Another King James Bible Believer


Bible Babble Buffet Five

Job 6:6 Can that which is unsavoury be eaten without salt? OR IS THERE ANY TASTE IN THE WHITE OF AN EGG?

This is the reading of the RV, ASV, NKJV 1982, NASB 1995, the NIV 1984 edition, TEV, KJV 21, Third Millenium Bible 1998, Bishops' Bible 1568, Coverdale 1535, the Geneva bible 1599, Living Bible, New Life Bible 1969,  Darby, Lamsa's 1936 translation of the Syriac, Rotherham's Emphatic Bible 1902, Complete Jewish Bible 1998, Orthodox Jewish Bible 2011,  the Common English Bible 2011, the French Martin 1744, French Ostervald 1996 and Louis Segond of 2007 - "trouvera-t-on de la saveur dans le blanc d'un œuf?", Italian Diodati 1649 and Nuova Diodati 1991 - "Si mangia forse un cibo insipido senza sale?, o c'è qualche gusto nel chiaro d'uovo?", Luther's German Bible 1545 - "Oder wer mag kosten das Weiße um den Dotter?", and the Spanish Sagradas Escrituras 1569, the Reina Valera 1909, 1960, 1995, NIV Spanish edition 1999 - "¿Por ventura se comerá lo desabrido sin sal? ¿O habrá gusto en la clara del huevo?", the Portuguese Almeida Actualizada and NIV Nova Versão Internacional 2000- "Pode se comer sem sal o que é insípido? Ou há gosto na clara do ovo?" 


The various Jewish translations themselves are in disagreement in this verse as well. 

The 1917 JPS version says: "Or is there any taste in the JUICE OF MALLOWS?".

The Judaica Press Tanach has: Can bland food be eaten without salt, or is there a taste in the SALIVA OF STRONG-TASTING FOOD?"

But the 1936 Hebrew Publishing Company, New York, version reads just like the KJB's "or is there any taste IN THE WHITE OF AN EGG?"

And the Complete Jewish Bible also reads: "Can food without flavor be eaten without salt? DO EGG WHITES HAVE ANY TASTE?"

Hebrew Names Version - "Or is there any taste in the white of an egg? "

Even Daniel Wallace's NET version agrees with the King James reading: "Or is there any taste in the white of an egg?"

Then Mr. Wallace footnotes: "Some commentators are not satisfied with the translation “white of an egg”; they prefer something connected to “slime of purslane” (H. H. Rowley, Job [NCBC], 59; cf. NRSV “juice of mallows”). This meaning is based on the Syriac and Arabic version of Sa`adia. The meaning “white of the egg” comes from the rabbinic interpretation of “slime of the yolk.” Others carry the idea further and interpret it to mean “saliva of dreams” or after the LXX “in dream words.” H. H. Rowley does not think that the exact edible object can be identified. The idea of the slimy glaring white around the yolk of an egg seems to fit best"

NOTE - Daniel "Anything but the King James Bible" Wallace is incorrect when he says the LXX reads "in dream words". It doesn't. It says "empty words" - καὶ ἔστιν γεῦμα ἐν ῥήμασιν κενοῖς

The so called Greek Septuagint (LXX)  -εἰ βρωθήσεται ἄρτος ἄνευ ἁλός εἰ δὲ καὶ ἔστιν γεῦμα ἐν ῥήμασιν κενοῖς


But take a look at what other eminent scholars have come up with while translating the same Hebrew texts.

The NIV 1978 and 1984 editions read: "Is tasteless food eaten without salt, OR IS THERE FLAVOR IN THE WHITE OF AN EGG?"

NIV Spanish edition Nueva Versión Internacional 1999 - "¿Puede comerse sin sal la comida desabrida? ¿Tiene algún sabor la clara de huevo? = "Is there any taste in the white of an egg?"

NIV Portuguese edition Nova Versão Internacional 2000- "Come-se sem sal uma comida insípida? E a clara do ovo, tem algum sabor?" = "Is there any taste in the white of an egg?"

However the NIV 2011 English "this time we got it right" edition  now reads: "Is tasteless food eaten without salt, OR IS THERE FLAVOR IN THE SAP OF THE MALLOW?"

RSV (Revised Standard Version) 1952 - "Is there any taste IN THE SLIME OF THE PURSLANE?"

NRSV, ESV 2001 - "Is there any taste IN THE JUICE OF THE MALLOW?"

Jehovah Witness New World Translation -"Or is there any taste in THE SLIMY JUICE OF MARSH MALLOW?"

Young's literal - "Is there ANY SENSE IN THE DRIVEL OF DREAMS?"

Catholic Douay-Rheims 1610, Douay 1950  "Or can an unsavoury thing be eaten, that is not seasoned with salt? OR CAN MAN TASTE THAT WHICH WHEN TASTED BRINGETH DEATH?"

Catholic St. Joseph NAB 1970, New Jerusalem bible 1985 - "Can a thing insipid be eaten without salt? IS THERE FLAVOR IN THE WHITE OF AN EGG?

Bible in Basic English 1961 - "Will a man take food which has no taste without salt? or is there any taste IN THE SOFT SUBSTANCE OF PURSLAIN?"

The 2012 Knox Bible - "Would you have me relish food unseasoned, LICK MY LIPS OVER THE TASTE THAT BRINGS DEATH?"

Lexham English Bible 2011 - "Can tasteless food be eaten without salt, or is there taste IN THE WHITE OF A MARSHMALLOW PLANT?"

