - “the cormorant and the bittern shall lodge”, The Word of Yah Bible 1993, The Revised Webster Bible 1995, The 21st Century KJV 1994, The Third Millennium Bible 1998, the Jubilee Bible 2010, The Hebrew Transliteration Scripture 2010, The Bond Slave Version 2012, The Biblos Bible 2013 - “the cormorant and the bittern” and the Modern English Version 2014.


 


Zechariah 9:16-17 - God’s goodness and beauty or man’s?

 


The NKJV, NIV, NASB, Holman Standard steal the Lord’s goodness and beauty and attribute them to man.


Zachariah 9:16-17 KJB - “And the Lord their God shall save them in that day as the flock of his people: for they shall be as the stones of a crown, lifted up as an ensign upon his land.


For how great is HIS goodness, and how great is HIS beauty! corn shall make the young men cheerful, and new wine the maids.”


NKJV (hard copy) - “The Lord their God will save them in that day, As the flock of His people. For they shall be like the jewels of a crown, Lifted like a banner over His land—


For how great is THEIR goodness And how great THEIR beauty! Grain shall make the young men thrive, And new wine the young women.”


NKJV Footnote: “Literally HIS”


Also changing the literal HIS goodness and HIS beauty to THEIR are the NASB, NIV and the Holman Standard.


NIV - How attractive and beautiful THEY will be!


NASB - For what comeliness and beauty will be THEIRS!


NASB Footnote - “Literally HIS”


Holman Standard - How lovely and beautiful THEY will be!


BUT The ESV got it right - For how great is HIS goodness, and how great HIS beauty!


Also following the Hebrew text and reading like the KJB that speaks of the goodness and the beauty of the Lord - HIS beauty and HIS goodness - are the following Bible translations - the Geneva Bible 1587, The Jewish Family Bible 1864, The Revised Version 1885, Darby 1890, Young’s 1898, the ASV 1901, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907 - “For how great is His goodness, and how great is His beauty!”, The Word of Yah Bible 1993 - “For how great is His goodness and how great is His beauty!”, The Koster Scriptures 1998, the World English Bible 2000, The Yah Sacred Scriptures 2001, A Conservative Version 2005, The Jubilee Bible 2010, The Hebrew Transliteration Scripture 2010, The Common English Bible 2011, Lexham English Bible 2012, The International Standard Version 2014, Modern English Version 2014 - “For how great is His goodness, and how great His beauty!”


The Bible Commentators on Zechariah 9:17 


Jamieson, Faussett and Brown Commentary - “17. his goodness . . . his beauty--the goodness and beauty which Jehovah-Messiah bestows on His people. Not as MAURER thinks, the goodness, &c., of His land or His people”


Matthew Henry Commentary - “For how great is his goodness and how great is his beauty! This is the substance, this the burden, of the songs wherewith they shall make a noise before the Lord. We are here taught, [1.] To admire and praise the amiableness of God's being: How great is his beauty! All the perfections of God's nature conspire to make him infinitely lovely in the eyes of all that know him. Our business in the temple is to behold the beauty of the Lord (Ps. 27:4), and how great is that beauty! How far does it transcend all other beauties, particularly the beauty of his holiness. This may refer to the Messiah, to Zion's King that cometh. See that king in his beauty (Isa. 33:17), who is fairer than the children of men, the fairest of ten thousand, and altogether lovely. Though, in the eye of the world, he had no form or comeliness, in the eye of faith how great is his beauty!”


John Calvin - “every one of you ought to be filled with amazement at God’s incredible kindness, and at his incredible beauty.”


John Gill’s Commentary - “For how great is his goodness.... Not of the land of Judea, as Kimchi; nor of the doctrine of the law, as the Targum; nor of the people of the Jews; but of the Messiah: and designs not his essential nor his providential goodness; but his goodness as Mediator, which he has in his heart, and has shown unto his people, in being their surety, and becoming their Saviour; in assuming their nature; bearing their sins, and obeying and suffering in their room and stead.”



Zechariah 13:5 KJB "But he shall say, I am no prophet, I am an husbandman; FOR MAN TAUGHT ME TO KEEP CATTLE FROM MY YOUTH."


