Proverbs 7:22 - A fool, a madman, a dog, a deer, a ram, a calf, a viper, a wild animal or a lamb?
Hey, they all have the same meaning, just with different words, right?
Proverbs 7:22-23 KJB - Speaking of a young man void of understanding who is deceived by a strange woman:
"He goeth after her straightway, as an ox goeth to the slaughter, or as A FOOL TO THE CORRECTION OF THE STOCKS; till a dart strike through his liver; as a bird hasteth to the snare, and knoweth not that it is for his life."
This is the meaning found in such versions as Coverdale, Bishops' Bible, the Geneva Bible, Webster's, the NKJV, RV, ASV, NASB 1995, Darby 1890, Young's, Spanish Reina Valera, Darby, Rotherham's Emphasized Bible, and the Jewish Publication Society of 1917, Hebrew Publishing Company Holy Bible of 1936, J.P. Green's literal Translation, The Koster Scriptures 1998, A Conservative Version 2005 - "as a fool to the correction of the stocks.", Third Millennium bible 2010, Jubilee Bible 2010, New Heart English Bible 2005, the Hebrew Transliteration Scriptures 2010, The Modern Literal Version, the Orthodox Jewish Translation 2011 and the Modern English Version 2014 - "as a fool to the correction of the stocks."
The Jewish Virtual Library Full Text Tanach 1998 - As a FOOL to the correction of the stocks
This Online Hebrew Interlinear - or as a fool to the correction of the stocks.
However, the NIV says: - "like an ox going to the slaughter, LIKE A DEER STEPPING INTO A NOOSE."
Then the NIV footnotes: Syriac; Hebrew - a fool. (It comes right out and tells us that the Hebrew says "a FOOL", NOT "a deer").
Then the NIV says to see the LXX. However the LXX is little help because it says: "as a DOG to bonds or a hart shot in the liver with an arrow."
Likewise the Syriac is of no help either. Lamsa's translation of the Syriac says here: "as an ox to the slaugher, or A DOG TO BE MUZZLED."
The NIV reading is most like the Catholic St. Joseph New American bible of 1970 that reads: "like an ox is led to the slaughter; LIKE A STAG THAT MINCES TOWARD THE NET."
But the Catholic New Jerusalem of 1985 has: "ox to the slaughterhouse, LIKE A MADMAN ON HIS WAY TO THE STOCKS."
The NKJV gives the same translation to this verse as do the King James Bible and many others, but then footnotes that the Greek Septuagint, Syriac and Targum read "as A DOG to bonds" and that the Vulgate reads: "as A LAMB...to bonds".
The Catholic Douay version is of interest in that it does follow the Vulgate to a degree, but then agrees with the KJB and others in the remainder of the verse. It says: "Immediately he followeth her as an ox led to be a victim, and AS A LAMB PLAYING THE WANTON, and not knowing that he is drawn LIKE A FOOL TO BONDS."
Other corrupted versions are the RSV, NRSV, ESV and the Holman Standard. The ESV reads: "as an ox to the slaughter, or AS A STAG IS CAUGHT FAST." Then it footnotes: "Probable reading; See Septuagint, Syriac, Vulgate."
But as we have seen, neither the Septuagint nor the Syriac read anything like what is found in the NIV or the ESV. The Holman also joins this mess and says: "like a DEER bounding towards a trap", then footnotes - "TEXT EMENDED - Hebrew obscure - "like shackles for the discipline of a fool".
Then for more novelty
God's Word Translation says: "like A RAM hobbling into captivity."
The Concordant Literal Version 2009 has: "Like A CALF TO THE BOND OF FOOLISH CREATURES."
The Complete Apostles' bible 2005 tells us: "OR AS A DEER SHOT IN THE LIVER WITH AN ARROW."
The New Life Version 2003 has: "like A WILD ANIMAL goes into a trap."
the Lexham English Bible 2012 has: "like A STAG TO THE INSTRUCTION OF A FOOL."
And The Complete Jewish Bible 1998 actually says: "AS A VIPER TO THE CHASTISEMENT OF A FOOL."
Think about how ridiculous some of these translations are.
Folks, the Hebrew reading is not obscure at all. Even the Holman footnote that says Hebrew -"like shackles for the discipline of a fool" shows that it is not that hard to understand.
The phrases "as an ox to the slaughter, or as a fool to the correction of the stocks" simply means that the fool is doing something that will lead to his being punished. It is not that hard to figure out.
Proverbs 8:16 KJB - "By me judges rule, and nobles, even all the judges OF THE EARTH."