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




So read the KJB, Wycliffe 1395, the Geneva Bible 1599, Bishops's 1568, NKJV, NASB, NIV, Holman Standard, Message, TNIV, NET, Bible in Basic English, Darby, Douay 1950, Lamsa's 1936 translation of the Syriac, the ESV 2001, the Orthodox Jewish Bible  2011, Spanish Reina Valera 1909, 1960, 1995, Las Sagradas Escrituras 1569 - "Aunque él me mate, en él esperaré.", Jewish translations of 1917, 1936, Judaica Press Tanach, and the Modern Greek translation of the Old Testament.

However, believe it or not, the Revised Version 1881, ASV 1901, RSV 1952, and the NRSV 1989 say: "SEE, HE WILL KILL ME; I HAVE NO HOPE." - the opposite meaning!

The Common English Bible (a critical text edition) also reads this way. It says: "He will slay me; I'M WITHOUT HOPE."

The NIV Spanish edition, La Nueva Versión Internacional  of 1999 also reads this way, saying - "¡Que me mate! ¡Ya no tengo esperanza!" = LET HIM KILL ME! I NO LONGER HAVE ANY HOPE!"

RSV 1952 - "Behold, he will slay me; I have no hope..."

The fictitious LXX further confuses the issue with: "Though the Mighty One should lay hand upon me, FORASMUCH AS HE HAS BEGUN, verily I will speak, and plead before him."

Not to be outdone for novelty, Young's "literal" says: "Lo, He doth slay me -- I wait not!" and Green's goes along with this, saying: "Behold, He will cut me off; I WILL NOT WAIT."

Job 26:9 He holdeth back the face of his throne

Many times God seems to conceal Himself from us and hide His workings from our sight and understanding. We are told in Isaiah 45:15 "Verily thou art a God that hideth thyself"

Job 26:9 tells us: "He holdeth back the face of his THRONE, and spreadeth his cloud upon it."

This is the reading of Wycliffe 1393, the Bishops's Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1587, Douay-Rheims 1610, The Thomson Bible 1808, Lesser O.T. 1835, Darby 1890, Young's 1898, the Revised Version 1885, the ASV of 1901 (the precursor to the NASB) The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, the 1917 & 1936 Hebrew-English Masoretic translations,  Douay of 1950, the NKJV 1982, The New Jewish Version 1985, The Koster Scriptures 1998, the Complete Jewish Bible 1998, God's Word Translation 1995, the World English Bible 2000, The Yah Sacred Scriptures 2001, The Complete Apostle's Bible 2003, The Apostolic Polyglot Bible 2003, The Complete Jewish Tanach 2004, the Holman Standard 2009 - "He obscures the view of His throne, spreading His cloud over it.", The New European Version 2010, the Jubilee Bible 2010, New Heart English Bible 2010, the Knox Bible 2012, The Voice 2012, The Biblos Bible 2013 and The Hebrew Names Version 2014.


Foreign Language Bibles


Foreign language bibles that read like the KJB are the so called Greek Septuagint - "πρόσωπον θρόνου" = "the face of his THRONE", the Spanish Sagradas Escrituras 1569, the Reina Valera 1909, 1960, 1995 and 2011- "Él encubre la faz de SU TRONO y sobre él extiende su nube.", the Portuguese Almeida - "Encobre a face do SEU TRONO", the German Schlachter Bible of 2000, the French Louis Segond  of  1910 and of 2007 and La Bible du Semeur 1999 - "Il recover SON TRONE", the  Italian Diodati versions of 1649 and 1991 and the 2006 Nuova Riveduta - "Copre la vista del SUO TRONO."

The word is # 3678 kisseh, and means throne. It is so translated many times and never means moon. Even the LXX agrees with the Hebrew and the KJB and says throne. - "πρόσωπον θρόνου"

However the NASB, NIV, New Living Translation and Dan Wallace's NET version read: "He covers the face of THE FULL MOON." This is also the reading of the liberal RSV, the NRSV and the ESV, but the RSV, ESV have a footnote "or throne."

We see the same confusion among the Catholic versions. The Douay-Rheims of 1610 and Douay of 1950 read "face of his THRONE", but the 1970 St. Joseph New American Bible and the 1968 Jerusalem bible and the New Jerusalem of 1985 all read "the face of THE FULL MOON"

Ah, but now once again in 2009 the latest Catholic Public Domain version has gone back to - "He holds back the face of HIS THRONE, and he stretches his cloud over it."

Job 22:29 "WHEN MEN ARE CAST DOWN, THEN THOU SHALT SAY, THERE IS LIFTING UP; and he shall save the humble person."

The meaning is quite clear as it stands in the KJB. When others are cast down for their sins, you will say in effect, God is lifting me up. So read the Jewish translation of the 1936 Hebrew Publishing Company, the Bishops' Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1587 - "When others are cast downe, then shalt thou say, I am lifted vp: and God shall saue the humble person.", Spanish Reina Valera 1569, 1909, 1960 - "Cuando fueren abatidos, dirás tú: Enaltecimiento habrá" , Webster's 1833 translation, the 21st Century KJV 1994 and the Third Millenium Bible 1998.

John Gill remarks: "When men are cast down,.... Wicked men are brought down from a state of prosperity to a state of adversity, are in low circumstances, great straits and difficulties: then thou shall say, there is lifting up; that is, for himself and his; when others are in adversity, he should be in prosperity; when others are cast down into a very low estate and distressed condition, he should be exalted to a very high estate."

However in the case of the NKJV, NIV, and NASB all three give different meanings even from each other.

