Another King James Bible Believer

Subtitle

Modern Versions reject Hebrew Part 4


Ezekiel 19:7 the context is speaking of a lion who "knew their desolate palaces."

The KJB and the Hebrew say: "he KNEW their desolate palaces". This simply means that the lion whelp was familiar and acquainted with these areas. So too read the Geneva Bible 1599, the Revised Version 1881, the American Standard Version of 1901, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, the NKJV, Darby, Young, the Jewish translation of 1917, World English Bible, Hebrew Names Version and others.

However the NASB changes this to "he DESTROYED their fortified towers", while the NIV says "He BROKE DOWN their strongholds." Then in a footnote the NIV tells us this reading comes from a Targum (a Jewish interpretation) but that the Hebrew reads "he KNEW".

Dan Wallace's NET version also says: "HE BROKE DOWN their strongholds" and then informs us in a footnote - "Hebrew text reads “knew”

Likewise the Catholic versions like the St. Joseph and New Jerusalem follow this same bogus reading and have "RAVAGED" (St. Joseph) and "TORE DOWN" (New Jerusalem).

Now the ESV has come out and it reads differently than them all. The ESV says "he seized THEIR WIDOWS", while Green's MKJV says "He knew their widows", and the new Complete Jewish bible says: "He RAPED their widows".

The NKJV text reads as does the King James Bible, but the online NKJV tells us in their footnote: "The LXX reads "he stood in insolence" (my copy of the LXX says "he prowled in boldness); the Targum reads: "He destroyed its palaces"; and the Vulgate reads: "He learned to make widows".

Let's see, "he knew their desolate palaces"; "he knew their widows"; "he broke down their strongholds", and "he seized their widows". Yep, looks pretty much like the same meaning;-)

In Ezekiel 19:10 we read: "Thy mother is like a vine in thy BLOOD".

The inspired prophet is changing metaphors from a lion and her whelps to that of a vine and its branches. The blood merely represents the same life and likeness that comes from the mother. It's not that hard to understand.

The Geneva Bible notes: "He speaks this in the reproach of this wicked king, in whose blood, that is in the race of his predecessors, Jerusalem would have been blessed according to Gods promise and flourished as a fruitful vine."

The reading of "blood" is that found in the Hebrew texts, the Vulgate 425 A.D., Wycliffe 1395, the Geneva Bible 1599, Bishops' bible 1568, Coverdale 1535, the Revised Version 1881, American Standard Version 1901, the Douay-Rheims, Young's, Green's MKJV, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, Lamsa's 1936 translation of the Syriac, the earlier Spanish Reina Valera of 1602 and 1909.

The NKJV says "bloodline", which is acceptable, but the RSV, ESV, NASB and the NIV change this to "your mother is like a vine in your VINEYARD".

The NIV then footnotes that "vineyard" comes from two mss. but most Hebrew mss. read "blood".

Wallace's NET version also reads like the NIV but then footnotes: "The Hebrew text reads “in your blood,” but most emend to “in your vineyard."

The Catholic Connection


The Catholic versions follow their typical pattern. The older Catholic translations like the Douay-Rheims, Douay followed the Hebrew texts and say "a vine in thy blood" but the more modern Catholic versions like St. Joseph and New Jerusalem bible omit this phrase, as do the NIV, NASB, ESV, NET, but footnote that the Hebrew does read "in thy blood".

Why didn't the modern versions follow the alleged LXX here? Well, perhaps because this fake bible version actually reads: "your mother was as a vine AND AS A BLOSSOM ON A POMEGRANATE TREE..." Now, that's pretty close, right?

Darby's fantasy version has: "Thy mother is like a vine IN THY REST..." And then he footnotes that the "reading is uncertain." No, the reading is not uncertain. The only uncertainty is that these Bible correctors can't think straight to figure out the simple meaning of the verse.

In Ezekiel 22:24 we read: "Son of man, say unto her, Thou art the land that is not CLEANSED nor RAINED UPON in the day of indignation."


So read the KJB, NKJV, NASB, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, The Koster Scriptures 1998, The New European Version 2010, and even the RSV, ESV and Holman Standard.

However the NIV ALONE follows the Greek Septuagint and says: "you are a land that HAS NO RAIN OR SHOWERS in the day of wrath." Then in a footnote tells us this comes from the LXX, but that the Hebrew reads "not cleansed or rained upon".

Again, guess which other versions read the same as the NIV. You got it. The older Catholic Douay-Rheims and Douay read as does the Hebrew and the KJB, but the St. Joseph and the New Jerusalem Catholic versions have likewise adopted the reading from the Greek and rejected the Hebrew texts.

The New Jerusalem says "a land that has NOT RECEIVED RAIN OR SHOWER". Then it footnotes that this reading comes from the Greek but that the Hebrew reads "has not been cleansed".

Likewise Dan Wallace's goofy NET version also reads this way saying -"‘You are a land that RECEIVES NO RAIN OR SHOWERS in the day of my anger." And then he footnotes - "The MT reads “that is not cleansed”; the LXX reads “that is not drenched,” which assumes a different vowel pointing as well as the loss of a מ (mem) due to haplography."

In Ezekiel 22:25 we read: "There is a conspiracy of her PROPHETS in the midst thereof..."

So read the RV, ASV, Geneva, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, NASB, NKJV, The Koster Scriptures 1998, The New European Version 2010, and even the newest ESV and Holman Standard.

However the NIV went along with the previous RSV, NRSV and says there is a conspiracy among HER PRINCES. Then footnotes that the reading of "princes" comes from the Greek, but that the Hebrew says "prophets".

Again, the train wreck called the NET version by Daniel Wallace and company also reads "HER PRINCES" and then he footnotes - "Heb “a conspiracy of her prophets is in her midst.” The LXX reads “whose princes” rather than “a conspiracy of prophets.”


The Catholic Connection

AND as usual, the older Catholic versions like the Douay-Rheims and the Douay followed the Hebrew and read "there is a conspiracy of prophets", but the newer Catholic St. Joseph and the New Jerusalem read "PRINCES" and then tell us in a footnote that this reading comes from the Greek but that the Hebrew reads "the conspiracy of her prophets". It's all there in black and white, folks.


Ezekiel 24:14 "...according to thy ways and according to thy doings, shall THEY judge thee, saith the Lord GOD."

God was going to bring the Babylonians against the land of His rebellious people. As He said in the previous chapter: "For thus saith the Lord GOD: I will bring up a company upon them...And the company shall stone them with stones, and dispatch them with their swords; they shall slay their sons and their daughters, and burn up their houses with fire." Ezekiel 23:46-47.

In Ezekiel 24:14 the reading of "THEY shall judge thee" is that found in the traditional Hebrew Masoretic texts and in the following translations: The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, the Jewish translations of 1917, 1936, the Complete Jewish Bible 1998, The Koster Scriptures 1998, the Judaica Press Tanach 2004, the Hebrew Names Version 2014, the Revised Version 1885, American Standard Version 1901, Young's 1898, Darby, the NKJV 1982, Green's literal 2004, Third Millennium Bible 1998, The New European Version 2010, and the Spanish Reina Valera.

However the Holman Standard, along with the NASB, NET and the RSV change the text and say: "And 'I' will judge you". Then in a footnote the Holman Standard informs us that this different reading comes from "some Hebrew mss., the LXX, Syriac, Targum and the Vulgate, while other Hebrew manuscripts read 'they'."

But, the NIV, ESV and TNIV have changed even this to read: "YOU will be judged". Need it be pointed out that "they", "I" and "you" are not the same thing?

The older Catholic Douay read "I will judge you" but the St. Joseph and New Jerusalem say "YOU will be judged" just like the NIV.

Ezekiel 32:5 - Here God compares Pharoah king of Egypt to a whale in the seas, whom He will cast forth upon the open field and cause the fowls of heaven to be filled with his flesh.

In Ezekiel 32:5 The Hebrew texts as well as the King James Bible say: "I will lay thy flesh upon the mountains, and fill the valleys with thy HEIGHT."