This is an interesting case in that the Hebrew manuscripts differ from each other. Even the NIV, RV, ASV, Geneva, Young's, Darby and the RSV read as does the KJB.
However the NASB follows a different text and reads as the NRSV and says: "all who judge RIGHTLY" instead of "all the judges OF THE EARTH."
The Catholic versions are likewise is total disarray. The Douay has: "By me princes rule, and THE MIGHTY DECREE JUSTICE." But then the St. Joseph NAB 1970 goes back to the Hebrew of the KJB and says: "...all the rulers OF THE EARTH.", but then the 1985 New Jerusalem changes their texts once again and now reads: "by me rulers govern, so do nobles, THE LAWFUL AUTHORITIES."
Ecclesiastes 2:8 "I gat me men singers and women singers, and the delights of the sons of men, as MUSICAL INSTRUMENTS, AND THAT OF ALL SORTS."
Ecclesiastes. 2:8 "I gat me men singers and women singers, and the delights of the sons of men, as MUSICAL INSTRUMENTS, and that of all sorts."
"Musical instruments" is the reading of the NKJV 1982, the ASV of 1901 (remember, the NASB introduction says this was the "Rock of Biblical Honesty"), The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, Webster's 1833 translation, the Hebrew Names Version 2014- "musical instruments, and that of all sorts.", the KJV 21st Century 1994, the Third Millennium Bible 1998, the Orthodox Jewish Bible of 2011 - "musical instruments of all kinds."
Other English Bibles that read "MUSICAL INSTRUMENTS" are The Word of Yah 1993, the Sacred Scriptures Family of Yah 2001, the Bond Slave Version 2009, the New Heart English Bible 2010, Hebraic Transliteration Scripture 2010, the English Jubilee Bible 2010, Natural Israelite Bible 2012, the World English Bible 2012 - "MUSICAL INSTRUMENTS".
Among Foreign language Bibles that also have "musical instruments" are Luther?s German Bible 1545 - die Wonne der Menschen, allerlei Saitenspiel = the joy of all the people, ALL KINDS OF MUSIC., the Italian Diodati 1649 and the Nuova Diodati 1991 - "E STRUMENTI MUSICALI di ogni genere. (of every kind) ", the Spanish Reina Valera of 1569, 1909, 1960 and 1995 INSTRUMENTOS MUSICALES, and the 2010 Reina Valera Gómez bible - "y de toda clase de instrumentos de música.", the French Martin 1744 - "une harmonie d'INSTRUMENTS DE MUSIQUE, même plusieurs harmonies de toutes sortes d'instruments", the Russian Synodal Bible of 1876 - = all kinds of musical instruments", the Portuguese Almeida Corrigida 2009 and the Portuguese A Biblia Sagrada em Portugués - "e das delícias dos filhos dos homens, E DE INSTRUMENTOS DE MUSICA de toda sorte.", the Albanian bible - "dhe vegla MUZIKORE të çdo lloji.", the Czech Kralicka Bible - "a nástroje MUZICKE rozli?né.", the Lithuanian bible - "MUZIKOS INSTRUMENTU.", the Tagalog Ang Dating Biblia 1905 - mga sarisaring INSTRUMENTO NG MUSIKO iya'y totoong marami., and the Romanian Fidela Bible of 2009 - "INSTRUMENTE MUZICALE".
The Bible Babble Buffet in Action
The NASB, RSV, ESV and Holman Standard say: "I provided for myself male and female singers and the pleasures of men-MANY CONCUBINES."
The NIV says: "I acquired men and women singers, AND A HAREM AS WELL, - the delights of the heart of man." Then the NIV footnotes that the meaning of the Hebrew is uncertain.
I'm pretty sure there is a difference between musical instruments and an harem. Let's see what some other translations have come up with. Remember, all these translators are "experts in the original languages".
The Catholic Connection
The Catholic Douay-Rheims 1610 and the Douay Version 1950 - "...and the delights of the sons of men, CUPS AND VESSELS TO SERVE TO POUR OUT WINE."
Then the Catholic St. Joseph of 1970 changed this to "AND ALL HUMAN LUXURIES."
Then the 1985 New Jerusalem embellished this a bit more and says: "AND EVERY HUMAN LUXURY, CHEST UPON CHEST OF IT."
But now the 2009 Catholic Public Domain Version has come out and it has gone back to the previous Douay version reading: "and the delights of the sons of men, BOWLS AND PITCHERS FOR THE PURPOSE OF POURING WINE."