The NKJV says: "When THEY cast YOU down, AND you say "EXALTATION WILL COME". Then He will save the humble person."

The NASB has: "When YOU are cut down, YOU WILL SPEAK WITH CONFIDENCE", And the humble person He will save."

The NIV reads: "When MEN are brought low and you say "LIFT THEM UP, then he will save the downcast." 

The Holman Standard is different still. It says: "When OTHERS are humiliated and you say, “Lift them up,” GOD will save the humble."

The Complete Jewish Bible 1999 - "when someone is brought down, you will say, ‘IT WAS PRIDE, BECAUSE GOD saves the humble."

Job 22:30 "He shall deliver THE ISLAND OF THE INNOCENT; and it is delivered by the pureness of thine hands."

According to Strong's and Wigram's concordances the word for island is # 336 and is used numerous times meaning "island". Agreeing with the KJB reading are the 1936 Hebrew Publishing Company translation,  New English Bible, 1970 - "He will deliver the innocent",  Douay 1950,  Spanish Sagradas Escrituras 1569, Reina Valera 1909 - "El libertará la isla del inocente; Y por la limpieza de tus manos será librada.", the Reina Valera Gómez 2010 - "Él libertará la isla del inocente; y por la pureza de tus manos será librada.", Luther's German Bible 1545 - "Und der Unschuldige wird errettet werden" = "And the innocent will be saved", Webster's 1833 translation, the 1992 Today's English Version - "He will rescue you if you are innocent", the KJV 21st Century 1994 and the Third Millennium Bible 1998.

Also saying that the innocent are delivered are the  1917 JPS (Jewish Publication Society) - "He delivereth him that is innocent", the so called Greek Septuagint - "ῥύσεται ἀθῷον", the Wycliffe updated version of 2001 - "An innocent shall be saved.", the Douay-Rheims  1610 - "The innocent shall be saved", Rotherham's Emphasized bible 1902 - "He shall deliver the innocent" , Lamsa's translation of the Syriac - "The innocent man shall be spared wherever he is", the Bible in Basic English 1961 - "He makes safe the man who is free from sin", the Modern Greek - "Θελει σωσει και τον μη αθωον·" , the RSV (Revised Standard Version)- "He delivers the innocent man", the Revised English Bible 1989 - "He will deliver the innocent", and the Knox Bible of 2012 - "But the innocent shall be kept safe".

The Geneva Bible notes read: " He shall deliver the island of the innocent: and it is delivered by the pureness of thine hands. God will deliver a whole country from peril, even for the just man's sake."  (End of quote)

However once again the NKJV joins the NASB, NIV, ESV and many others and says the opposite with: "He will deliver EVEN one who is NOT INNOCENT."!!  

Bible commentators are all over the board on this one as are the Bible translations, and even though Dan Wallace and company side with the ESV, NIV, NKJV, NASB - "He will deliver even someone who is NOT innocent" yet he footnotes: "The Hebrew has אִי־נָקִי (’i naqi), which could be taken as “island of the innocent” (so Ibn-Ezra), or “him that is not innocent” (so Rashi)." Matthew Poole also mentions the same thing in his commentary, that the Hebrew word can be translated either as "the island of the innocent" or "he that is not innocent".

Job 26:12 "He divideth the sea with his power, and by his understanding HE SMITETH THROUGH THE PROUD."

This is the reading or meaning found in Wycliffe 1395 - "and his prudence smoot the proude.",  the Geneva Bible 1587 - "and by his vnderstanding he smiteth the pride thereof.", Young's - "And by His understanding smitten the proud.", 1936 Hebrew Publication Society, Douay - Rheims 1610 and Douay 1950 - "and his wisdom has struck the proud one.", Green's interlinear, 2000 - "and by His understanding He shatters pride." Webster's 1833 translation, and the Third Millenium Bible 1998.

Among foreign language translations that have the same meaning as found in the King James Bible are the Italian Riveduta of 1994 and 2006 - "con la sua intelligenza ne abbatte l’orgoglio" = "by his intelligence he strikes down the pride", the French Louis Segond of 1910 and 2007 - "par son intelligence il en brise l'orguei", the Spanish Reina Valera 1909, 1960, 1995 and Contemporánea of 2011 - " Y con su entendimiento hiere la arrogancia suya." = "and by his understanding he wounds their arrogance.", and the Portuguese A Biblia Sagrada em Portugués and the Portuguese Almeida Corrigida E Fiel 1681 - "e com o seu entendimento abate a sua soberba." = "by his understanding he knocks down their pride."

However again the multi-meaning modern versions are all over the map. Instead of "by his understanding he SMITETH THROUGH THE PROUD" the NKJV says: "by His understanding HE BREAKS UP THE STORM". Yet the NKJV rendered this same word as "proud" in Job 9:13, but here as "storm"!

The NASB, NIV say: "by his wisdom HE CUT RAHAB TO PIECES". Yet the NASB translates the same Hebrew word as "proud" in Psalm 40:4 and the NIV has translated the same word as "proud" in Psalm 101:5 'a proud heart' and Proverbs 21:4 'a proud heart'. 

Lamsa's translation has: "by His wisdom He SAVES MANY." 

 Rotherham's Emphasized bible of 1902 informs us that - "by his skill, hath HE SHATTERED THE CROCODILE."  And if you don't like any of these, you can always go with The Message which says: "by His wisdom HE TAMES SEA MONSTERS."

Job 39:13 - "Gavest thou the goodly wings unto the peacocks? or wings and feathers unto the ostrich?"