The Hebrew word here is "height" and it comes from the verb "to lift up, to be lofty, be exalted, to be high." So read not only the King James Bible but also Coverdale, Bishops' Bible, the Geneva Bible, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, the RV, ASV, Green's MKJV, Diodati, Spanish Reina Valera 1909, The Koster Scriptures 1998, Hebrew Names Bible 2014, World English Bible 2000, the Third Millennium Bible 1998, The New European Version 2010,.

However beginning with the RSV and then the NRSV, ESV they changed this verse to read: "I will fill the valleys with YOUR CARCASS."

Then in a footnote, these versions tell us that the word "carcass" supposedly comes from the Syriac and the Vulgate, but that the Hebrew reads "height".

The LXX is not much help to these people who would mould the Bible like they would a piece of putty, because the LXX says "blood" and not "height" nor "carcass". However this didn't prevent Rotherham's Emphasized bible of 1902 from following the LXX reading and his version says "blood".

The New English Bible says "I will fill the valleys with the WORMS that feed on it." The Douay and the New Jerusalem say "with your CORRUPTION", but the St. Joseph NAB has "YOUR CARCASS" and the Holman says "with your GORE".

But wait! Now the NKJV also joins the old RSV and says "I will fill the valleys with your CARCASS", while the NASB reads "with your REFUSE", and the NIV says "with your REMAINS."

In typical fashion, Daniel Wallace and his NET version reads: "fill the valleys with your MAGGOT-INFESTED CARCASS." Then he footnotes this revealing comment: "The Hebrew text is difficult here, apparently meaning “your height.” Following Symmachus and the Syriac, it is preferable to emend the text to read “your maggots.” These guys are a hoot, aren't they.

The NIV rejects the Hebrew readings in Ezekiel 27:15; 29:7; 40:6, 8, and 9. Then in 40: 44 the NIV changes "east" to "south, and in 40: 49 changes "eleven cubits" to "twelve cubits" from LXX; 41:1 NIV, NASB both omit "which was the breadth of the tabernacle" though in most Hebrew mss. and in the RV, ASV, NKJV; 41:22; 42:10; the NIV changes "east" to "south" 42:16; in 43:3 both NIV, NASB change "when I came to destroy the city" to "when HE came to destroy" based on the Vulgate. See Eze. 9:1 for the correct explanation in the Hebrew and the KJB.


Ezekiel 37:23 KJB - Neither shall they defile themselves any more with their idols, nor with their detestable things, nor with any of their transgressions: but I will save them out of all their DWELLINGPLACES, WHEREIN THEY HAVE SINNED, and will cleanse them: so shall they be my people, and I will be their God.”

NIV - They will no longer defile themselves with their idols and vile images or with any of their offenses, for I will save them from all their SINFUL BACKSLIDING,[a] and I will cleanse them. They will be my people, and I will be their God.

Footnotes:
Ezekiel 37:23 Many Hebrew manuscripts (see also Septuagint); most Hebrew manuscripts all their dwelling places where they sinned

The Catholic Connection

The previous Catholic Douay-Rheims 1610 and the Douay of 1950 both followed the same Hebrew texts as does the KJB saying - “and I will save them out of ALL THE PLACES in which they have sinned, and I will cleanse them”

However now the Catholic St. Joseph New American Bible 1970 and the New Jerusalem Bible 1985 have adopted the other reading and say “I will save them from THE ACTS OF INFIDELITY which they have committed” (New Jerusalem - Footnote “Manuscripts ‘acts of infidelity”, Hebrew - ‘dwellings’ ) or “I will deliver them from ALL THEIR SINS OF APOSTASY, and cleans them” (St. Joseph NAB)

Also adopting this different text are the Holman Standard - “I will save them from ALL THEIR APOSTASIES by which they sinned, and I will cleanse them.”, The ESV, RSV, NRSV - “But I will save them from ALL THE BACKSLIDINGS in which they have sinned” and Dan Wallace’s NET version.

Wallace and company’s NET version says: “I will save them from all THEIR UNFAITHFULNESS (20) by which they sinned.” Then he footnotes - “Heb “their dwellings.” The text as it stands does not make sense. Based on the LXX, a slight emendation of two vowels, including a mater, yields the reading “from their turning,” a reference here to their turning from God and deviating from his commandments.“

So our resident Bible corrector and esteemed “scholar” tells us that the Hebrew text reading just like the KJB and so many others have it - “dwelling” but that to him “It doesn’t make sense.”, in spite of the fact that it makes perfect sense. So, he and his group of highly respected scholars simply change the text.

The Amplified Bible 1987 combines BOTH readings with: “I will save them out of all THEIR DWELLING PLACES and FROM ALL THEIR BACKSLIDINGS in which they have sinned”

Agreeing with the reading found in the King James Bible - “I will save them out of all their DWELLINGPLACES, WHEREIN THEY HAVE SINNED” are Lamsa’s translation of the Syriac Peshitta, the NASB “all their dwelling places in which they have sinned”, the Revised Version 1885, ASV 1901, Darby 1890, Youngs 1898, The Complete Jewish Bible, Coverdale 1535, the Bishops’ Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1587, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, the Jewish Publication Society O.T. 1917, The Complete Jewish Bible 1998, The Koster Scriptures 1998, The Judaica Press Tanach 2004, The New European Version 2010, The Online Interlinear 2010 (André de Mol), Common English Bible 2011, The Work of God’s Children Illustrated Bible 2011, The Voice 2012, The World English Bible 2012 - “I will save them out of ALL THEIR DWELLINGPLACES wherein they have sinned”,The Interlinear Hebrew-Greek Scriptures 2012 (Mebust), The Hebraic Roots Bible 2012, the Biblos Interlinear Bible 2013, International Standard Version 2014 and the Modern English Bible - “I will save them out of ALL THEIR DWELLING PLACES in which they have sinned”

Ezekiel 40:49 - "The length of the porch was twenty cubits, and the breadth ELEVEN CUBITS"

So read the Hebrew texts as well as Wycliffe 1395, Coverdale, Matthew's Bible 1549, the Bishops' Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible, the Revised Version 1881, ASV 1901, NASB 1995, the NKJV 1982, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, the Jewish Publication Society translation of 1917, Darby, Youngs, The Koster Scriptures 1998, World English Bible 2000, The New European Version 2010, Orthodox Jewish Bible 2011 and the Catholic Douay-Rheims 1610 and the Douay of 1950.

However the RSV, NRSV, ESV, NIV along with the more modern Catholic St. Joseph NAB 1970 and New Jerusalem bible 1985 all reject the clear Hebrew reading of "ELEVEN cubits" and here follow the so called Greek Septuagint and say "the breadth TWELVE CUBITS." Then they footnote that this reading comes from the LXX but that the Hebrew text reads "ELEVEN cubits."

The confusion is seen further in Ezekiel 40:49 in that the Holman Standard says: "21 feet deep" and then footnotes "Literally 12 cubits". But this means the Holman followed the Septuagint reading and not the Hebrew text.

This is seen by comparing Dan Wallace's NET version which says "the width 19 1/4 feet", and he then footnotes "Hebrew - ELEVEN cubits." So the Holman paraphrased the LXX and not the Hebrew while Dan Wallace paraphrased the Hebrew and not the LXX.

Then the Common English bible of 2011 says: "the porch was EIGHTEEN feet wide", not 191/4 or much less 21 feet wide.

One would have to ask that if the ESV and NIV liked the so called Septuagint so much here, why they didn't follow it in Ezekiel 40:7 where the Hebrew texts as well as the ESV, NIV, NASB, NKJV, NET, ISV etc. all say "and between the little chambers were FIVE cubits", but this same LXX says "SIX cubits".