Lamsa?s 1933 translation of the Syriac Peshitta - the delights of the sons of men, and I appointed for myself BUTLERS AND WAITRESSES.
The Jehovah Witness NWT has: "exquisite delights of the sons of mankind, A LADY, EVEN LADIES."
The Common English Bible OF 2011 (one of the latest critical text edition) has: "along with EVERY HUMAN LUXURY, TREASURE CHESTS GALORE!"
The Knox Bible of 2012 says: "men-singers I had and women-singers, and all that man delights in; BEAKERS A MANY, AND JARS OF WINE TO FILL THEM."
The Judaica Press Tanach - "I acquired for myself various types of MUSICAL INSTRUMENTS, the delight of the sons of men, WAGONS AND COACHES."
The Concordant Literal Version - the delicacies of the sons of humanity, A WINE WAITER AND WINE WAITRESS.
The Online Interlinear 2012 (André de Mol) - "delicacies of the sons of men, FIELD AND FIELDS."
New English Version 1970 - "I acquired singers, men and women, and ALL THAT MAN DELIGHTS IN."
The so called Greek Septuagint (LXX) actually says: "I procured me singing men and singing women, and delights of the sons of men, A BUTLER AND FEMALE CUPBEARERS."
Coverdale 1535 - "...I GAT ME DRINKING CUPS AND ALSO GLASSES."
Bishops' Bible 1568, Geneva Bible 1587 - "I have provided me men singers and women singers, and the delights of the sons of men, as A WOMAN TAKEN CAPTIVE, AND WOMEN TAKEN CAPTIVES."
Young's - "and the luxuries of the sons of man -- A WIFE AND WIVES."
Easy To Read Version 2001 - " I had men and women singing for me. I HAD EVERYTHING ANYONE COULD WANT."
Green's "literal" says: "and the delights of the sons of men, A CONCUBINE, AND CONCUBINES." (Makes a lot of sense, huh? ;-)
Peterson's The Message: " and--most exquisite of all pleasures--VOLUPTUOUS MAIDENS FOR MY BED."
Let's see..."musical instruments", "a harem", "everything anyone could want", "a woman taken captive", "a wife and wives", "drinking cups and glasses", "a butler and female cupbearers", "beakers and jars of wine to fill them", "every human luxury", "wagons and coaches", "field and fields" and "concubines".
Yep, it must be true. The bible scholars have made great advances in their knowledge of biblical languages. All we need to do is "go to the Hebrew" to find out what God REALLY said...Don't ya think?
Bible scholars are all over the board on just about any subject and any individual word. What one affirms, another absolutely denies, so my trust is NOT in any scholar but in the sovereign God of the universes who promised to give us "the book of the LORD" and to preserver His words.
John Gill - "and the delights of the sons of men; as musical instruments, and that of all sorts; such as David his father invented; and to which he might add more, and indeed got all that were to be obtained; see Amos 6:5. The two last words, rendered "musical instruments, of all sorts," are differently interpreted; the Targum interprets them of hot waters and baths, having pipes to let out hot water and cold; Aben Ezra, of women taken captive; Jarchi, of chariots and covered wagons; the Septuagint, Syriac, and Arabic versions, of cup bearers, men, and women, that pour out wine and serve it; and the Vulgate Latin version, of cups and pots, to pour out wine. IT SEEMS BEST TO UNDERSTAND IT OF MUSICAL INSTRUMENTS, or of musical compositions ; sung either with a single voice, or in concert; which, according to Bochart , were called "sidoth," from Sido, a Phoenician woman of great note, the inventor of them or rather from giving unequal sounds, which, by their grateful mixture and temperament, broke and destroyed one another."
Ecclesiastes 2:25 "For who can eat, or who else can hasten hereunto, MORE THAN I?"
So read the Hebrew texts as well as Wycliffe 1395, Bishops' Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible, the RV, ASV, Darby, Youngs, the Jewish translations JPS 1917, Hebrew Publishing Company translation 1936, Judaica Press Tanach, the Hebrew Names Version, Rotherham's Emphasized Bible 1902, the NKJV, Greens, Douay, Spanish Reina Valers, Italian Diodadi 1998, the French and the Portuguese Bibles to name but a few.
However the NIV, NASB, RSV, NRSV, ESV and NET versions reject the majority Hebrew reading and have instead: "For who can eat and who can have enjoyment WITHOUT HIM?"
Then versions like the RSV footnote that the reading "WITHOUT HIM" comes from the Greek and Syriac, but that the Hebrew reads "more than I"
Here the older Catholic Douay followed the Hebrew reading found in the KJB, but the more modern Catholic versions like St. Joseph and the New Jerusalem read like the NIV, NASB, ESV and NET versions.