This is another verse that is so mixed up in the Bible Babel versions that it is virtually unrecognizable. The KJB as well as the Spanish Reina Valera 1909, 1960, 1995, and the Spanish Sagradas Escrituras 1569 and the 1999 edition  as well as the Reina Valera Gómez Bible of 2010 all equal the KJB word for word saying: "Diste las hermosas alas al pavo real, o alas y plumas al avestruz?" = "Have you given the beautiful wings to the peacock, or wings and feathers to the ostrich?". The reading of the King James Bible is also that found in the French Martin 1744 - "As-tu donné aux paons ce plumage qui est si brillant, ou à l'autruche les ailes et les plumes?" - = "Have you given to peacocks this plumage which is so brilliant, or ostrich wings and feathers?", Bishop's bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1599 -"Hast thou giuen the pleasant wings vnto the peacockes? or winges and feathers vnto the ostriche?", Webster's translation 1833, KJV 21st Century version 1994 and the Third Millenium Bible 1998 - "GAVEST THOU THE GOODLY WINGS UNTO THE PEACOCKS? OR WINGS AND FEATHERS UNTO THE OSTRICH?"

Now for a list of various translations, all of which wildly disagree with each other.


NASB: "The ostriches' wings FLAP JOYOUSLY with the PINIONS AND PLUMAGE OF LOVE."

NIV: "The wings of the ostrich flap joyously BUT THEY CANNOT COMPARE WITH the pinions and feathers OF THE STORK."

Young's "literal": "The wings OF THE RATTLING ONES EXULTETH whether the pinions of the ostrich OR HAWK."

Judaica Press Tanach - “The wing of the RENANIM REJOICED, OR THE WINGED STORK OR THE NOZAH.”

RSV, ESV 2001 - “"The wings of the ostrich wave proudly; BUT ARE THEY the pinions and plumage OF LOVE?”

NRSV : "The ostrich's wings flap wildly THOUGH ITS PINIONS LACK PLUMMAGE."



New English Bible: "The wings of the ostrich ARE STUNTED; her pinions and plummage ARE SO SCANTY."

Catholic St. Joseph New American bible 1970 - "The wings of the ostrich BEAT IDLY, HER PLUMAGE IS LACKING IN PINIONS."

Catholic New Jerusalem bible 1985 - "Can the wing of the ostrich BE COMPARED WITH THE PLUMAGE OF STORK OR FALCON?"

NET version by Daniel Wallace and company - "The wings of the ostrich FLAP WITH JOY, BUT ARE THEY THE PINIONS AND PLUMAGE OF A STORK?"

Bible in Basic English: "IS the wing of the ostrich FEEBLE, OR IS IT BECAUSE SHE HAS NO FEATHERS?"


Job 42:6

After the LORD appeared and spoke to Job, he realized the error of his thinking and confessed in Job 42:6 "Therefore I ABHOR MYSELF and repent in dust and ashes." This is the reading of the KJB along with the RV, ASV, NKJV, RSV, NIV, and ESV. 

However the NASB says, "Therefore I RETRACT, and I repent in dust and ashes". There is a big difference between abhoring myself and "I take back what I said".

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

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

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

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


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

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

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

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

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

The Message - "A good person SURVIVES MISFORTUNE."

The CEV (Contemporary English Version) of 1995 put out by the American Bible Society is so "contemporary" that it is unrecognizable. Sure, it's "easy to read" but is it even close to what God said?  It says: " YOU ARE BETTER OFF TO DO RIGHT, THAN TO LOSE YOUR WAY BY DOING WRONG."

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

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

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


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

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

 The Catholic Versions

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



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

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

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

The Jewish Translations

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Proverbs 26:10 Say what!

King James Holy Bible 1611: "The great God that formed all things, both rewardeth the fool, and rewardeth transgressors." This is the reading of Webster's 1833 translation, the KJV 21st Century Version, and the Third Millenium Bible.

Geneva Bible 1599: "The Excellent that formed all things both rewardeth the foole, and rewardeth the transgressours."

Young's "literal" translation: "Great is the Former of all, And He is rewarding a fool, And is rewarding transgressors."

NKJV 1982: "The Great God who formed all things gives the fool his hire and the transgressor his wages."

Spanish Reina Valera 1909: "El grande cria todas las cosas, y da paga al insensato, y la da a los transgressores." (The Great creates all things, and gives a recompense to the fool and gives it to the transgressors.)

The translations above generally teach the same idea, (except the NKJV gives it a different slant), but from here on, it is anybody's guess.

Spanish Reina Valera 1960: "Como arquero que a todos hiere, es el que toma a sueldo insensatos y vagabundos." (As an archer who wounds all, is he who hires fools and vagabonds.) Notice how different the two Spanish versions are.

Darby's Translation 1890: "A master roughly worketh everyone; he both hireth a fool and hireth passers-by."

Jewish Publication Society translation 1917: "A master performeth all things; but he that stoppeth a fool is as one that stoppeth a flood."

Lamsa's 1936 translation of the Syriac Peshitta: "The body of a fool is greatly afflicted, and a drunkard thinks that he can cross a sea."

Greek Septuagint Version (date disputed): "All the flesh of fools endures much hardship, for their fury is brought to nought."

Catholic Douay Version 1950: "Judgment determineth causes; and he that putteth a fool to silence, appeaseth anger."

Catholic Jerusalem Bible 1968: "An archer wounding all who pass: such is the man who employs a fool."

RSV 1952, ESV 2003: "Like an archer who wounds everybody is he who hires a passing fool or drunkard."