Or perhaps we could look at this same chapter of Ezekiel 40:14 where the Hebrew text says: "He made also posts of THREESCORE (SIXTY) cubits" but the LXX says "TWENTY cubits". Oh wait! The Bishops' Bible, Geneva Bible, JPS 1917, RV, ASV, NASB, NKJV, NIV and the previous Douay-Rheims and Douay all follow the Hebrew texts and read "THREESCORE (SIXTY) CUBITS" BUT the RSV, NRSV, ESV and the modern Catholic New Jerusalem DO follow the LXX reading here and have "TWENTY cubits", and the ESV doesn't even tell you in a footnote that they did this.

And again both the Holman Standard and Dan Wallaces NET version paraphrase the number and say "105 feet high" and then footnote that the Hebrew is literally "60 cubits", but at least this time the Holman and NET followed the same Hebrew texts whereas in Ezekiel 40:49 they both went their separate ways, with the Holman following the LXX and Wallace the Hebrew. And they like to call these shenanigans the "science" of textual criticism.

Ezekiel 42:4

Here we read: "And before the chambers was a walk of ten cubits breadth inward, A WAY OF ONE CUBIT, and their doors toward the north."

So read all Hebrew texts and The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, the Jewish translations JPS 1917, Hebrew Publishing Company Bible 1936, the Revised Version, American Standard Version, Geneva Bible, The Koster Scriptures 1998, The New European Version 2010, and the Spanish Reina Valera.

The walkway of 10 cubits was ONE cubit wide. The NKJV changes the meaning by saying: "a distance of one cubit".

The NASB says: "a way of 100 cubits", the NIV has "100 feet" and the Holman Standard says "175 feet long".

The RSV and ESV say "100 cubits long", but then in a footnote tell us the reading of "100" comes from the Greek Septuagint, but that the Hebrew literally reads "a way of one cubit".

Here the Catholic Douay and even the St. Joseph follow the Hebrew text and say "one cubit" but the New Jerusalem goes with "a hundred cubits long", and then informs us in a footnote that the Hebrew reads "a cubit".

Wallaces's NET version says: "at a distance of one and three-quarter feet", then he footnotes "Heb “one cubit”. The Septuagint and the Syriac read “one hundred cubits.”

Ezekiel 45:1 "...the length shall be the length of five and twenty thousand reeds, and the breadth shall be TEN thousand. This shall be holy in all the borders thereof round about."

TEN thousand is the reading of all Hebrew texts and that of Wycliffe 1395, Coverdale 1535, Bishops' Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible, the RV, ASV, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, Jewish Publication Society (JPS) 1917, NKJV 1982, the Complete Jewish Bible 1998, The Koster Scriptures 1998, The New European Version 2010, the Hebrew Names Version 2014, Lamsa's 1933 translation of the Syriac, the NASB 1972, 1973 and 1977 editions.

The Modern Greek Bible reads like the KJB and the Hebrew text with "10,000" - και το πλατος δεκα χιλιαδων

However the NIV, RSV, ESV and now the NASB 1995 edition all say "TWENTY thousand", then in a footnote tell us the 20,000 comes from the Septuagint, but that the Hebrew reads 10,000.

So the NASB has once again changed from a previous Hebrew text to the LXX text in this place.

The Catholic Connection

Likewise the earlier Catholic versions (Douay-Rheims, Douay) follow the Hebrew "10,000" but the newer St. Joseph NAB 1970 and the New Jerusalem 1985 both go with the Septuagint reading of "20,000" and reject the Hebrew text.

The Daniel Wallace NET version says: "three and one-third miles". But wait! The Holman Standard says: "six and two-thirds miles." Now I'm really confused.

No wonder the Muslims mock at the Christians' "inspired Bible"! Dan Wallace is paraphrasing the Hebrew text, which he footnotes as reading 10,000 cubits and the Holman Standard is paraphrasing the Greek Septuagint. But there is more to this story of the shifting shenanigans of the "science" of textual criticism.

Not only does the so called Greek Septuagint change the Hebrew number of 10,000 cubits into 20,000 cubits in verse one, but it does the same thing in verses three and verse five! All three places have been changed in the LXX from 10,000 to 20,000.

But did the ESV, NIV, RSV and now the NASB 1995 edition follow the LXX in verses 3 and 5 and change the 10,000 to the LXX's 20,000 there? No, they did not; they still read 10,000 cubits in verse 3 and 5. How is that for being consistent?

Not only this, but this same Greek Septuagint also radically changes the number in verse 15. There we read in the Hebrew text - "And one lamb out of the flock, out of TWO HUNDRED". However the LXX reads "And one sheep out from the flock out of TEN", not 200.

So did any of these modern versions go with the Septuagint reading in that verse? No, they did not. They still read "out of 200". Such is the fickle nature of the so called "science" of textual criticism.

They reject the Hebrew and pick out a LXX reading from verse 1 and do the same thing in part of verse five, but reject the LXX readings in verses 3, part of 5 and 15.

Ezekiel 45:5 "And the five and twenty thousand of length, and the ten thousand of breadth, shall also the Levites, the ministers of the house, have for themselves, for a possession for TWENTY CHAMBERS."

"for a possession for twenty chambers" is the reading of the Hebrew texts and that of Wycliffe, Coverdale, Bishops' Bible, the Geneva Bible, the RV, ASV, NKJV, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, Complete Jewish Bible 1998, The Koster Scriptures 1998, Hebrew Names Version 2014 and Lamsa's 1933 translation of the Syriac.

And once again, the Modern Greek Bible now agrees with the Hebrew text and says "TWENTY CHAMBERS" - μετα εικοσι θαλαμων.

However the NASB, RSV, ESV, NIV, NET and Holman Standard say: "as their possession CITIES TO DWELL IN."

Then the RSV, ESV footnote that "cities to dwell in" comes from the Greek Septuagint, but that the Hebrew reads "twenty chambers."


The Catholic Connection

Again, the older Catholic Douay-Rheims and Douay stuck with the Hebrew and read "twenty chambers" but the newer Catholic versions (St. Joseph and New Jerusalem) go with "CITIES TO DWELL IN"

Daniel Wallace's NET version reads: "the Levites, who minister at the temple, as the place FOR THE CITIES IN WHICH THEY LIVE." Then he mentions in his footnote: " The translation follows the Septuagint here. The MT reads “twenty.”

Folks, these are the modern perversions people are being deceived into using and that NOBODY seriously believes are the true and infallible words of the living God. Get yourself the King James Holy Bible and stick to it.

Hosea 4:7 KJB - (Geneva bible, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, NASB, NKJV, ASV, RSV, ESV, Holman Standard, The New European Version 2010,) - "As they were increased, so they sinned against me: therefore WILL I CHANGE their glory into shame."

NIV - follows the Syriac and says "THEY EXCHANGED their Glory for something disgraceful." So too do the NRSV, the Message and Wallace's NET version.

The NIV footnotes that "they exchanged" comes from the Syriac, but that the Hebrew texts read "I will exchange".

Notice that the RSV stayed with the Hebrew, then the NRSV went with the Syriac, but then the ESV had now gone back to the Hebrew reading once again.


The Catholic Connection

And among the Catholic versions the older Douay stayed with the Hebrew and read: "I will change" but the more modern New Jerusalem went with "THEY have bartered their Glory for Shame" and then informs us that the Hebrew reads "I will change their glory for shame", just as the KJB has it. The modern versionists are nothing but consistently inconsistent.

Hosea 6:5 "Therefore have I hewed them by the prophets; I have slain them by the words of my mouth: AND THY JUDGMENTS ARE AS THE LIGHT THAT GOETH FORTH."

So read the Hebrew texts, as well as the following Bible translations: Geneva Bible 1599, ("THY" is also the reading of Wycliffe 1395, Bishops' Bible, and Coverdale); the Revised Version 1881 "and THY judgments are as the light that goeth forth.", ASV 1901, the 1917 Jewish Publication Society translation, Darby, NKJV, Green's MKJV, Third Millennium Bible 1998, and the Spanish Reina Valera - "y TUS juicios serán como luz que sale."