Also reading this way are the Geneva Bible 1599 - "I am no Prophet: I am an husbandman: for man taught me to be an heardman from my youth vp.", The Lesser Old Testament 1853 - " I am no prophet, a man that tilleth the ground am I; for some one hath taught me to keep cattle from my youth.", The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907 - "I am no prophet, I am an husbandman; FOR MAN TAUGHT ME TO KEEP CATTLE FROM MY YOUTH.", the NKJV 1982, the 1936 Jewish Publication Society of America translation, Webster’s 1833 translation, - "I am no prophet, I am a husbandman; for man taught me to keep cattle from my youth.", The Word of Yah Bible 1993, the KJV 21st Century 1994, Revised Webster Bible 1995, the Third Millennium Bible 1998, The Revised Geneva Bible 2005, The Hebrew Transliteration Scripture 2010 - "I [am] no Navi, I [am] an husbandman; for MAN TAUGHT ME TO KEEP CATTLE FROM MY YOUTH.", The Bond Slave Version 2012, and The Biblos Bible 2013 - "I am not a prophet; I am a farmer, I serve the ground, for MAN TAUGHT ME TO KEEP LIVESTOCK from my youth." all read the same as the King James Bible.

 

 

Foreign Language  Bibles


Foreign language Bibles that agree with the meaning found in the King James Bible are the French Martin 1744 - "je suis un laboureur; car on m'a appris à gouverner du bétail dès ma jeunesse." = "I am a farmer; because I was taught to govern the cattle from my youth.", the Italian Diodati 1649 and the New Diodati of 1991 -"Io non sono profeta, sono un agricoltore; qualcuno mi ha insegnato ad allevare il bestiame fin dalla mia giovinezza." = "I am no Prophet, I am an husbandman; someone taught me to keep cattle from my youth.", and the Portuguese A Biblia Sagrada Almeida Corrigida E Fiel - "Näo sou profeta, sou lavrador da terra; porque certo homem ensinou-me a guardar o gado desde a minha mocidade." = "I am no Prophet, I am a tiller of the Earth; because certain man taught me to keep cattle from my youth." 

 

The Natural Israelite Bible (online) - “But he will say, 'I am no prophet, I am a farmer; for a man taught me to keep cattle from my youth.’”



BIBLE BABBLE BUFFET VERSIONS


NIV 1984 edition - "I am not a prophet. I am a farmer; THE LAND HAS BEEN MY LIVELIHOOD SINCE MY YOUTH."


ISV (International Standard Version)  2012 - "He will say, 'I am NO MERE PROPHET. A SERVANT OF MANKIND AM I, BECAUSE A MAN DEDICATED TO THIS HAVE I BEEN from my youth.'

 

The New Jewish Version 1985 - "I am not a prophet; I am a tiller of the soil; YOU SEE, I WAS PLIED WITH THE RED STUFF from my youth on." (Yep. It really says this.)

 


NASB - "I am a tiller of the ground, FOR A MAN SOLD ME AS A SLAVE IN MY YOUTH."

 

 

Lama’s 1933 translation of the Syriac Peshitta: “AND A MAN MADE ME ZEALOUS TO PROPHESY from my youth.”


New English Bible: “I AM A TILLER OF THE SOIL WHO HAS BEEN SCHOOLED IN LUST from boyhood.”


RSV 1952 “FOR THE LAND HAS BEEN MY POSSESSION from my youth.”


The ESV now has "I am a worker of the soil, FOR A MAN SOLD ME IN MY YOUTH."


J.P. Green's translation 2000 - "I am a man, a tiller of the ground, for A MAN CAUSED ME TO BUY from my youth."


The 1969 Berkeley Version says: "I am a man who cultivates the ground, FOR THE SOIL HAS HELD ME DOWN from my youth."


Catholic Douay 1950 and 2009 Catholic Public Domain Version  “ADAM IS MY EXAMPLE from my youth.”


The so called Greek Septuagint has: "for I am a tiller of the ground, FOR A MAN BROUGHT ME UP THUS FROM MY YOUTH."


Aren't you glad that all these scholars have "gone to the Hebrew" in order to make the meaning plain for us and easy to understand?


John Calvin comments of this verse saying: "With regard to the verb ynnqh, ekenni, hnq, kene, means to possess, to acquire; but as the word hnqm, mekene, which signifies a flock of sheep or cattle, is derived from this verb, the most learned interpreters are inclined to give this meaning, "Man has taught me to possess sheep and oxen." I am however disposed to give this rendering, as I have already stated, "Man has taught me to be a shepherd." 


Adam Clarke comments: "He declares he is no prophet, neither true nor false; that he is now a husbandman, and was brought up a herdsman."


Jamieson, Fausset and Brown comment: "However, husbandry and keeping cattle might be regarded as jointly the occupation of the person questioned: then Amos 7:14, "herdman," will accord with English Version. A Hebrew kindred word means "cattle." Both occupations, the respondent replies, are inconsistent with my being a "prophet."


Matthew Henry comments: "He shall return to his own proper employment, which is the fittest for him: I will be a husbandman; "I will apply myself to my calling again, and meddle no more with things that belong not to me; for man taught me to keep cattle from my youth, and cattle I will again keep, and never set up for a preacher any more." 