NASB 1972, 95: "Like an archer who wounds everyone, So is he who hires a fool or who hires those who pass by." (The NASB complete concordance shows they have translated this word as "great" 84 times, and only once as "archer")

NIV 1984: "Like an archer who wounds at random is he who hires a fool or any passerby."

The Good News Translation 1992: "An employer who hires any fool that comes along is only hurting everybody concerned."

The Living Bible 1981: "The master may get better work from an untrained apprentice than from a skilled rebel."

The New Living Bible 1998: "An employer who hires a fool or a bystander is like an archer who shoots recklessly."

God's Word Translation 1995: "Like many people who destroy everything, so is one who hires fools or drifters."

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

As noted scholar James White likes to say, reading a variety of translations gives us a better understanding of the Scriptures.

Let's look at some of the verses in Proverbs 30, in the modern Bibles, to see if they contradict each other. 

In verse 3 we read, "I neither learned wisdom, NOR have the knowledge of the holy." The RV, ASV, Spanish, NIV, NKJV agree with the KJB.

However the NASB of 1972 says "I have not learned wisdom, BUT I have knowledge of the Holy One." - the exact opposite. Then in 1995, the NAS changed again to read like the KJB and others.

In Prov. 30:11 we read, "There is a generation that curseth their father, and doth not bless their mother." It refers to a whole generation of people. NASB has, "a kind of man who curses his father", and the NIV, "those who curse their father. . ." The correct word is "generation", as even the ESV footnote says.

In verse 17 "the young eagles shall eat it" NKJV, NAS, have eagles while the NIV has "vultures". 

Verse 26 "The conies are but a feeble folk" Conies are a kind of rabbit, it is not archaic. Conies are found in the Geneva, RV, ASV, NIV, and Youngs. But the NKJV has "rock badgers" while the NAS of 1972 has "badgers" then in 1995 changed it to the "shepharim". These are just two of many examples where the great NASB doesn't even agree with itself from one edition to the next.

In verse 28 "the spider taketh hold with her hands" is the same in the KJB, NKJV, Geneva, 1917,1936, Youngs and Spanish. 

But the spider becomes a lizard in the NAS, NIV, and lastly for now in verse 31 "a greyhound" in the KJB, NKJV, Geneva, ASV, 1917, 1936 Hebrew - English versions, becomes "the struting cock" in the NASB and "the struting rooster" in the NIV. Now biology is not my strong point, but I'm pretty sure a struting cock is not the same thing as a greyhound.

As can be seen from this one chapter of the Bible, the finest modern day scholars do not agree with each other, and come up with totally different renderings for the same word.

Not all of them can equally express the mind of God. If I take the modern position, I can pick and choose which rendering I personally like, go back and forth among the versions and become my own final authority for what the word of God says. That is where the "Whateverists" or the "originals only" crowd are.

I, by God's grace, believe His complete inspired words are only found preserved in the King James Bible. On this issue, I part company with the modern version proponents.

Ecclesiastes 8:10 - “were forgotten” or “were praised”?

King James Bible -  “And so I saw the wicked buried, who had come and gone from the place of the holy, and they WERE FORGOTTEN in the city where they had so done: this is also vanity.”

ESV, NIV - ” Then I saw the wicked buried. They used to go in and out of the holy place and WERE PRAISED in the city where they had done such things. This also is vanity.”

I would hope that you can see there is an obvious difference between the wicked being forgotten and the wicked being, not only not forgotten, but even praised! You can’t praise someone and have forgotten them at the same time.

Agreeing with the King James Bible in saying that the wicked were FORGOTTEN are: Coverdale 1535, the Great Bible 1540, Matthew’s Bible 1549, the Bishops’ Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1587, the Revised Version 1885, ASV 1901, NASB, Lamsa’s translation of the Syriac, Darby, Young’s, the NKJV 1982, the Hebrew Names Bible, the Jewish Publication Society 1917 translation and the 2004 Jewish Complete Tanach. 

Among foreign language translations that follow the Masorretic text and read as does the King James Bible are the French Martin 1744, Louis Segond 1910, and French Ostervald 1996 -”et sont oubliés dans la ville.”, Luther’s German Bible 1545, Spanish Reina Valera, and Reina Valera Gómez 2004 - “y ser olvidados en la ciudad donde esto hicieron. Esto también es vanidad.”, the Italian Diodati 1649, New Diodati 1991, and the Portuguese de Almeida and Biblia Sagrada  - “foram esquecidos na cidade.”

The NASB - “So then, I have seen the wicked buried, those who used to go in and out from the holy place, and they are soon forgotten in the city where they did thus. This too is futility.” 

Lamsa’s translation of the Syriac - “And so I saw the wicked buried, who had come and gone from the holy place, and they WERE FORGOTTEN in the city where they had done such evil things; this also is vanity.”


NIV - “Then too, I saw the wicked buried-those who used to come and go from the holy place and RECEIVE PRAISE in the city where they did this. This too is meaningless.”

So how did the NIV and the other perverted versions listed below come up with “receive praise” insteat of “were forgotten”?  Well, the NIVs own footnote tells us.  The NIV footnote says the reading of “receive praise” comes from “Some Hebrew manuscripts and the Septuagint (Aquila), but most Hebrew manuscripts read ‘and are forgotten’.”

The ESV also perverts this verse and says: “were praised in the city” and then footnotes: “Some Hebrew manuscripts, Septuagint Vulgate read ‘praised’; Most Hebrew manuscripts read “forgotten”.

RSV, NRSV, ESV -” Then I saw the wicked buried. They used to go in and out of the holy place and WERE PRAISED in the city where they had done such things. This also is vanity.”