Ecclesiastes 8:10 KJB - "AND THEY WERE FORGOTTEN in the city where they had so done: this also is vanity." So read the RV, ASV, NASB, NKJV, but the NIV, ESV, and Catholic Douay and St. Joseph say: "AND RECEIVE PRAISE in the city where they did this" with a footnote telling us some Hebrew manuscripts and the LXX so read but that most Hebrew mss. read "and are forgotten". Dan Wallace's NET version says "THEY BOASTED" and then footnotes that the Hebrew Masoretic text reads "and they were forgotten".
The NIV adds "and the bad" to Eccl. 9:2 from the LXX, Vulgate and Syriac but admits it is not in the Hebrew nor in the NASB.
Song of Solomon 4:12 "A garden inclosed is my sister, my spouse; A SPRING SHUT UP, a fountain sealed." The Hebrew text as well as the RV, ASV, NKJV, NIV, ESV and the Jewish translations all agree with the King James reading of "a spring shut up". However the NASB along with the RSV follows the Greek Septuagint reading here and says: "A garden locked is my sister, my bride A ROCK GARDEN LOCKED, a spring sealed up."
Song of Solomon 7:9 KJB ( NKJV, NASB, RV, ASV) "And the roof of thy mouth like the best wine for my beloved, that goeth down sweetly, CAUSING THE LIPS OF THOSE THAT ARE ASLEEP TO SPEAK."
NIV - "flowing gently OVER LIPS AND TEETH."
The NIV Footnote says this comes from the LXX, Vulgate and Syriac, but the Hebrew says "lips of sleepers". The ESV also reads as does the NIV but it footnotes that the Hebrew literally reads: "causing the lips of sleepers to speak", just as the KJB has it!
Guess which other bible reads like the ESV. The Catholic St. Joseph NAB says: "spreading over the lips and the teeth." The New Jerusalem bible notes that this reading of "lips and teeth" comes from the Greek Septuagint.
Isaiah 5:17 KJB (NASB, NKJV) - "Then shall the lambs feed after their manner, and the waste places of the fat ones SHALL STRANGERS EAT."
Agreeing with the Hebrew texts and the King James Bible are the following Bible versions: The Revised Version 1881, American Standard Version 1901, Jewish translations of 1917, 1936, Judaica Press Tanach, Hebrew Names Bible, the Geneva Bible, Bishops' Bible, Rotherham's Emphasized Bible, Young, Darby, Douay, the Spanish Reina Valera 1909 - 1995, the Modern Greek translation (not to be confused with the so called LXX) the NASB, Holman Standard, and the NKJV.
However the NIV reads "The sheep will graze as in their own pasture, LAMBS WILL FEED among the ruins of the rich." - instead of "and the waste places of the fat ones shall STRANGERS eat." Then in a footnote the NIV tells us that "LAMBS" comes from LXX but the Hebrew says "strangers will eat". So too do the liberal RSV, the NRSV, NET, The Message ("KIDS AND CALVES right at home in the ruins") and the new revision of the old NIV called Today's NIV.
The older RSV, NRSV follow the alleged Greek Septuagint here, but now the new revision of the revision called the ESV has now gone back to the Hebrew reading (more or less) and says "and NOMADS shall eat among the ruins of the rich."
The older Douay version followed the Hebrew text and says "shall strangers eat" but the the newer Catholic versions like the New Jerusalem follow the Septuagint reading just like the NIV. The Catholic St. Joseph, on the other hand, completely omits all of verse 5:17!
Why didn't the NIV go with the Syriac as it frequently does? Well, maybe because Lamsa's translation of the Syriac reads differently than them all saying: "and the waste places THAT SHALL BE REBUILT SHALL BE THE PROPERTY OF THE RIGHTFUL OWNERS."!!
Hey, "strangers eat", "Lambs eat" "fatlings and kids shall eat" (RSV, NRSV), or "shall be the property of the rightful owners", it all means the same thing, right? The message hasn't been changed. Don't worry. Be happy. (sarcasm intended).
Isaiah 21:8 KJB ( NKJV, Geneva, Darby, Young's, Jewish translations and many others)- "And he cried, A LION: My lord..."
The NIV says: "And THE LOOKOUT shouted" then tells us "lookout" comes from the Syriac and Dead Sea Scrolls, but the Hebrew says "a lion". The NASB of 1977 says: "then the SENTRY called like a LION", combining both the Syriac and the Hebrew, but the 1995 NASB omits "lion" altogether and says: "Then the lookout called, O Lord..."