Zechariah  13:6  King James Bible - "And one shall say unto him, What are these wounds IN THINE HANDS? Then he shall answer, Those with which I was wounded in the house of my friends."

 

 

"WOUNDS IN THINE HANDS?"


Agreeing with the King James Bible reading of "What are these wounds IN THINE HANDS" are the 1936 Hebrew Publishing Company version, the Wycliffe Bible 1395, Coverdale 1535, The Great Bible 1540, Matthew's Bible 1549, The Bishops' Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1599, the Douay-Rheims 1610, The Revised English Bible 1877, Young's literal translation 1898, Darby's translation 1890, The Spanish Reina Valera "Y le preguntarán: ¿Qué heridas son estas en tus manos? Y él responderá: Con ellas fui herido en casa de mis amigos.", the Italian Diodati, Lamsa's 1936 translation of the Syriac, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, the KJV 21st Century version, The NKJV 1982, The Word of Yah Bible 1993, the Third Millennium Bible 1998, The Koster Scriptures 1998, God's First Truth 1999, Apostolic Polyglot Bible 2003, Easy-To-Read Version 2006, Jubilee Bible 2010, Hebrew Transliteration Scripture 2010, The New European Version 2010, The Work of God's Children Bible 2011, Bond Slave Version 2012, The Biblos Bible 2013 -"What are these wounds IN YOUR HANDS?" and the International Standard Version 2014 - "what are these injuries to your hands?"


Other translations:


NIV- "What are these wounds ON YOUR BODY? he will answer, 'The wounds I was given at the house of my friends."

 

The NIV concordance shows that they have translated this same Hebrew word as "hand" or "hands" 887 times, and as "body" only once.


NASB - "What are these wounds BETWEEN YOUR ARMS?"

 

Where exactly is "between your arms", anyway? By the way, the word is clearly "hands" from the Hebrew, same as in the next verse "I will turn mine hand upon the little ones". The NASB has translated this Hebrew word as "hands" 1163 times.


The 1917 Jewish Pub. Society - "And one shall say unto him: 'What are these wounds BETWEEN THY HANDS?' Then he shall answer: 'Those with which I was wounded in the house of my friends.'"


The RSV, ESV - "And if one asks him, 'What are these wounds ON YOUR BACK?' he will say, 'The wounds I received in the house of my friends.'


The NRSV, Holman 2009 - "And if anyone asks them, "What are these wounds ON YOUR CHEST?" the answer will be "The wounds I received in the house of my friends."  

 

Complete Jewish Bible 1998 - "If someone asks him, 'Then what are THESE GASHES BETWEEN YOUR SHOULDERS?', he will answer, 'I got hurt at my friends' house." 


THE MESSAGE - "And if someone says, "And so WHERE DID YOU GET THAT BLACK EYE?' THEY'll say, "I RAN INTO A DOOR at a friend's house.'


New Life Bible 1969 - "If someone asks him, 'What are these SORES ON YOUR BACK?' he will answer, 'They are the sores I received in the house of my friends.'

 


The Living Bible 1981 - "And if someone asks, Then what are these SCARS ON YOUR CHEST AND YOUR BACK? he will say, "I GOT INTO A BRAWL AT THE HOME OF A FRIEND."



Zechariah 14:5 KJB - “And ye shall flee to the valley of the mountains:...ye shall flee, like as ye fled from before the earthquake in the days of Uzziah king of Judah: and the LORD my God shall come, and all the saints with THEE.”


ESV (RSV, NRSV, NIV, NASB, NET, Jehovah Witness NWT, all Catholic versions) - "Then the Lord my God will come, and all the holy ones with HIM.”


Lexham English Bible 2012 - “And Yahweh my God will come, and all the holy ones with HIM”.[a]

Footnotes: Zechariah 14:5 Hebrew “you”; LXX has “him”


The King James Bible translators were well aware of the reading "and all the saints with HIM" because this is the way the Bishops' bible along with Coverdale, The Great Bible and Matthew's bibles read.  But they made a deliberate decision to go with the Hebrew reading instead, and like the Geneva Bible did, they went with "and all the saints with THEE."