However the NASB says: "And the judgments ON YOU are like the light that goes forth." The NASB merely omits the Hebrew word THY, or else changes it to "on you" and changes the meaning of the verse.

The judgments spoken of were the words of truth, light and doctrine that went forth by the prophets and were given to the nation of Israel. The verse does not refer to "punishments for their sins", as the NASB implies.

The NIV has changed the Hebrew text and reads: "MY judgments FLASHED LIKE LIGHTNING UPON YOU." Among the Catholic versions the older Douay follows the Hebrew and reads like the KJB with "thy judgments shall go forth as the light"; the St. Joseph just omits the phrase altogether, and the New Jerusalem adopts the bogus reading of "MY sentence will blaze forth as the dawn", but then mentions in the footnote that the Hebrew Masoretic text reads as we have it in the King James Bible.

The Holman Standard similarly rejects the Hebrew texts and says: "I have killed them with the words of My mouth. MY judgment strikes like lightning." However the Holman at least does us the service of noting in their footnote that the reading of MY comes from the LXX and the Syriac, but that the Hebrew reads "YOUR judgments go out as light". By the way, the Hebrew word means "light" and not "lightning".

Not even the RSV, NRSV, or the 2001 ESV went as far as the NIV and Holman in perverting the Hebrew texts. They all read: "MY judgment goes forth as the light." (ESV). Then again they footnote that MY comes from the Greek and Syriac, but the Hebrew reads YOUR.

What is fascinating to watch is how each "scholar" goes about setting up his own mind as the final authority. Daniel Wallace, of Dallas Theological Seminary, is a prime example of today's "every man for himself bible version" mentality.

Wallace's NET version reads: "for MY judgment will come forth like the light of the dawn." Then the good doctor informs us in his footnotes: "The MT reads “and YOUR judgments are a light which goes forth” which is enigmatic and syntactically awkward (cf. KJV, NASB). The LXX reads “MY judgment goes forth like light”. Here Wallace recognizes the Hebrew reads "your" (or thy), yet he thinks it is enigmatic, and so corrects the Hebrew text with the Greek LXX.

But then in the very same verse he now criticizes the NIV reading and says: "The noun “light” is used here in reference to the morning light or dawn rather than lightning (cf. NIV)."

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

Hosea 11:2 "As THEY called them, so they went from THEM: they sacrificed unto Baalim, and burned incense to graven images."

Here, the "they" who called them, and the "them" from whom the children of Israel went, are the prophets God sent to call His people to repentance, and urge them to return to the true worship. Compare 11:7.

The reading of "as THEY called them, so they went from THEM" is found in the KJB, NKJV, RV, NASB, Geneva, Youngs, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, Jewish translations of 1917, 1936, the Spanish Reina Valera, and even the ESV.

However the NIV, RSV, NET and NRSV say: "The more I called Israel ("Israel" is not in any text), the more they went FROM ME."

Then the NIV, RSV footnote that the "I" and the "ME" come from some Septuagint versions, but that the Hebrew texts read "they" and "them".

Daniel Wallace's goofy NET bible version also reads like the NIV, thus rejecting the Hebrew readings.

The Holman Standard confuses things even further by saying: "The more THEY called them, the more they departed from ME." Then it footnotes that "ME" comes from the LXX but the Hebrew Masoretic text reads "THEM".


The Catholic Connection


Again, among the Catholic versions we see the same degeneration of the text. The older Catholic versions like the Douay-Rheims and the Douay followed the Hebrew "they/them" but the St. Joseph and New Jerusalem go with the Greek and have "I/me" but then tell us in a footnote their reading comes from the Greek while the Hebrew reads "they called them, so they went away from them."

Hosea 11:4 - This one is almost too much to believe. In the King James Bible we read: "I drew them with cords of a man, with bands of love: and I was to them as THEY THAT TAKE OFF THE YOKE on their jaws, and I laid meat unto them."

This was also the reading of the old Catholic Douay-Rheims -"to them as one that taketh off the yoke on their jaws". It is also the reading of The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, the Revised Version, the ASV, NASB, RSV, ESV, NKJV, NET The Koster Scriptures 1998, The New European Version 2010, and Holman Standard.

It WAS the reading of the former NIVs which said - "I LIFTED THE YOKE from their neck" (NIV 1984). However the NRSV and now the NIV 2011 have changed this verse to read -" I was like ONE WHO LIFTS A LITTLE CHILD to the cheek" (NIV 2012).

This is also like the Catholic St. Joseph and the New Jerusalem which say "I was like someone LIFTING AN INFANT TO HIS CHEEK." Then the New Jerusalem informs us in a footnote that the Hebrew text reads "YOKE".



Here the words "THEY/THEM" refer to the prophets God sent to call Israel back to Himself (See verse 7). So read the Hebrew texts as well as the RV, ASV, NASB, NKJV, Darby, Youngs, Spanish Reina Valera and the new ESV.
However the NIV, RSV, NRSV read: "But the more "I" called Israel, the further they went from ME." (NIV) Then these versions footnote that "I" and "ME" come from "SOME Septuagint manuscripts, but the Hebrew reads "they" and "them". The Holman Standard confuses things even further by saying: "The more THEY called them, the more they departed from ME." Then it footnotes that "ME" comes from the LXX but the Hebrew Masoretic text reads "THEM".
Hosea 12:4 "Yea, he had power over the angel, and prevailed: he wept, and made supplication unto him: he found him in Bethel, and there he spake WITH US."

"WITH US" is the reading of the Hebrew texts, as well as that of The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, the RV, ASV, NASB, NKJV, Geneva Bible, Young's, Darby, The Koster Scriptures 1998, the 2001 ESV, The New European Version 2010,.

However, the RSV, NIV, NET and Holman Standard all follow the Greek Septuagint and Syriac, instead of the Hebrew texts. The NIV and Holman Standard say: "and talked WITH HIM there."

Daniel Wallace and company's NET version also changes this to "there he spoke WITH HIM." and then he footnotes - "The Leningrad Codex and the Allepo Codex both read 1st person common plural עִמָּנוּ (’immanu, “with us”). The LXX and Peshitta both reflect an alternate Hebrew Vorlage of 3rd person masculine singular עִמוֹ (’imo, “with him”). The BHS editors suggest emending the MT in favor of the Greek and Syriac."


The Catholic Connection

Well, the Catholic versions do the same thing with the older Catholic versions following the Hebrew and reading "he spoke WITH US." but the newer Catholic versions like the St. Joseph and New Jerusalem reading "with HIM"


Hosea 13:10 KJB - "I WILL BE YOUR KING: where is any other that may save thee in all thy cities?"

Hosea 13:10 God says to Israel "I WILL BE YOUR KING" in the KJB, The Bill Bible 1671, The Webster Bible 1833, The Longman Version 1841, The Jewish Family Bible 1864, The Smith Bible 1876, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, NKJV 1982, The Word of Yah Bible 1993, The Revised Webster Bible 1995, the Third Millennium Bible 1998, The Hebrew Transliteration Scriptures 2010 - "I WILL BY THY KING: where [is any other] that may yasha (save) thee in all thy cities? and thy judges of whom thou saidst, Give me a melekh and princes?", The Bond Slave Version 2012, The Natural Israelite Bible, The Biblos Bible 2013 - "I WILL BE YOUR KING.", The Far Above All Translation 2014.


And in this online Hebrew Interlinear Old Testament

http://studybible.info/IHOT/Hosea%2013:10

but the NIV, RSV, ESV, Holman, NASB, Jehovah Witness New World Translation, and the Catholic Douay, St. Joseph NAB 1970 and the New Jerusalem bible 1985 all ask "WHERE IS your king?"

The RSV, NRSV, and Holman Standard 2009 all have an interesting footnote here. Here is the Holman Christian Standard 2009 edition footnote. MT stands for the Hebrew Masoretic Text.