One NASB is not the same as the next NASB. There are literally thousands of changes between the 1977 edition and the 1995 update edition. Agreeing with the NIV once again is the Catholic New Jerusalem bible and the St. Joseph NAB. The older Douay had "lion".
The NIV also changes Isaiah 23:10 from "PASS THROUGH" to "TILL YOUR LAND" from Syriac and DSS. Here the St. Joseph sticks with the Hebrew reading like the KJB but the New Jerusalem bible goes along with the NIV reading of "cultivate your country".
Isaiah 33:6 - the fear of the LORD is HIS treasure.
So reads the Hebrew text as well as the NKJV and NASB, but the ASV says "THY treasure", then footnotes that the Hebrew reads HIS, and the RSV, ESV and Holman say: "the fear of the LORD is ZION'S treasure", then footnote that the Hebrew reads HIS treasure, and the NIV says: "the fear of the LORD IS THE KEY TO THIS treasure", apparently having just made it up out of thin air. By the way, the DSS says "YOUR treasure", but nobody followed this reading so far.
Daniel Wallace's NET version changes this to: "he gives all this to those who fear him." and then footnotes - Heb - the fear of the Lord, it is his treasure.
Hope this clears everything up for you all ;-)
Isaiah 33:8 "he hath despised THE CITIES".
So read the Hebrew Masoretic texts and the Jewish translations, Geneva, Darby, NASB, The New European Version 2010, the ESV and Holman, but the RSV, NRSV, NET and the NIV change this to "ITS WITNESSES are despised" from DSS. But wait! The Dead Sea Scrolls also change verse 33:3 which reads "AT THE LIFTING UP OF THYSELF the nations were scattered" (found in the RV, ASV, RSV, NRSV, NET, NIV, NASB and NKJV) to "AT YOUR SILENCE nations scattered."
Why don't any of these conflicting modern versions follow the DSS reading here? They just willy-nilly pick and choose at random among the various readings whenever some spirit leads them to do so and not one of them agrees all the way through with the others. By the way, the New Jerusalem bible follows the reading found in the NIV "witnesses" and then footnotes that the Hebrew reads "towns (cities)" like the KJB has it.
Isaiah 37:25 - here the NIV adds the words "in foreign lands" taken from the DSS but not found in Masoretic nor the NASB, RSV, NRSV; and the NIV departs from the Hebrew in 45:2; 49:12; 51:19; 52:5, 14; and 66:19.
Isaiah 48:1 "waters", "loins" or "seed"?
Isaiah 48:1 KJB - "Here ye this, O house of Jacob, which are called by the name of Israel, and are ome forth out of the WATERS of Judah..."
The word here in the Hebrew Masoretic text is cleary WATERS of Judah, and is so rendered by the KJB, Wycliffe 1395, the Geneva Bible - "Heare yee this, O house of Iaakob, which are called by the name of Israel, and are come out of THE WATERS of Iudah", the Douay-Rheims of 1610, The Family Jewish Bible 1864, the Revised Version 1881, ASV 1901, Rotherham's Emphasized bible 1902, Young's, Webster's 1833, Douay of 1950, the New Berkeley Version in Modern English 1969, The New Jewish Version 1985, The Word of Yah 1993, Green's literal 2005, the Judaica Press Tanach 2004 - "and who emanated from THE WATERS of Judah", the Apostolic Bible Polyglot 2003, the Context Group Version 2007, the Concordant Literal Version 2009, the New Heart English Bible 2010, the Orthodox Jewish Bible 2011, Lexham Bible 2012, the Third Millennium Bible 1998, The Koster Scriptures 1998, The Hebraic Transliteration Scripture 2010 - ?are come forth out of the WATERS of Yehudah?, The New European Version 2010 - "the WATERS of Judah", The Online Interlinear 2010 (André de Mol), The Work of God's Children Illustrated Bible 2011, The Orthodox Jewish Bible 2011 - "the WATERS of Yisroel", the English Standard Version 2011, the Interlinear Hebrew-Greek Scriptures 2012 (Mebust), The Hebraic Roots Bible 2012, The Biblos Bible 2013 and The Modern English Version 2014.
The NKJV needlessly alters this to the WELLSPRINGS of Judah, but at least retains the idea of water.