Agreeing with the reading found in the King James Bible - "and the LORD my God shall come, and all the saints with THEE." are the Geneva Bible 1587 the JPS (Jewish Publication Society) of 1917, Hebrew Publishing Company bible 1936, the Judaica Press Tanach 2004, Webster's bible 1833, Lesser O.T. 1835, Julia Smith Translation 1855, The Jewish Family Bible 1864, The Revised English Bible 1877, the Revised Version 1885, ASV 1901, Youngs 1898, Darby 1890, Rotherham’s Emphasized Bible 1902, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, The New Jewish Version 1985, the World English Bible 2000, The Complete Tanach 2004 - “And the Lord, my God, shall come; all holy ones WITH YOU.”, Green’s Literal 2005, KJV 21st Century Version 1998, The Koster Scriptures 1998, the Complete Jewish Bible 1998, Third Millennium Bible 1998, The New European Version 2010, The Hebrew Transliteration Bible 2010 - “ADONAI (יהוה) my Elohim (אלהים) shall come, [and] all the Kedoshim with THEE.”,  The Jewish Orthodox Bible 2011 - "and Hashem Elohai shall come, and kol Kadoshim (all the holy ones) with Thee [see Daniel 7:13-14].”, The Voice 2012, The International Standard Version 2014, The Hebrew Names Version 2014, The Far Above All Translation 2014, The Modern English Version 2014 and The Hebraic Roots Bible 2015.


The Jewish Virtual Library Complete Tanach 1994 - “and the LORD my God shall come, and all the saints with THEE.”

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/book-of-zechariah#14


Jamieson, Fausset and Brown, Matthew Henry, John Calvin and other Bible commentators have seen a reference here to God Himself and a prophetic reference to the Lord Jesus Christ. 


Jamieson, Fausset and Brown comment:- “Lord my God . . . with thee--The mention of the "Lord my God" leads the prophet to pass suddenly to a direct address to Jehovah. It is as if "lifting up his head" (Lu 21:28), he suddenly sees in vision the Lord coming, and joyfully exclaims, "All the saints with Thee!" So Isa 25:9. “

The Geneva Bible notes read: “Because they did not credit the Prophets words, he turns to God and comforts himself in that that he knew that these things would come, and says, "You, O God, with your angels will come to perform this great thing."

Matthew Henry comments: “The Lord my God shall come, shall come to the comfort of all that are his; for, "Blessed Lord, all the saints shall be with THEE, and it shall be their everlasting happiness to dwell in THY presence; and therefore come, Lord Jesus." The Lord my God shall come, shall come to the comfort of all that are his; for, "Blessed Lord, all the saints shall be with THEE, and it shall be their everlasting happiness to dwell in THY presence; and therefore come, Lord Jesus."

John Calvin notes: “All the saints WITH THEE (caps are mine). There seems to be here a kind of indignation, as though the Prophet turned himself away from his hearers, whom he observed to be in a measure prepared obstinately to reject his heavenly doctrine; for he turns his discourse to God.”


The Coffmann’s Commentary: ”And Jehovah my God shall come, and all the holy ones with THEE ..." Significantly Jesus Christ himself in the Matthew parallel made certain reference to the final judgment:

"And all the holy ones with THEE ..." "The holy ones are the angels." Many New Testament passages associate the "holy ones" or angels with the Second Coming of Christ, as in Matthew 13:41,49, and 2 Thessalonians 1:7.


"With thee ..." The change to the second person here is no problem. It is simply the manner in which the prophets wrote.  To make the connection between this passage and Matthew 24 even more certain, it should be recalled that when Jesus spoke the remarkable words recorded in Matthew 24, that he did so sitting upon the mount of Olives, the very mountain so prominent in this passage (Matthew 24:3); add that to the fact of this passage in Zechariah's being one of only two places where the mountain is mentioned in the Old Testament (the other being Ezekiel 11:23), and named only in this place. From all this, it is clear enough that Jesus interpreted this passage as teaching the same thing that he taught in Matthew 24."


John Trapp  Commentary - English Puritan - "And all the saints with THEE -  The prophet, in a holy indignation at his hearers’ obstinace and untractableness, turns him thus to God; like as doth old Jacob, Genesis 49:18; and our blessed Saviour cried out with the people’s perverseness, Matthew 11:25-26."



Though the NKJV still reads: “The LORD my God will come, and all the saints with YOU.” YET it footnotes: “The ancient versions and some Hebrew manuscripts read HIM.”

Versions that do read “The Lord my God will come, and all the saints with HIM” are the RSV, (which footnotes that HIM comes from the Greek LXX, Syriac, Vulgate and Targum, but the Hebrew reads YOU), NIV, NASB, the NRSV, ESV, Holman Standard, NET, Jehovah Witness New World Translation and all Catholic Versions.  


IT GETS WORSE.

What is so amazing about these fake bibles that have rejected the Hebrew text "all the saints WITH THEE" for the so called Greek Septuagint reading of "all the saints WITH HIM", is THE REST OF THE VERSE as it is found in the Septuagint.