Hosea 13:10 LXX, Syr, Vg; MT reads I will be your king
Likewise the Spanish New Living Translation (Nueva Traducción Viviente) of 2010

reads "Now, where is your king?" in the text, ( Ahora, ¿dónde está [a] tu rey?) but also has this footnote -

[a] 13:10 Así aparece en la versión griega, en la siríaca y en la Vulgata Latina; en hebreo dice Yo seré. = So it appears in the Greek version in the Syriac and in the Latin Vulgate; IN HEBREW IT SAYS 'I WILL BE'"


The King James Bible translators were well aware of the variant readings of this verse from the previous English bibles. Both the Bishops' bible 1568 and the Geneva Bible 1587 had: "I AM: WHERE IS THY KING nowe that shoulde helpe thee in all thy cities?",

while Wycliffe 1395 (from the Latin Vulgate) and the Douay-Rheims 1610 read: "WHERE IS THY KING? now especially let him save thee in all thy cities",

and Coverdale 1535, The Great Bible 1540 and Matthew's Bible 1549 all had: "WHERE ARE THY KINGS NOW, that shulde helpe the in all thy cities? ",

and they deliberately rejected them all, and went with "I WILL BE THY KING".

Most Foreign Language bible miss it on this verse, but the Romanian Fidela Bible of 2014 reads like the KJB, with: "Eu voi împăratul tău, unde este vreun altul care să te salveze în toate cetăţile tale? " = "I will be your king...."


Bible commentators often disagree with each other. What one affirms, another denies. Several of them offer both views as possibilities, and don't know which one is right.


Daniel Wallace's NET bible version says: "WHERE THEN IS your king, that he may save you in all your cities?" Then he footnotes: "The Masoretic Text reads the enigmatic “I want to be your king”... which makes little sense...All the versions (Greek, Syriac, Vulgate) read the interrogative particle “where?” which the BHS editors endorse. The textual corruption was caused by metathesis of the y (yod) and h (hey). FEW TRANSLATIONS FOLLOW THE MT (Masoretic Text) "I WILL BE THY/YOUR KING" (KJV, NKJV). Most emend the text: “Where is your king?” (RSV, NASB, NIV, NJPS, CEV)."

There it is in black and white. This "eminent textual scholar" (who often rejects the Hebrew readings) openly admits that the Hebrew Masoretic Text (MT) says "I WILL BE THY/YOUR KING", but he says it makes little sense to him, and that it is better to "emend" (change) the text, as do many modern versions!!!

Other textual scholars take the opposite view and stick with the King James Bible reading.

The Hebrew text here in Hosea 13:10 where we have "I WILL BE" followed by "thy king" is exactly the same found in Hosea 13:14 where the KJB and many others read:"O death, I WILL BE thy plagues; O grave, I WILL BE thy DESTRUCTION."

Jamieson, Faussett and Brown clearly side with the meaning found in the King James Bible, saying: "I will be thy king;--the Septuagint, Syriac, Vulgate, "Where now is thy king?" [MAURER]. ENGLISH VERSION IS, HOWEVER, FAVORED BOTH BY THE HEBREW, BY THE ANTITHESIS BETWEEN ISRAEL'S SELF-CHOSEN AND PERISHING KINGS, AND GOD, ISRAEL'S ABIDING KING. (compare Ho 3:4, 5)."

John Trapp's Bible Commentary (English Puritan) - "Ver. 10. I will be thy king Thine eternal King, so Pagnine. As I have been thy prophet, Hosea 13:4-5, so I will be thy king; I will also be thy priest and thy Redeemer, Hosea 13:14, that so thou mayest hear my voice, submit to my sceptre, and apply my death for thy deliverance from death’s dominion."

John Wesley's Explanatory Notes - "Thy king - I would have been thy king to govern and save thee, but thou refusedst me in both: yet I will be thy king to punish thee."


Hosea 13:14 KJB - "O death, I WILL BE thy plagues; O grave, I WILL BE thy DESTRUCTION."

The reading of "I WILL BE" (found twice in this one verse) is the reading of the Wycliffe bible 1395, The Great Bible 1540, Matthew's Bible 1549 - "O death, I wyl be thy death: O hel, I wil be thy sting.", the Bishops' Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1587, the Douay-Rheims bible 1610, Webster's bible 1833, The Longman Version 1841, Julia Smith Translation 1855, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, Douay Version 1950, NKJV 1982, The Word of Yah Bible 1993, 21st Century KJV 1994, God's Word Translation 1995, Third Millennium Bible 1998, God's First Truth Translation 1999, the Updated Bible Version 2004, Jubilee Bible 2010, The Hebrew Transliteration Bible 2010, the Jubilee Bible 2010, the Names of God Bible 2011, The Far Above All Translation 2011, The Bond Slave Version 2012, The Biblos Bible 2013 and the International Children's bible 2015.


Spanish Sagradas Escrituras 1549, the Reina Valera 1960-1995 and the Reina Valera Gómez 2010 bibles - "Oh muerte, yo seré tu muerte; y seré tu destrucción", The Italian Diodati 1991 - "O morte, io sarò la tua peste. O Sceol, io sarò la tua distruzione.", and the Italian Nuova Riveduta 2006, The French Martin Bible 1744 and French Ostervald 1996 - "j'eusse été tes pestes, ô mort! et ta destruction, ô sépulcre! "

However the RSV, NRSV, ESV, NASB, NIV, Jehovah Witness NWT, Catholic New Jerusalem and Holman all unite in saying: "WHERE ARE your plagues? WHERE ...".

What is found in both the RSV and NRSV footnotes is that the reading of "WHERE ARE your" comes from the Greek Septuagint and the Syriac, but that the Hebrew reads "I WILL BE your..I WILL BE your... “Hosea 13:14 Gk Syr: Heb I will be”


The Catholic Connection

Likewise the older Catholic versions like the Douay-Rheims read like the Hebrew and the KJB saying - "O death, I will be thy death; O hell, I will be thy bite: comfort is hidden from my eyes."

But the newer Catholic versions like the St. Joseph New American bible 1970 and the New Jerusalem change this to "WHERE are your plagues..WHERE is your STING?"


Furthermore, regarding the phrase "O grave, I will be YOUR DESTRUCTION", we find that the word "DESTRUCTION" is the reading of the Geneva Bible, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, the NKJV, KJB, RSV, NRSV, Spanish Reina Valera, Darby, Young's, and even the NIV and TNIV,

but that the NASB, ESV, Holman Standard and the newer Catholic versions have all changed this to: "Where IS YOUR STING" instead of "your destruction".

The NKJV footnote informs us that the words "where is your STING" come from the Greek Septuagint. So we see that it is the more recent NASB, ESV, Holman and more modern Catholic versions that have even further departed from the Hebrew Scriptures.

Hosea 14:2 "...so will we render the CALVES of our lips." The Hebrew word here is calves or bullocks, and is the rendering found in the Geneva Bible, RV, ASV, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, Jewish translations of 1917, 1936, NET, The Koster Scriptures 1998, Darby, Spanish Reina Valera, The New European Version 2010, the ESV 2011.

However the NASB, NIV, RSV, NRSV say: "so will we render the FRUIT of our lips." The RSV, NRSV footnotes tell us that "fruit" comes from the LXX, but that the Hebrew reads bullocks or calves.

Even the new ESV has gone back to the Hebrew reading, but the NASB, NIV are still following the Greek Septuagint.



Joel 3:21 KJB - “For I will CLEANSE their blood that I have not CLEANSED: for the LORD dwelleth in Zion.

ESV - “I will AVENGE their blood, blood I have not AVENGED, for the Lord dwells in Zion."

RSV, NRSV 1989 - “I will AVENGE their blood, and I WILL NOT CLEAR THE GUILTY, for the LORD dwells in Zion."

Footnote - Greek, Syriac; Hebrew “I will hold innocent their blood that I have not held innocent.”

The RSV and NRSV both tell us that their reading of “I will AVENGE their blood” comes from the Syriac and the so called Greek LXX and not the Hebrew. Then they mislead us by telling us the Hebrew reads “I will HOLD INNOCENT”.