Holman Standard - “ In such circumstances, I saw the wicked buried. They came and went from the holy place, and they WERE PRAISED in the city where they did so. This too is futile.”

Douay-Rheims Roman Catholic, St. Joseph New American Bible 1970, Catholic Public Domain Version 2009 - “ I saw the wicked buried: who also when they were yet living were in the holy place, and WERE PRAISED in the city as men of just works: but this also is vanity.”

Catholic Jerusalem bible 1968 - “to honor them”

The Message tells us: “One time I saw wicked men given a solemn burial in holy ground. When the people returned to the city, THEY DELIVERED FLOWERY EULOGIES--and in the very place where wicked acts were done by those very men!”

The silly Amplified bible tells us: “and they are [praised and] forgotten in the city”.  It’s a little difficult's impossible to be both praised and forgotten at the same time.  

Daniel Wallace and company have gone completely over the edge of all reason and their NET translation actually reads this way in Ecclesiastes 8:10 - “ Not only that but I have seen the wicked approaching and entering the temple, and as they left the holy temple, they boasted in the city that they had done so. This also is an enigma.

Maybe James White will tell us that they are all “reliable and trustworthy” because each of them follows their own sources. Doesn’t matter what God Himself inspired in His inerrant words; just as long as they follow “their sources” (no matter how wrong or corrupt” James thinks they are “reliable”. 

Have these Bible critics lost their minds? (That’s a rhetorical question ;-)


Isaiah 30:7 "Their strength is to sit still"

Israel knew they were about to be attacked and they turned to Egypt to hire mercenaries who would help them. In 30:7 we read: "For the Egyptians shall help in vain, and to no purpose: therefore HAVE I CRIED CONCERNING THIS, THEIR STRENGTH IS TO SIT STILL."

This is the reading of the KJB, the Geneva Bible, Young's 'literal' translation, Green's interlinear of 2000, the Douay version 1950, the Spanish Sagradas Escrituras 1569 - "su fortaleza sería estarse quietos.", the Reina Valera 1960, 1995 and Contemporánea of 2011 - "Por eso yo le he dado voces, que su fortaleza sería estarse quietos." = "her strength will be to be still", the Portuguese Almeida Corrigida E Fiel 1681 and the Portuguese A Biblia Sagrada em Portugués - "por isso clamei acerca disto: No estarem quietos será a sua força." = "so I cried about this: On being quiet is their strength.", the French Martin 1744 - "leur force est de se tenir tranquilles." = "their strength is to be still", the Modern Greek - "Η δυναμις αυτων ειναι να καθηνται ησυχοι." = "their strength is to sit still",  Webster's 1833 translation, Third Millenium Bible 1998 and the KJV 21 1994.

Matthew Henry and John Wesley comment on this verse.

Isaiah 30:7 Matthew Henry - Their strength is to sit still, in a humble dependence upon God and his goodness and a quiet submission to his will, and not to wander about and put themselves to great trouble to seek help from this and the other creature.?

John Wesley - 30:7 Sit still - It is safer and better for them to sit quietly at home, seeking to me for help.

John Gill comments on Isaiah 30:7 saying: "that it was best for them quietly to trust in the Lord, and depend upon his protection, and sit still in Jerusalem, and not attempt to flee from thence to Egypt for safety, and they should see the salvation of God"

John Calvin also translates this passage in Latin as "their strength is to sit still"  (Robur illorum quiescere.) and then comments: "To sit still" means here "to remain and to stay at home," though he will afterwards shew (verse 15) that they ought to have peaceable dispositions. The cause of their alarm and impassioned exertions was, that they were terrified and struck with dismay, and did not think that God's protection was sufficient, if they had not also the Egyptians on their side. Thus, they who do not give sufficient honor to God have their hearts agitated by unbelief, so that they tremble and never find peace."

The immediate context also argues for this interpretation. We read in verse 15 "For thus saith the Lord GOD, the Holy One of Israel; In returning and rest shall ye be saved; in quietness and in confidence shall be your strength: and ye would not."

However instead of the KJB's "I cried concerning this, their strength is to sit still" the NKJV says: I HAVE CALLED HER RAHAB-HEM-SHEBETH".



The New Living Translation of 1996 says: "Egypt's promises are worthless! I CALL HER THE HARMLESS DRAGON."


The Bible in Basic English 1961 has: "For there is no use or purpose in the help of Egypt: SO I HAVE SAID ABOUT HER, SHE IS RAHAB, WHO HAS COME TO AN END."

The NET version by Dan Wallace and company reads: "For this reason I call her ‘PROUD ONE WHO IS SILENCED."

The so called Greek Septuagint has: "The Egyptians shall help you utterly in vain: tell them, THIS YOUR CONSOLATION IS VAIN."

The Knox bible of 2012 says: "my word has been said about her, THERE GOES PRIDE, LET HER ALONE."

The Catholic St. Joseph NAB 1970 tells us: "Therefore I CALL HER RAHAB QUELLED."

And the Catholic New Jerusalem of 1985 has: "and so I CALL HER RAHAB-THE-COLLAPSED."

Boy, am I glad they cleared that up for us, aren't you?

Isaiah 59:19 When the enemy shall come in like a flood the Spirit of the LORD shall lift up a standard against him.

Isaiah 59:19 "So shall they fear the name of the LORD from the west, and his glory from the rising of the sun. When THE ENEMY shall come in like a flood, THE SPIRIT OF THE LORD SHALL LIFT UP A STANDARD AGAINST HIM."