BUT the NASB 1995, RSV, NRSV and ISV 2014 say 'the LOINS of Judah" with a footnote in the RSV and the ISV telling us this is a correction to the text and that the Hebrew reads 'waters'. The reading or interpretation of 'loins' comes from some Targum commentators but it is not what the Hebrew actually says.
John Gill says the 'seed of Judah' is a Targum interpretation.
The NIV likewise says "from the LINE of Judah."
The Holman Standard of 2003 is a bit weird in that it just omits the phrase altogether and reads: "who are called by the name Israel and have DESCENDED FROM  Judah", but then in their Footnote they tell us "Literally 'have come from the WATERS of Judah". Perhaps the Holman is following the so called Greek Septuagint here because the LXX likewise omits the phrase altogether and simply says "are come from Judah".
Dan Wallace and company's NET version likewise omits the phrase and has "and are descended from Judah." He then footnotes "The Hebrew text reads literally "and from THE WATERS of Judah came out."
The Latin Vulgate of 405 A.D. follows the Hebrew text in this place and says -"et de AQUIS Juda existis" = "waters of Judah".
Once again we see the purification process in the previous English Bibles. Wycliffe 1395 correctly has "the waters of Judah" but Coverdale 1535 and the Bishops' Bible 1568 erroneously have "the STOCK of Judah".
The Geneva Bible the went back to the Hebrew reading of "the WATERS of Judah".
The Catholic Connection
Among the Catholic versions we see the usual confusion. The older Douay-Rheims 1610 and the Douay of 1950 both followed the Hebrew text and say "the WATERS of Judah".
But then the 1969 Jerusalem bible and the 1970 St. Joseph New American Bible both changed this to "the STOCK of Judah". Oh, but wait! Now the 1985 New Jerusalem bible and the 2009 Catholic Public Domain Version have gone back to the Hebrew reading of "the WATERS of Judah". Nothing like consistent inconsistency, is there.
Foreign Language Bibles
Foreign language Bibles that also read "the WATERS of Judah" are Luther's German bible 1545 and the 2000 Schlacher Bible - "aus dem Wasser Juda's", the Spanish Reina Valers 1960 - 1995 - "los que salieron de LAS AGUAS de Judá", the Portuguese A Biblia Sagrada em Portugués and the Almeida Corrigida E Fiel - "e saístesDAS AGUAS de Judá", the Italian Diodati of 1649 - "e siete usciti DELLE ACQUE acque di Giuda", and the Dutch Staten Vertaling Bible - "en uit DE WATEREN van Juda". The Modern Greek Bible reads "the fountain of Judah" -
Isaiah 49:17 "children" or "builders"?
King James Bible (NIV, NET, NKJV)- "Thy CHILDREN shall make haste; thy destroyers and they that made thee waste shall go forth of thee."
ESV, NASB - "Your BUILDERS make haste; your destroyers and those who laid you waste go out from you."
In this verse the NASB and ESV depart from the Hebrew Masoretic text and this time the NIV doesn't go along with them. The modern version "scholars" have really got their act together, don't they?
In the KJB we read: "Thy CHILDREN shall make haste: thy destroyers and they that made thee waste shall go forth of thee." 'Children' is the reading of the Hebrew Masoretic Text, the KJB, NKJV 1982, Revised Version of 1881, Darby, the ASV of 1901 - "Thy CHILDREN make haste", Rotherham's Emphasized bible 1902, the Jewish translations of JPS 1917, Hebrew Publishing Company version 1936, the 2004 Judaica Press Tanach, The New European Version 2010, Hebrew Names Version 2014, World English Version, Webster's 1833, Amplified Bible 1987, Lexham English Bible 2012, Green's literal of 2000 and the Third Millennium Bible 1998.
Even the NIV 1984 edition says "Your SONS hasten back" and the 2011 NIV now says: "Your CHILDREN hasten back." This time even Daniel Wallace and company's NET version sticks with the Hebrew text and says: "Your CHILDREN hurry back".
The Hebrew word is # 1121 Ben, which means "sons" or "children" and the context of Isaiah 49 is God bring children taken from among the Gentile nations and bringing them to Israel. See verses 6, 12, 20-22.
Among foreign language Bibles that follow the Hebrew Masoretic text and say "Thy CHILDREN make haste" are the Modern Greek translation, the French Martin 1744 and French Ostervald 1996 and the French Louis Segond of 2007 - "Tes enfants viendront à grande hâte", the Italian Diodati 1649, La Nuova Diodati of 1991 and the 2006 Nuova Riveduta - "I tuoi figli accorrono", the German Schlachter of 2000 - "Deine Söhne eilen herbei", and the Portuguese A Biblia Sagrada em Portugués and the Almeida Actualizada -(modern Portuguese version) as well as the NIV 1999 Nova Versão Internacional - "Os teus filhos pressurosamente virão"
However the NASB, RSV, NRSV, ESV 2001 (English Standard Version), Holman Standard 2003 and The Message say "Your BUILDERS make haste" instead of 'children'.