The first part of the verse in Hebrew as well as the KJB and all these others reads: "And YE SHALL FLEE TO the valley of the mountains; for the valley of the mountains SHALL REACH UNTO AZAL: YEA, YE SHALL FLEE, LIKE AS YE FLED FROM BEFORE the earthquake in the days of Uzziah king of Judah: and the Lord my God shall come, and all the saints with thee.”

Even versions like the NASB, NIV, ESV read basically the same in the first part of the verse IN THE HEBREW TEXT AND NOT AS IT IS IN THE SEPTUAGINT.

BUT the so called Greek Septuagint actually says: “And the valley of MY mountains SHALL BE CLOSED UP, and the valley of the mountains SHALL BE JOINED ON TO JASOD, AND SHALL BE BLOCKED UP AS IT WAS BLOCKED UP IN THE DAYS OF the earthquake, in the days of Ozias king of Juda; and the Lord my God shall come, and all the saints with him.”

You can see it here -
http://www.ecmarsh.com/lxx/Zacharias/index.htm

So these fake bibles have rejected almost everything else the LXX says in the first 4/5th of the verse, but latched on to the last word - “him” instead of “thee”. And they call this “the science of textual criticism”.

 


Zechariah 14:6 The context is the “day of the LORD” when He goes forth to fight against the nations that He gathers against Jerusalem.


We pick up in 14:5-7 where we read: “...and the LORD my God shall come, and all the saints with thee. And it shall come to pass in that day, THAT THE LIGHT SHALL NOT BE CLEAR, NOR DARK: But it shall be one day which shall be known to the LORD, NOT DAY, NOR NIGHT: but it shall come to pass, that at evening time is shall be light.”


Even Jamieson, Fausset and Brown point out: "English Version (this would be the King James Bible) accords with Zec 14:7: "There shall not be altogether light nor altogether darkness." The King James Bible makes perfect sense in the context. However there is a huge difference in the way the various versions have translated this section, with several of the more modern ones abandoning the Hebrew, and following SOME copies of the so called Greek Septuagint.


Agreeing with the King James reading of “THAT THE LIGHT SHALL NOT BE CLEAR, NOR DARK” either word for word or in sense are: Bishops’ Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible “And in that day shall there bee no cleare light, but darke.”, Webster’s 1833, the 1936 Hebrew Publishing Company version :”no bright light nor thick darkness”, Darby, the KJV 21st Century Version 1994, and the Modern Greek translation of the Old Testament (not to be confused with the LXX).


The Spanish translations from 1569 to 1960 agree exactly with the KJB reading. The Sagradas Escrituras 1569, and the Spanish Reina Valera 1602, 1909, 1960, - “Y acontecerá que en ese día no habrá luz clara, ni oscura.” - And it will come to pass in that day that there will not be clear light, nor dark.” (But the 1995 RV rejects the Hebrew and follows the alleged LXX - Acontecerá que en ese día no habrá luz, ni frío, ni hielo. - “there will not be light, nor cold, nor ice.”


The Judaica Press Tanach is very similar to the KJB with: “And it shall come to pass on that day that there shall be no light, only disappearing light and thick darkness.”


The modern Complete Jewish Bible is very similar to the KJB with: “On that day, there will be neither bright light nor thick darkness.”


The 1917 Jewish Publication Society version is in the ballpark of the KJB reading: "And it shall come to pass in that day, that there shall not be light, but heavy clouds and thick." Notice that none of the four Jewish translations cited say anything about "cold and frost", but instead refer to some sort of a combination of light and darkness on that day.


Young’s ‘literal’ - “in that day, The precious light is not, it is dense darkness.”


Green’s 2000 “literal” - “And it will be in that day, there shall not be light; THE GLORIOUS ONES WILL SHRINK.”!!


The 1982 NKJV has a different meaning that either the KJB or the NIV saying: “It shall come to pass in that day That there will be no light; THE LIGHTS WILL DIMINISH.”


Darby is similar in sense to the KJB - “in that day, that there shall not be light; the shining shall be obscured.”


NIV - “On that day there will be no light, NO COLD OR FROST.”


But the 2003 Holman Standard doesn’t go along with the NIV reading, but instead has: “On that day there will be no light; THE SUNLIGHT AND MOONLIGHT WILL DIMINISH.”


Not even the New International Reader’s Version 1998, put out by the same people who gave us the NIV, go along with the previous NIV reading, but have: “There won't be any light on that day. THE SUN, MOON AND STARS WILL NOT SHINE.”


The 2001 English Standard Version reads like the NIV but notice its footnotes: ESV- “On that day there shall be NO LIGHT, COLD, OR FROST.” Footnote: Compare Septuagint, Syriac, Vulgate, Targum; the meaning of the Hebrew is uncertain.”