This is the reading of the NKJV 1982, Darby's translation, Webster's bible 1833, Youngs 'literal', the 1936 Hebrew Publishing Company version, the KJV 21st Century 1994, Third Millennium Bible 1998 and the 2011 Orthodox Jewish Bible - "When the enemy shall come in like a nahar (flood, river), the Ruach [Hakodesh] of Hashem shall lift up a standard against him." 

Among foreign language translation that read like the KJB are the Spanish Reina Valera of 1909, 1960 and the Reina Valera Gómez bible 2010 - "porque vendrá el enemigo como río, mas el Espíritu de Jehová levantará bandera contra él.", the Portuguese Almeida Corrigida E Fiel 1681 and A Biblia Sagrada em Portugués - "vindo o inimigo como uma corrente de águas, o Espírito do SENHOR arvorará contra ele a sua bandeira.", the Italian Diodati of 1649 - "perciocchè il nemico verrà a guisa di fiume; ma lo Spirito del Signore leverà lo stendardo contro a lui.", the French Martin 1744 and French Ostervald 1996 - "quand l'adversaire viendra comme un fleuve, l'Esprit de l'Éternel lèvera l'étendard contre lui.", the 1991 Italian Diodati - "quando l'avversario verrà come una fiumana, lo Spirito dell'Eterno alzerà contro di lui una bandiera." and the Modern Greek bible - "οταν ο εχθρος επελθη ως ποταμος, το πνευμα του Κυριου θελει υψωσει σημαιαv."= "When the enemy comes in as a flood, the Spirit of the Lord will raise up a sign (standard)" 

John Gill comments on Isaiah 59:19 saying: "when the enemy shall come in like a flood; when Satan, the common "enemy" of mankind, the avowed and implacable enemy of Christ and his people, "shall come" into the world, and into the church, as he will in the latter day; and has already entered "like" an impetuous flood, threatening to carry all before him, introducing a flood of immorality and profaneness, as in the days of Noah and Lot, to which the times of the Son of Man's coming are likened, (Luke 17:26-30) (2 Timothy 3:1-5) or else a flood of error and heresy of all sorts; see (Revelation 12:15) and likewise a flood of persecution, as will be at the slaying of the witnesses, that hour of temptation that will come upon all the earth, to try the inhabitants of it, (Revelation 3:10) (11:7,8) . Aben Ezra compares this passage with, and illustrates it by, that time of trouble which will be, such as never was since there was a nation, (Daniel 12:1) when this will be the case, which seems to be near at hand: the Spirit of the Lord shall lift up a standard against him; Christ and his Gospel, or Christ the standard lifted up in the ministry of the Gospel, (Isaiah 11:10,12) a set of ministers shall be raised up, having the everlasting Gospel, which they shall publish to all nations, and which shall have an universal spread; and by means of which the earth shall be filled with the knowledge of the Lord as the waters cover the sea."

John Calvin comments: "For the enemy shall come as a river. As to the reason now assigned, commentators differ. But the true meaning, in my opinion, is, that the attack of the enemy shall be so furious that, like a rapid and impetuous torrent, it shall appear to sweep away and destroy everything, but that the Lord shall cause it instantly to subside and disappear. It is therefore intended to heighten the description of the divine power, by which the vast strength and dreadful fury of the enemies are repelled, receive a different direction, and fall to pieces."


This is also how the modern Catholic versions like the New Jerusalem bible 1985 and the St. Joseph NAB 1970 read: "For he will come like a pent up stream impelled by the breath of Yahweh." (New Jerusalem)


If you look up this word "enemy" it is number 6862 tzar or tzahr meaning enemy or adversary, trouble. The NASB concordance shows they have translated this word as "enemy" or adversary or foe some 68 times and as "rushing" only once. The NIV concordance shows as enemy or foe 61 times, yet as "pent-up" only one time.

The NASB and Holman capitalize the word "He", as though it is refering to God. So is it God or the enemy who comes rushing in like a flood? A totally different meaning is found in this verse depending on which "bible" you are using. Which one are you confident in telling other people is the inspired word of God?

Isaiah 63:11 "The HE remembered the days of old, Moses, and his people...."

In 63:11 we read: "Then HE remembered the days of old, Moses and his people..." HE refers to God and is the reading of the KJB, Geneva bible, Coverdale, Wycliffe, RV, ASV, NKJV, ESV, Young's, Darby, Geneva, RSV, Spanish Reina Valera, KJV 21, TMB, Webster's, Douay, and the Holman Standard versions.

The commentaries are divided as to whether the passage is speaking about God remembering or whether the literal "he" refers to the people of Israel. However the context in the preceding verses and in this verse itself refer again and again to the people of Israel as "they" and "them", not "he".

Jamieson, Faussett and Brown comment: "remembered - Notwithstanding their perversity, He forgot not His covenant of old; therefore He did not wholly forsake them - God is represented, in human language, mentally speaking of Himself and His former acts of love to Israel, as His ground for pitying them notwithstanding their rebellion."

However the NASB, ESV and NIV say "HIS PEOPLE remembered..." It is of interest to note that the NRSV says THEY remembered, but then in a footnote tells us the Hebrew literally says HE, just as the RV, ASV, NKJV, RSV, ESV and Holman Standard have it.

The online NASB is really messed up. It reads: "Then His people remembered the days of old, of Moses. " Then in the footnote "cross reference" it notes Psalm 106:44, 45. However when we look at Psalm 106 what we read is not of "His people" remembering, but rather God remembering, as the KJB correctly has it. "Nevertheless he regarded their affliction, when he heard their cry: And he remembered for them his covenant..."