The fact is the Hebrew word has several meanings, none of which is “to avenge”, but it can be translated as “cleanse” as here, or as “CLEANSE thou me from secret faults” (Psalm19:12), or “to be clear” as in “Then thou shalt be CLEAR from this my oath” (Genesis 24:8 and 41), “and by no means CLEARING the guilty” (Num. 14:18) or “to hold guiltless” (Exodus 20:7) and “to be innocent” as in “And I shall be innocent from the great transgression.” Psalm 19:13

You will also notice that the RSV, NRSV do not agree with the ESV. The RSV says: “I will AVENGE their blood, and I WILL NOT CLEAR THE GUILTY, for the LORD dwells in Zion."

While the revision of the revision of the revision - the ESV - says: “I will AVENGE their blood, BLOOD I HAVE NOT AVENGED, for the Lord dwells in Zion."

Neither are their footnotes totally accurate. The RSV and NRSV tell us that their reading comes from the Greek Septuagint and the Syriac, but there are at least two different Greek translations that are called the Septuagint and the most common one reads“ And I WILL MAKE INQUISITION FOR their blood, and will by no means leave it UNAVENGED”, while another one does read “I will AVENGE their blood”.

The RSV and NRSV have followed the Syriac and not the Hebrew. Lamsa’s translation of the Syriac reads: “For I will AVENGE their blood, and I WILL NOT ABSOLVE THE OFFENDERS; and the LORD will dwell in Zion.” But the ESV follows the Syriac in the first part of the verse and then just makes up the second part saying: ““I will AVENGE their blood, (Syriac) BLOOD I HAVE NOT AVENGED, (Who knows where they got this from) for the Lord dwells in Zion."


Following the Hebrew text and the reading or meaning found in the King James Bible’s - “For I will CLEANSE their blood that I HAVE NOT CLEANSED: for the LORD dwelleth in Zion.” are Wycliffe 1395 - “And Y schal CLENSE the blood of hem, which Y hadde not CLENSID; and the Lord schal dwelle in Syon.”, Bishops’ Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1587 - “For I will CLENSE their blood, that I haue not CLENSED”, Webster’s 1833, Young's 1898, Darby 1890 - “And I will purge them from the blood from which I had not purged them”, the Revised Version of 1885 and the ASV of 1901 - “And I will CLEANSE their blood, that I have not CLEANSED”, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, the Hebrew Names Version - “I will cleanse their blood, That I have not cleansed”, Rotherham’s Emphasized Bible 1902, World English Bible, Complete Jewish Bible 1998 and the Orthodox Jewish Bible of 2011 - "I will cleanse them of bloodguilt which I have not yet cleansed", Updated Bible Version 2004, Knox Bible of 2012, the Third Millennium Bible 1998, Green’s literal translation - “And I will cleanse their blood which I did not cleanse.”, The New European Version 2010, and the Lexham English Bible of 2012 - “I will cleanse their bloodguilt that I did not cleanse”


The NKJV basically has the same sense by reading: “ I will ACQUIT them of bloodguilt, whom I had not acquitted; For the LORD dwells in Zion.”


The Catholic Connection

Among the Catholic versions we see the usual confusion. The early Douay-Rheims Bible of 1610 read just like the KJB and so did the Douay of 1950 with: “And I will CLEANSE their blood which I did not CLEANSE.”

But then the 1970 St. Joseph New American Bible and the 1985 New Jerusalem bible read like many of the modern Vatican Versions and have: “I WILL AVENGE their blood, and NOT LEAVE IT UNPUNISHED. The LORD dwells in Zion.”

But wait. They are not done yet. Now the 2009 Catholic Public Domain Version has come out and they have once again gone back to the Hebrew text and it says: “And I will CLEANSE their blood, which I had not CLEANSED. And the Lord will remain in Zion.”

Also departing from the Hebrew text is the NASB - “And I will AVENGE their blood which I have not AVENGED.”, even though the previous ASV read exactly like the King James Bible.

The NIV is interesting in that the earlier NIV 1978 and 1984 editions actually made an attempt to follow the Hebrew text, and read: “Their bloodguilt WHICH I HAVE NOT PARDONED, I WILL PARDON. The LORD dwells in Zion!”

However in the recent 2011 NIV edition they went further astray and it now reads: “SHALL I LEAVE THEIR INNOCENT BLOOD UNAVENGED? NO, I WILL NOT.” The Lord dwells in Zion!

The NIV Spanish version, called La Nueva Versión Internacional, of 1999 says the exact opposite of the English NIV of 1984. The 1984 NIV Enlglish versions says “I WILL PARDON.” but the Spanish NIV says “I will NOT pardon.”

NIV Spanish edition - “¿Perdonaré la sangre que derramaron? ¡Claro que no la perdonaré!” = Shall I pardon the blood they have shed? Of course I will NOT pardon it!”

As usual, Dan Wallace and company depart from the Hebrew text and reads: “I will AVENGE (47) their blood which I had not previously ACQUITTED.” Then he footnotes: (47) “The present reading follows “I will avenge” rather than the Masoretic Text “I will acquit”.

The 2003 Holman Standard has made an attempt to stick to the Hebrew reading and has: “I will PARDON their bloodguilt, which I have not PARDONED, for the Lord dwells in Zion.”

The 2012 International Standard Version also made an attempt to follow the Hebrew text and reads: “I will ACQUIT their bloodguilt that has NOT YET BEEN ACQUITTED. For the LORD lives in Zion!"

The goofy Amplified version of 1987, put out by the Lockman Foundation who also bring us the NASB, has put in ALL the readings from the Hebrew AND the Syriac and actually says: “And I will CLEANSE AND HOLD AS INNOCENT their blood AND AVENGE IT, blood which I have not CLEANSED, HELD INNOCENT AND AVENGED, for the Lord dwells in Zion.” I guess they are trying to cover all their bases, but they end up perverting the true words of God in the process.

Foreign language versions that follow the Hebrew text and agree with the King James Bible are the Spanish Sagradas Escrituras of 1569 and the Reina Valera of 1909, 1960 and 1995 - “Yo limpiaré la sangre de los que no había limpiado.” = “I will cleanse the blood of those that I had not cleansed.”, the Portuguese Almeida - “E purificarei o sangue que eu não tinha purificado; porque o Senhor habita em Sião.”, the French Martin 1744 and Ostervald 1996 - “Et je nettoierai leur sang que je n'avais point nettoyé” = “I will cleanse their blood”, the Italian Diodati - “Ed io netterò il lor sangue, il quale io non avea nettato; e il Signore abiterà in Sion.” = “I will cleanse their blood” and the Modern Greek Bible - "Και θελω καθαρισει το αιμα αυτων, το οποιον δεν εκαθαρισα· διοτι ο Κυριος κατοικει εν Σιων." = "And I will CLEANSE their blood, which I had not cleansed; for the Lord dwells in Zion."

Micah 5:6 Different meanings and different Texts. In the King James Bible we read: "And they shall WASTE the land of Assyria with the sword, and the land of Nimrod IN THE ENTRANCES THEREOF."

According to Strong's concordance the word for "waste" is # 7489 raw-ah, which means "to waste, to destroy, to break down, to harm, or to hurt."

To "waste" or destroy, or to break is also the reading of the following Bible versions: Geneva Bible 1599, Bishops' bible 1568, Coverdale 1535, the Revised Version 1881, American Standard Version 1901, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, NKJV 1982, Darby 1870, Young's, New Century Version 1991, Bible in Basic English 1961, KJV 21, the 1917 Jewish translation, 1936 Hebrew Publishing Company version, The Koster Scriptures 1998, the new Judaica Press Complete Tanach translation 2004.

However some modern versions apparently confuse a different Hebrew word here and say: "And they shall SHEPHERD (or Rule) the land of Assyria with the sword..." These include the NASB, NIV, RSV, NRSV, ESV, Catholic and the NET versions, though both the NIV and the NET version tell us in their footnotes that this word may also be translated as "to crush" or destroy.