However the earlier RSV, and NRSV even omitted the word “light” and tell us: “On that day there shall not be EITHER COLD OR FROST.” But then footnote: Compare Gk Syr Vg Tg: Meaning of Heb uncertain.”


The Latin Vulgate does read like the NIV has it, saying “et erit in die illa non erit lux sed frigus et gelu” (and in that day there shall not be light but cold and frost) and to this also agree Wycliffe and Coverdale. The first English Bible to follow the Hebrew rather than the Latin here was the Bishops’ Bible which agrees in sense with the King James Bible. But the Spanish Bible had it right way back in 1569.


The RSV, NRSV, ESV recommend the so called Septuagint, but the LXX versions differ among themselves. The LXX copy I have says “and there shall be no light, and there shall be for one day A SOUL (psukee) and frost.” Then even it footnotes: “Alexandrian psukos, cold, PROBABLY the right reading.” So not even the LXXs agree with each other.


ASV 1901 - “there shall not be light; THE BRIGHT ONES SHALL WITHDRAW THEMSELVES.”


NASB - “In that day there will be no light; THE LUMINARIES WILL DWINDLE.”


The Message is unrecognizable with: - “The Day is coming—the timing is God's—when it will be continuous day. Every evening will be a fresh morning.”


Contemporary English Version 1995 - “It will be a bright day that won't turn cloudy.” Footnote - “One possible meaning for the difficult Hebrew text.”


NET Version. As usual, Daniel Wallace puts his own spin on things, but his footnote is of interest in that what he says he thinks it means is basically what is found in the King James Bible.


NET Version - “On that day there will be no light – the sources of light in the heavens will congeal.” Then part of his lengthy footnote reads: “This difficult phrase is not clarified by the LXX which presupposes “and cold and ice,” a reading followed by NAB, NIV, NCV, NRSV, TEV). Besides the fact that cold and ice do not necessarily follow the absence of light, the idea here is that day will be night and night day.”


 


Malachi 2:12 - “the master and the scholar”


James White, who is his own authority and will NEVER show you a copy of any Bible in any language that he really believes is the complete and inerrant words of God, has written a book called The King James Only Controversy in which he criticizes many readings found in the King James Bible.


Regarding Malachi 2:12 he writes on page 107: “In Malachi 2:12 all Hebrew manuscripts read “AWARE AND AWAKE”; whereas the KJV reads “THE MASTER AND THE SCHOLAR,” following the Roman Catholic Latin Vulgate.  Do you suppose this is a New Age attack on spiritual alertness, replacing it with godless scholarship?”


My Response 


First of all, let’s look at the entire verse in its context.  God is rebuking His people for their many sins and pronouncing judgement upon them.


 

He says: “For the priest’s lips should keep knowledge, and they should seek the law at his mouth: for he is the messenger of the LORD of hosts.  BUT YE ARE DEPARTED OUT OF THE WAY; YE HAVE CAUSED MANY TO STUMBLE AT THE LAW; YE HAVE CORRUPTED THE COVENANT of Levi, saith the LORD of hosts.”  Malachi 2:7-8


“Judah hath dealt treacherously, and an abomination is committed in Israel and in Jerusalem: for Judah hath profaned the holiness of the LORD which he loved, and hath married the daughter of a strange god.


The LORD will cut the man that doeth this, THE MASTER AND THE SCHOLAR, out of the tabernacles of Jacob, and him that offereth an offering unto the LORD of hosts.”  Malachi 2:11-12.


Does it even make sense to say “The LORD will cut off the man that doeth this, AWARE AND AWAKE, out of the tabernacles of Jacob”? 


Do any other Bible versions translate it the way our Bible critic thinks it should be done?  Not many. In fact, what we have here is another example of the Bible Babble Buffet versions in all their confusion.


Individual Hebrew words often have multiple and widely varied meanings.  The KJB (and others as we shall soon see) have translated the word # 5782 goor, as “awake, be raised, stir up, lifted up, and master.”


The Hebrew word # 6030 gah-nah they have translated as “to bring low, to hear, to answer, to afflict, the testify, and scholar.”