Young's "literal" has this time rejected the Hebrew for some strange reason and reads: "Hastened have THOSE BUILDING THEE."
The NASB never tells you when they depart from the Hebrew Masoretic text, but the ESV tells us in a footnote that the word "BUILDERS" comes from a Dead Sea Scroll manuscript, but that the Hebrew reads 'children'.
The Holman Standard footnotes that the word "builders" comes from one DSS manuscript and the Latin Vulgate, but that both the Hebrew and the Syriac reads "sons" or "children".
Yet there are NUMEROUS readings found in the Dead Sea Scrolls copies of the book of Isaiah that NONE of these modern versions have adopted. There IS no method to their madness; it's just random madness.
Even these versions are confused among themselves. The RSV has- "Your builders outstrip your destroyers"; the NRSV says - "Your BUILDERS outdo your destoyers" and the ESV has - "Your BUILDERS make haste." The Douay-Rheims and Douay say - "Thy BUILDERS ARE COME." but the newer Catholic versions like the St. Joseph and New Jerusalem read: "Your REBUILDERS are hurrying."
The NIV presents us with contradiction and confusion when they translate it into other languages. In English NIV and the NIV Portuguese version of 1999 they correctly read "Your CHILDREN hasten back" - "Os teus filhos pressurosamente virão", but the Spanish NIV of 1999 has rejected the Hebrew Masoretic text and says "Your BUILDERS make haste" - "Tus CONSTRUCTORES se apresuran."
The Spanish versions have not done very well with this verse. The early Sagradas Escrituras of 1569 and the Reina Valera of 1909, 1960 and 1995 and even the R.V. Gómez of 2010 have followed the Latin Vulgate instead of the Hebrew and read - "Tus edificadores vendrán aprisa;"= "Your BUILDERS WILL COME QUICKLY".
However the 2010 paraphrase called Nueva Traducción Viviente is pretty close with "Dentro de poco tus descendientes regresarán" = "Within a little while your DESCENDANTS will return." and the 2012 Palabra de Dios para Todos (The Word of God For Everybody) is a lot better with: "Tus hijos se apresuran a regresar a ti" = "Your CHILDREN will hurry up to return to you."
The Catholic versions have followed the Latin Vulgate here instead of the Hebrew and also read "your BUILDERS". These are the Douay-Rheims, Douay 1950, St. Joseph NAB 1970 and the New Jerusalem bible 1985. The Latin Vulgate of 405 A.D. itself reads: " venerunt structores tui" = "your BUILDERS are come".
The so called Greek Septuagint (Benton's translation) is a bit confused in that it reads - "Thou shalt soon be built by whom thou wast destroyed."!! Not at all the same as any modern version.
Once again we can see the gradual purification process of the words of God in the English translations. Wycliffe 1395 followed the Latin Vulgate and his translation said "The BUILDERS are come". Both Coverdale's translation of 1535 and the Bishops' Bible of 1568 likewise did not follow the Hebrew text but said: "They that haue broken the downe, shal make haist to buylde the vp agayne." Not even the Geneva Bible of 1587 got it right, but also followed the Latin Vulgate and says: "Thy BUILDERS make haste."
It wasn't till God finally finished the purification process that we get perfection and infallibility in the King James Bible that reads: "Thy CHILDREN shall make haste, thy destroyers, and they that made thee waste, shall go forth of thee."
Get yourself the true "book of the LORD", the King James Holy Bible. It is always right and you will never go wrong.
Isaiah 49:24 KJB (RV, ASV and others) "Shall the prey be taken from the mighty, or THE LAWFUL CAPTIVE delivered?"
Both the NIV, NASB say: "captives rescued FROM THE FIERCE" which the NIV footnote tells us comes from the DSS, Vulgate and Syriac. The Catholic New Jerusalem bible also follows this reading like the NIV.
Isaiah 53:11 KJB (RV, ASV, RSV, NKJV) "He shall see THE TRAVAIL OF HIS SOUL, and shall be satisfied."
NIV - "After the suffering of his soul, he will see THE LIGHT OF LIFE and be satisfied."
The NIV Footnote tells us this comes from the Dead Sea Scrolls but the Masoretic text does not have "light of life".