Another big problem for the NIV, TNIV, RSV, NRSV and Daniel Wallace's NET version is that in this same verse they have rejected the Hebrew texts which say: "and the land of Nimrod IN THE ENTRANCES THEREOF" and replaced it with the Latin reading "WITH A DRAWN SWORD".

The Holman and the RSV and NRSV at least give a footnote telling us that this totally different reading comes from the Vulgate, but that the Hebrew masoretic text reads as does the KJB = "at it's entrances". In this case, the 2003 ESV at least went back to the Hebrew reading, whereas the NIV, TNIV and Holman still follow the Latin Vulgate instead.

The Catholic versions have perverted this verse too with the New Jerusalem bible 1985 reading much like the NIV saying: "they WILL SHEPHERD Assyria with the sword, the country of Nimrod WITH NAKED BLADE." Then it footnotes that "with naked blade" comes from the Greek but the Hebrew reads "IN ITS ENTRANCES".

The NIV has "who will RULE the land of Assyria with the sword, the land of Nimrod WITH DRAWN SWORD."

Following the Hebrew texts and agreeing with the reading found in the King James Bible of : "and the land of Nimrod IN THE ENTRANCES THEREOF" are the following Bible versions: The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, The Jewish translations of 1917, 1936, The modern Complete Jewish Bible 1998, the Judaica Press Complete Tanach 2004 Hebrew Names Version 2014, the NKJV, RV, ASV, NASB, ESV, Darby, Young's, and the Third Millennium Bible 1998.

Some question about the previous English Bibles and why God in His sovereignty has placed them on the shelf and now blessed the King James Bible far above any other Bible. There are many other examples of inferiour texts and translations in all previous English bibles, and here is just one of these examples.

The Geneva Bible of 1599, Coverdale 1535, Bishops' Bible of 1568 all followed the reading found in the Latin Vulgate here instead of the preserved Hebrew texts. These earlier English versions read like the modern NIV, RSV, and NET versions with: "...and the land of Nimrod WITH THEIR NAKED WEAPON" (or with a drawn blade), instead of the clear Hebrew reading of "in the entrances thereof". The King James Bible is the right one - as always.

The NIV changes Micah 6:16 "ye shall bear the reproach of my people" to "the scorn of THE NATIONS", and admits in their footnote that this reading comes from the Greek Septuagint, but that the Hebrew reads as does the KJB. Here the Catholic Douay reads "the people" but the Catholic St. Joseph has "the NATIONS"

Micah 7:19 - “HE will turn again, HE will have compassion upon us; HE will subdue our iniquities; and thou wilt cast all THEIR sins into the depths of the sea.”
The modern bible versions are all over the board on this one willy nilly following different texts of all sorts.
Reading HE three times in this verse are the Hebrew Masoretic texts as well as the RV, ASV, NASB, NKJV, the 1917 JPS, RSV, NRSV, ESV. (But not the NIV nor the NET version)
The reading of “THEIR sins” (not OUR sins) is that of the Hebrew Masoretic texts, as well as the Geneva Bible, Rotherham’s Emphasized bible 1902, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, the RV, ASV, NASB, JPS 1917, Hebrew Names Version 2014, the Complete Jewish Bible 1998, Darby 1890, Young's 1898, the Third Millennium Bible 1998, The New European Version 2010,.
By the way, the "their sins" refers to the people mentioned in the next verse where it says: "Thou wilt perform the truth to Jacob, and the mercy to Abraham, which thou hast sworn unto our fathers from the days of old."
However the NIV along with Daniel Wallace's NET version has changed HE to YOU, and THEIR to OUR and reads: “YOU will again have compassion on us; YOU will tread our sins underfoot and hurl all OUR iniquities into the depths of the sea.” Daniel Wallace even notes in his footnotes that the Hebrew reads "he, he, their" as the KJB has it.
The Catholic versions unite in changing the text here too and all have "OUR sins" instead of the Hebrew "THEIR sins".
The Holman Standard keeps the HE but changes “their” to “our” and says: “HE will again have compassion on us; HE will vanquish our iniquities. YOU will cast all OUR sins into the depths of the sea.”
Other versions that have changed “THEIR sins” to OUR sins based on the LXX and Syriac (while the NRSV, ESV footnote that the Hebrew reads THEIR sins), are the RSV, NRSV, ESV AND the NKJV! Then the NKJV footnotes “literally THEIR” sins.
The NIV gets these changes from the Greek Septuagint, but even then neither the NIV nor the Holman Standard - (which don’t even agree with each other!), nor the RSV, ESV completely follow the so called Septuagint either.
The Septuagint says: “HE will return and have mercy upon us, HE will SINK OUR iniquities, and THEY SHALL BE CAST (Not “You”) into the depths of the sea, (then it adds) even ALL OUR SINS.”
So versions like the RSV, ESV follow the Hebrew texts in the first part of the verse, but then choose ONE of the readings from the so called LXX in the second part, while the NIV and Holman follow different parts of the LXX but not all of it, and not even the same parts. - And they call this “the science” of textual criticism!
If it all sounds very confusing, that’s because it is. Now, whom do you think would want to confuse God’s words like this? Any ideas?


More Shenanigans from the Bible Correctors Guild.
Habakkuk 1:12 KJB (NASB, ESV, NKJV, NIV 1984 edition)- "WE SHALL NOT DIE."
NIV 2011 edition - (NET, NRSV, Holman Standard, Jehovah Witness NWT, Catholic New Jerusalem)- “My God, my Holy One, YOU WILL NEVER DIE”.

Habakkuk 1:12 KJB - “Art thou not from everlasting, O Lord my God, mine Holy One? WE SHALL NOT DIE. O Lord, thou hast ordained them for judgment; and, O mighty God, thou hast established them for correction.”

“WE SHALL NOT DIE” = Geneva Bible, The Longman Version 1841, Revised English Bible 1877, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, Jewish Publication Society 1917, ASV 1901, JPS 1917, Hebrew Publishing Company Bible 1936, RSV 1952-1971, NASB 1995, ESV 2011, NKJV 1982, NIV 1978 and 1984 editions, The Complete Jewish Bible 1998, God's First Truth 1999, the World English Bible 2000, The Yah Sacred Scriptures 2001, the Apostolic Polyglot Bible 2003, The Jewish Complete Tanach 2004, Mebust Bible 2007, The New European Version 2010, Jubilee Bible 2011, Hebrew Transliteration Bible 2010, The Orthodox Jewish Bible 2011, The Katapi New Standard Bible 2012, The New Brenton Translation 2012, ISV 2014, Hebrew Names Version 2014, Modern English Version 2014, and the Amplified Bible 2015.

NIV 1978 and 1984 editions - “My God, my Holy One, WE will not die.”

Habakkuk 1:12 - NIV 2011 edition - “Lord, are you not from everlasting? My God, my Holy One, YOU WILL NEVER DIE. You, Lord, have appointed them to execute judgment; you, my Rock, have ordained them to punish.”

Footnote: “An ancient Hebrew scribal tradition; Masoretic Text WE”

The Catholic Connection.

The older Catholic bibles like the Douay-Rheims 1610 as well as the Douay Version 1950 both read “WE shall not die.”

However the St. Joseph New American Bible 1970 changed this to “my holy God, IMMORTAL”.

Then the Catholic New Jerusalem bible 1985 has “My God, my Holy One, YOU WILL NEVER DIE”.

The New Jerusalem bible then tells us in their footnote that the Hebrew text reads “WE shall not die”, but that this is (supposedly) “the result of a scribal correction.”

Not only does the NIV 2011 edition change the Hebrew text here, but so too do The Jehovah Witness New World Translation - "YOU do not die.", The New English Bible 1970, the NRSV 1989, Dan Wallace’s NET version 2006 (Big surprise) - “my sovereign God, YOU ARE IMMORTAL.”, Holman Standard 2009 - “YOU will not die.”, Lexham English bible 2012, The Translator’s bible 2014 and the New Living Translation 2015.