Not only does the King James Bible read “the MASTER AND THE SCHOLAR” in Malachi 2:12, but so too do the following Bible translations - Coverdale 1535, The Great Bible 1540, Matthew’s Bible 1549 - “THE MASTER AND THE SCHOLAR”, Douay Rheims 1610, Webster’s bible 1833, The Boothroyd Bible 1853, The Jewish Family Bible 1864 - “THE MASTER AND THE SCHOLAR”, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, The KJV 21st Century 1994, The Revised Webster Bible 1995, The Third Millennium Bible 1998, God’s First Truth Translation 1999, the Jubilee Bible 2010, The Hebrew Transliteration Bible 2010, The Work of God’s Children Bible 2011 and The Biblos Bible 2013 - “THE MASTER AND THE SCHOLAR”


The Jewish Virtual Library - The Tanach [Full Text] 1994 - “THE MASTER AND THE SCHOLAR”


http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/book-of-malachi#2


This online Hebrew Interlinear - THE MASTER AND THE SCHOLAR

http://studybible.info/IHOT/Malachi%202:12


Some Bible Commentators 


Jamieson, Fausset and Brown - “scholar — literally, “him that watcheth and him that answereth.” So “wakeneth” is used of the teacher or “master”  (Isaiah 50:4); masters are watchful in guarding their scholars. The reference is to the priests, who ought to have taught the people piety, but who led them into evil. “Him that answereth” is the scholar who has to answer the questions of his teacher.”


Matthew Henry - “The Lord will cut off both the master and the scholar, that are guilty of this sin, BOTH THE TEACHERS AND THE TAUGHT. The blind leaders and the blind followers shall fall together into the ditch, both him that wakeneth and him that answereth (so it is in the margin), FOR THE MASTER CALLS UP HIS SCHOLAR TO HIS BUSINESS, AND STIRS HIM UP IN IT. They shall be cut off together out of the tabernacles of Jacob.”



Adam Clarke - “The master and the scholar - He who teachers such doctrine, and he who follows this teaching, the Lord will cut off both the one and the other.”


Matthew Poole’ English Annotations - “The master and the scholar; him that calleth and him that answereth; there shall be left NEITHER ANY TO TEACH NOR ANY TO LEARN, none to call nor any to answer, all the living cut off.”


John Wesley - “The master and the scholar - There shall be left neither any to teach nor any to learn.”



Other Bible Babble Buffet versions -


The Complete Tanach 2004  with commentary by Rashi - “the Lord shall cut off ONE OF ACUITY OR ERUDITION from the tents” 


 Rashi says: “An ingenious one among the students and one who can answer among the sages.”


This is essentially the same meaning as that found in the KJB.




The so called Greek Septuagint - “The Lord will utterly destroy the man that does these things UNTIL HE BE EVEN CAST DOWN from out of the tabernacle”


Lamsa’s 1933 translation of the Syriac Peshitta - “The Lord will destroy the man that does this, AND ALSO HIS SON AND HIS SON’S SON out of the tabernacle”


Catholic St. Joseph NAB 1970 and Catholic New Jerusalem bible 1985 - “BOTH WITNESS AND ADVOCATE”


Green’s Literal 1979 - “ANSWERING AND STIRRING”


Dead Sea Scrolls - “the man who does this - ONE WHO WITNESSES OR ANSWERS - from the tents“


Wycliffe 1395 - “THE MASTER AND DISCIPLE”


Geneva bible 1587 - “both THE MASTER AND THE SERVANT”


The Longman Version 1841 - “THE PROSPERER AND THE PROVIDER”


The Lesser Bible 1853 - “THE SON AND GRANDSON”


Young’s 1898 - “TEMPTER AND TEMPTED”


New Life Version 1969, Easy to Read Version 2001 - “every man who does this, EVEN IF HE BRINGS A GIFT IN WORSHIP to the Lord of all.”


The New Jewish Version 1985 - “NO DESCENDANTS” 


Complete Jewish Bible 1998 - “WHETHER INITIATOR OR FOLLOWER”


ESV 2015, Holman Standard 2003 edition - “the LORD cut off ANY DESCENDANTS from the tents”


Apostolic Polyglot Bible 2003 - “destroy the man doing these things, UNTIL WHENEVER HE SHOULD BE HUMBLED from out of the tents of Jacob” 


Holman Standard 2017 edition, NIV 2011, ISV 2014 - “WHOEVER HE MAY BE”


New English Bible 1970, Revised English bible 1989 - “NOMADS OR SETTLERS”


NKJV 1982 - “BEING AWAKE AND AWARE” Footnote: Talmud and Vulgate read ’teacher and student”


NASB 1995 - “EVERYONE WHO AWAKES AND ANSWERS”


NET version 2006 (Dan Wallace and company) - “who does this, AS WELL AS THE PERSON WHO PRESENTS IMPROPER OFFERINGS”


Modern English Version 2014 - “THE TEACHER AND STUDENT”


The Translator’s Bible 2014 - “ I wish that Yahweh would expel from Israel every man who has done that, EVEN THOUGH THEY SAY THEY ARE OBEYING the Commander of the armies of angels by bringing offerings to him.”


Yeah, that’s pretty much the same thing, right?