Isaiah 66:5 But He shall appear to your joy

There are literally hundreds of examples of how the New KJV has changed the meaning of the Scriptures as found in the King James Bible. One more of these hundreds of examples is found in Isaiah 66:5.

There we read: "Hear the word of the LORD, ye that tremble at his word; Your brethren that hated you, that cast you out for my name's sake, said, Let the LORD be glorified: BUT HE SHALL APPEAR TO YOUR JOY, and they shall be ashamed."

This is the reading of not only the KJB but also the Geneva Bible of 1587 - "Your brethren that hated you, and cast you out for my Names sake, said, Let the Lord be glorified: but he shall appeare to your ioy, and they shall be ashamed., Rotherham's Emphasized Bible of 1902- "Therefore shall he appear to your rejoicing", Daniel Webster's 1833 translation, the Lesser Old Testament 1853 - "Your brethren that hated you, that cast you out for the sake of my name, said, "Let the Lord be glorified;" but he will appear to your joy, and they shall be made ashamed.", Green's Modern KJV - "But He will appear to your joy, and they will be ashamed.", the Jewish translation of the Hebrew Publishing Company 1936, the Third Millenium Bible1998 - "He shall appear to your joy'; and they shall be ashamed."

Among foreign language translations that have the same sense as found in the King James Bible are the French Martin 1744 - "que l'Eternel montre sa gloire. Il sera donc vu à votre joie, mais eux seront honteux.", the Spanish Sagradas Escrituras of 1569 - "Mas él se manifestará a vuestra alegría, y ellos serán confundidos." = "But He shall appear to your joy, and they shall be confounded.", the Spanish Reina Valera 1602, 1909, 1960 and the Reina Valera Gómez Bible of 2010 - "Jehová sea glorificado. Mas Él se mostrará para alegría vuestra, y ellos serán confundidos.", the Italian Diodati 1649 - "Certo egli apparirà in vostra letizia, ed essi saran confusi." = "he will appear in your joy, and they shall be confounded.", Luther's German Bible 1545 - "lasset ihn erscheinen zu eurer Freude!" = "Let him appear to your joy! ",  the Dutch Staten Vertaling Bible - "Doch Hij zal verschijnen tot ulieder vreugde" = "But He will appear to your joy", and the Modern Greek Bible - "Ας δοξασθη ο Κυριος· πλην αυτος θελει φανη εις χαραν σας, εκεινοι δε θελουσι καταισχυνθη." = "But He will appear to your joy"


However a host of modern versions, including the NKJV, give a very different message. The NKJV says along with the NASB, NIV, RSV, ESV: "Who cast you out for my name's sake, said, 'Let the LORD be glorified, THAT WE MAY SEE YOUR JOY'. But they shall be ashamed."

What happened to the Second Coming of the Lord Jesus Christ? Is the true meaning "But He shall appear to your joy" or "That We may see your joy"?

The verb used here is # 7200 variously translated as "to see, to appear, to provide". It is a very common verb, but this particular instance is what is called a Niphal participle. It is only found three times in this particular form and the other two both refer to God or the Lord. Genesis 12:7 "the LORD who appeared unto him"; Genesis 35:1 "God that appeared unto thee", and here in Isaiah 66:5 "but he shall appear to your joy."

Jamison, Faucett and Brown -. They cast you out for my name's sake--excommunicate, as if too polluted to worship with them. So in Christ's first sojourn on earth . So it shall be again in the last times, when the believing shall be few (Luke 18:8). Let the Lord be glorified--the mocking challenge of the persecutors, as if their violence towards you was from zeal for God. "He shall appear to your joy," --giving you "joy" instead of your "rebuke"

Geneva Bible study notes:"but he shall appear to your joy, and they shall be ashamed. He encourages the 

faithful by promising to destroy their enemies, who pretended to be as brethren, but were hypocrites, and hated them that feared God."

John Calvin translates it as "But He will be seen to your joy" and then comments: "As if he had said, "God, by his coming, will cause believers to know that they have not hoped in vain; for he will appear for the advantage of believers, and for the destruction of those who maintain that he will appear as the defender of wickedness, of which he will be the severe avenger. The former shall enjoy gladness and consolation, while the latter shall be ashamed and shall blush, for they shall quickly feel that the judgment of God, which they now laugh at, is at hand."

I personally believe this verse has a great deal of application to the Bible version issue so vehemently being fought today. There are two camps in this battle. We who believe God has in fact kept His promises to preserve His pure, inspired words and He has done this in the King James Bible for the last 400 years; we "tremble at His word". And then there are those on the other side  who profess to believe the Bible is the inspired word of God, but when their beliefs are closely examined, we find out that "only the originals were inspired",  "No Bible is 100% correct, All translations are faulty, The correct reading should be..., Here there is a mistake", etc. and they cast out the Bible believer as being some kind of a nut or a "cultist", who has "made an idol out of the Bible" and they think they are honoring God when they do this.  

In the Bible Agnostic's way of thinking (They don't KNOW where to find God's complete and infallible Book) they who do not believe that ANY Bible in ANY language IS or ever was the complete and perfect words of God are "Orthodox", while we who believe God HAS given us His perfect Bible in the English language of the King James Holy Bible are "heretics" and kooks.

The battle lines are clearly drawn and you cannot sit on the fence. By the grace of God, may we be among those who tremble at His word. We have God's promise that He will appear to our joy, and they shall be ashamed.


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

Will Kinney

Return to Articles -