Dan “anything but the KJB” Wallace and company’s goofy NET version reads: “my sovereign God, YOU ARE IMMORTAL.”

Then our Bible correcting “scholar” footnotes: “The MT reads, “we will not die,” but an ancient scribal tradition has “you [i.e., God] will not die.” This is preferred as a more difficult reading that can explain the rise of the other variant. Later scribes who copied the manuscripts did not want to associate the idea of death with God in any way, so they softened the statement to refer to humanity.”

Does Dan Wallace believe that ANY Bible in ANY language IS now or ever WAS the complete and inerrant words of God? He SAYS he believes the Bible IS the infallible words of God (just like James White does) but he will NEVER actually show you a copy of this infallible Bible he PROFESSES to (and lies about) believe in - and neither will James White.



Zephaniah 3:8 KJB - "Therefore wait ye upon me, saith the LORD, until the day THAT I RISE UP TO THE PREY."

So read the Hebrew texts, as well as the Bishops’ Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1599, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, the Revised Version 1885, the ASV of 1901 - “until the day that I rise up to the prey”, the NASBs from 1972, 73 and 1977, the JPS 1917 (Jewish Publication Society), Darby 1890, Young's 1898, The Koster Scriptures 1998, The New European Version 2010, Hebrew Names Version 2014, the NKJV 1982, the ESV 2011 and the Spanish Reina Valera.


However the NIV reads: - "for the day I WILL STAND UP TO TESTIFY". Then it footnotes that this reading comes from the LXX and Syriac, but the Hebrew reads as the KJB.
Both the RSV and the NRSV also read like the NIV, and they also tell us this reading comes from the LXX and Syriac but the Hebrew reads as does the KJB.
But now the latest revision of the revision of the revision, the new ESV of 2001, has now gone back to the Hebrew reading - “for the day when I rise up to seize the prey.”

NET version - “Therefore you must wait patiently for me,” says the Lord “for the day WHEN I ATTACK AND TAKE PLUNDER.” Then he footnotes: “Hebrew “when I arise for plunder.” The present translation takes (’ad) as “plunder.” Some, following the LXX, repoint the term (’ed) and translate, “as a witness” (cf. NASB, NIV, NRSV).

The NASB keeps changing its underlying Hebrew texts. The earlier NASB’s (1971 through 1977) all read as does the King James Bible and the Hebrew texts - “the day I rise up TO THE PREY”
BUT the 1995 NASB now reads: “For the day when I rise AS A WITNESS” - thus following the so called Greek Septuagint in changing “for a prey” to “as a witness”. So, were all the previous NASBs and the Hebrew texts wrong, but now they got it right in the late$t NA$B?
The modern Catholic versions also follow this false reading and say: "when I rise AS ACCUSER"

Zechariah 5:6 KJB - (NASB, NKJV, The Koster Scriptures 1998, The New European Version 2010,) - "This is an ephah that goeth forth. He said moreover, This is THEIR RESEMBLANCE through all the earth."



Zachariah 5:6 and the ongoing Bible Babble Buffet Marathon.

Zachariah 5:6 KJB - “And I said, What is it? And he said, This is an ephah that goeth forth. He said moreover, This is THEIR RESEMBLANCE THROUGH ALL THE EARTH.”

ESV (RSV, NIV, Holman Standard 2009, Modern English Version 2014) - “And I said, “What is it?” He said, “This is the basket[a] that is going out.” And he said, “This is THEIR INIQUITY[b] in all the land.”

Then the ESV footnotes that this reading of “their iniquity” instead of “their resemblance” (appearance) comes from “One Hebrew manuscript, the Septuagint and the Syraic, but that most Hebrew manuscripts read “eye”.

Actually their footnote is not entirely accurate either. The word used here is # 5869 gah-yin and it has multiple meanings besides “eye”. It can also mean “RESEMBLANCE” or “appearance”, as well as “sight”, “before, in the sight of, fountain, well, color” and many other things.

The NASB (which got it right in this verse) has translated this Hebrew word as “appearance” 4 times and as “outward appearance” one time and as “SIGHT” 277 times.

The NIV 1984 edition also has translated it as “appearance” and “sight” many times. BUT here in Zachariah 5:6 the NIV says: “It is a basket. And he added, This is THE INIQUITY OF THE PEOPLE throughout the land.” Then it footnotes “Or appearance”. Well, which is it?

Which reading are they going to follow, the Hebrew Masoretic reading or the so called Greek Septuagint?
Even the ESV has translated this Hebrew word as “appearance” in 1 Samuel 16:7 - “But the Lord said to Samuel, “Do not look on his APPEARANCE or on the height of his stature, because I have rejected him. For the Lord sees not as man sees: man looks on the outward APPEARANCE, but the Lord looks on the heart.”
Dan Wallace’s NET version does not agree with the ESV or the NIV but says: “Moreover, he said, “This is their ‘EYE’ throughout all the earth.”

The Modern English Version 2014 lies to us when they tell us that their MEV “is a translation of the Jacob ben Hayyim edition of the Masoretic Text” because here, as well as in many other places, they did not follow it. Instead they have (with no footnotes) “This represents THEIR INIQUITY throughout the land.”

The Catholic Connection

The previous Douay-Rheims bible 1610 and the Douay Version 1950 both read “This is THEIR EYE in all the earth.”

BUT now the St. Joseph New American bible 1970 and the New Jerusalem bible 1985 have changed this to read: “This is THEIR GUILT throughout all the country.”
Then the New Jerusalem footnotes that “GUILT” comes from the Greek Septuagint, but that the Hebrew reads “eye”.

Agreeing with the KJB and the Hebrew Masoretic text of “this is THEIR RESEMBLANCE (or appearance) through all the earth.” are the following Bible versions - Geneva Bible “this is the sight of them through all the earth”, The Revised Version 1885 - “This is their resemblance in all the land.”, Darby 1890, the ASV 1901, Youngs 1898, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907 - This is THEIR RESEMBLANCE”, 1936 Hebrew Publishing Company bible - “their resemblance”, The NKJV 1982 - this is their resemblance”, The Word of Yah Bible 1993, the NASB 1995 - “This is THEIR APPEARANCE in all the land.”, The Koster Scriptures 1998, the World English Bible 2000, The Mebust Bible 2007, the Jubilee Bible 2010, The Hebrew Transliteration Bible 2010 - “their resemblance through all the eretz.”, The New European Version 2010, the Common English Bible 2011- “this is how it appears”, The Orthodox Jewish Bible 2011 - “This is their appearance throughout kol ha’aretz.”, The Bond Slave Version 2012, The Biblos Bible 2013 - “this is their RESEMBLANCE in all the earth”, the ISV (International Standard Version) 2014, The Hebrew Names Version 2014 and the Tree of Life Version 2015.


These are by no means all the textual omissions of the NIV, NASB, ESV, NKJV nor every example of where they depart from the traditional Hebrew text, but they should give you some serious pause for thought about accepting any of these modern Vatican Versions as a true record of what God has inspired in the words of truth.

Each of you can readily get an NIV, NASB, ESV, Holman or NKJV and look up these verses for yourself and read the footnotes. It is all there in black and white.

The Holy Bible tells us there will be a falling away or an apostasy before the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. This falling away is happening right now today and few Christians seem to care or even know it's happening.

"Thus saith the LORD, Stand ye in the ways, and see, and ask for the old paths, where is the good way, and walk therein, and ye shall find rest for your souls. But they said, We will not walk therein." Jeremiah 6:16

Will Kinney

May I suggest you take a serious look at this article that shows numerous examples proving the modern versions like the ESV, NIV, NASB, NET etc are the new Vatican Versions.

It is called - Undeniable Proof the ESV, NIV, NASB, NET etc. are the new "Catholic" bibles

“Mystery, Babylon the Great, The Mother of Harlots and Abominations of the Earth..is become the habitation of devils, and the hold of every foul spirit...Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins” Revelation 17:5; 18:2-4

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