Malachi 2:15 - Bible Babel in Action


First the context and an explanation of the verse: "...Because the LORD hath been witness between thee and the wife of thy youth, against whom thou hast dealt treacherously: yet she is thy companion, and the wife of thy covenant. AND DID NOT HE MAKE ONE? YET HAD HE THE RESIDUE OF THE SPIRIT. AND WHEREFORE ONE? THAT HE MIGHT SEEK A GODLY SEED. Therefore take heed to thy spirit, and let none deal treacherously against the wife of his youth." Malachi 2:14-15


Though I believe there is a spiritual, allegorical meaning to this passage as well, let's focus on the usual literal meaning of the words as applied to the marriage between one man and one woman.


Malachi 2:15 King James Bible - "And did not he make one? Yet had he the residue of the spirit. And wherefore one? That he might seek a godly seed."


This is the word for word rendering of the Revised Version 1881 and the American Standard Version of 1901. It is also the reading or meaning found in the Geneva Bible, Bishop's Bible, the Spanish Reina Valera, Webster's 1833 translation, the KJV 21st Century Version, the NKJV, the World English Bible, the Hebrew Names Version, the Updated Bible Version 2004, and the Third Millennium Bible.


Commentators as well as Bible versions are all over the board on the meaning of this verse, but most of them generally agree with the sense found in the King James Bible.


John Wesley comments: "One - But one man, and one woman. Yet - Yet he could have made more. Wherefore one - One couple, and no more. A godly seed - A holy seed born to God in chaste wedlock, and bred as they were born, in the fear of God. Take heed - Keep your heart from wandering after strange wives."


The Geneva Bible has these marginal notes of explanation.


"And did not hee make one? yet had hee abundance of spirit: and wherefore one? because he sought a godly seede: therefore keepe your selues in your spirit, & let none trespasse against the wife of his youth."


Did not God make man and woman as one flesh and not many? By his power and strength he could have made many women for one man.


John Gill comments on Malachi 2:15: "And did not he make one? - That is, did not God make one man, and out of his rib one woman? did he not make man, male and female? did he not make one pair, one couple, only Adam and Eve, whom he joined together in marriage? or rather, did he not make one woman only, and brought her to Adam to be his wife? which shows that his intention and will were, that one man should have but one wife at a time; the contrary to which was the then present practice of the Jews.


Yet had he the residue of the spirit - it was not for want of power that he made but one woman of Adam's rib, and breathed into her the breath of life, or infused into her a human soul or spirit; he could have made many women at the same time; and as the Father of spirits, having the residue of them with him, or a power left to make as many as he pleased, he could have imparted spirits unto them, and given Adam more wives than one.


And wherefore one? -what is the reason why he made but one woman, when he could have made ten thousand, or as many as he pleased? the answer is, That he might seek a godly seed.


The NKJV basically reads like the King James Bible - "But did He not make them one, Having a remnant of the Spirit? And why one? He seeks godly offspring. Therefore take heed to your spirit, And let none deal treacherously with the wife of his youth."


The Updated Bible Version of 2004 has also gone back to the King James reading with: "And did he not make one, although he had the residue of the Spirit? And why one? He sought a godly seed."


HOWEVER, when we begin to compare a multitude of modern versions we encounter totally different and conflicting meanings. Remember, all these scholars have the same training and are translating the same Hebrew texts, yet they come up with completely different translations.


The RSV of 1952


"Has not the one God made and sustained for us the spirit of life? And what does he desire? Godly offspring."


The NRSV of 1989


"Did not one God make her? Both flesh and spirit are his. And what does the one God desire? Godly offspring."


The ESV of 2001


"Did he not make them one, with a portion of the Spirit in their union? And what was the one God seeking? Godly offspring."


Each of these is a revision of the other, and none of them agree not with the King James Bible, but not even with each other.


The NASB of 1995 (Remember that both the RV and ASV read as does the KJB)


"But not one has done so who has a remnant of the Spirit. And what did that one do while he was seeking a godly offspring?"


The NIV of 1984


"Has not the LORD made them one? In flesh and spirit they are his. And why one? Because he was seeking godly offspring."


Holman Standard of 2003


"Didn't the one God make us with a remnant of His life-breath? And what does the One seek? A godly offspring."


The Message of 2002


"GOD, not you, made marriage. His Spirit inhabits even the smallest details of marriage. And what does he want from marriage? Children of God, that's what."


Not one of these modern versions, from the RSV to The Message, has the same meaning as any of the others. They are wildly different from each other, and yet we are constantly being told that all bibles have the same message. This is the present day Bible Babel and confused state of Christianity in the 21st century.


ALL of grace, believing the Book - the King James Holy Bible.

Will Kinney

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