The Catholic versions like the St. Joseph New American bible 1970 and the New Jerusalem bible 1985 also follow this reading like the NIV does.
The NIV does not always follow the DSS either for sometimes they mention the DSS reading in the footnotes but do not use it in their text. There is no pattern to when they choose to follow the DSS, LXX, Syriac, Vulgate or whatever. It is all a willy - nilly process, totally at random.
Some few others also follow this strange variant of "he will see THE LIGHT OF LIFE and be satisfied" are the NRSV 1989. Notice that the RSV 1946-1973 followed the traditional Hebrew text, then the NRSV 1989 went with the DSS reading, and now the ESV 2001-2011 has gone back to the Masoretic text - that's "scholarship" for you.
Also following the DSS reading of "he will SEE LIGHT" is the World English bible 2000, the New Heart English bible 2010 and the New European Version 2010.
the Holman Christian Standard keeps CHANGING its text.
The Holman "Standard" of 2003 says: "He shall see IT out of his anguish, and He will be satisfied with His knowledge. My righteous servant will justify many, and He will carry their iniquities."
BUT now the Holman "Standard" of 2009 says: "After his anguish, HE WILL SEE LIGHT, and be satisfied. By his knowledge, my righteous servant will justify many, and he will carry their iniquities." Then it footnotes that the Hebrew Masoretic Text omits "light".
Bible versions = KJB Agreeing with the Hebrew reading of "He shall see THE TRAVAIL OF HIS SOUL, and shall be satisfied." are the Bishops' Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1587, Darby 1890, Young's 1898, the Revised Version 1885, ASV 1901, the Jewish Publication Society bible 1917, Lamsa's 1933 translation of the Syriac Peshitta, the RSV, NKJV 1982, NASB 1995, God's Word Translation 1995, A Conservative Version 2005, The Mebust Bible 2007, The Hebrew Transliteration Scripture 2010, Jubilee bible 2010, the Orthodox Jewish Bible 2011, Lexham English bible 2012, The Biblos Bible 2013, the Modern English Version 2014, Hebrew Names Version 2014, and the Tree of Life Version 2015.
Jeremiah 9:3 And they bend their tongues like their bow for lies: BUT THEY ARE NOT VALIANT FOR THE TRUTH UPON THE EARTH; for they proceed from evil to evil, and they know not me, saith the LORD.
"But they are not valiant for the truth upon the earth" is the reading of the NKJV 1982, Webster's 1833, Green's literal, the 1936 Hebrew Publishing Company, New York Jewish translation,
The meaning in the KJB is pretty straight forward - they do not stand for and defend the truth. Adam Clarke comments: "They are not valiant for the truth They are bold in sin, and courageous to support their lies; but the truth they neither patronize nor support."
John Gill remarks: "but they are not valiant for the truth upon the earth;which a man should do everything for, and nothing against; and which he should earnestly contend for, and not part with or give up at any rate."
The Geneva Bible of 1587 is like the King James Bible in that it says: "And they bende their tongues like their bowes for lyes: BUT THEY HAVE NO COURAGE FOR THE TRUETH UPON THE EARTH: for they proceede from euill to worse, and they haue not knowen mee, sayth the Lord."
Lamsa's 1936 translation of the Syriac is very much like the KJB with - "And they bend their tongues like their bow; in falsehood and not in truth they are valiant upon the earth; for they proceed from evil to evil, and they do not know me, says the LORD."
The French Ostervald 1996 reads exactly like the KJB with - ce n'est pas pour la vérité qu'ils sont vaillants, as does the Italian Diodati - e non si fortificano in verità, the Portuguese Almeida, and the Spanish Reina Valera - y no se fortalecieron por verdad en la tierra.
However several modern versions reject the Hebrew reading and instead follow the so called Greek Septuagint (LXX), which reads: FALSEHOOD AND NOT FAITHFULNESS HAS PREVAILED UPON THE EARTH.
The RSV reads: "They bend their tongue like a bow; FALSEHOOD AND NOT TRUTH HAS GROWN STRONG IN THE LAND; for they proceed from evil to evil, and they do not know me, says the LORD." Then it footnotes that this reading comes from the Greek, but that the Hebrew reads: "and not for truth they have grown strong".
The Catholic New Jerusalem has also followed this Septuagint reading and rejected the Hebrew texts. It reads: "not truth but falsehood holds sway in the land." Then it footnotes that this reading comes from the Greek but the Hebrew reads "but they are not strong for the truth" as the KJB has it.
The NASB is very much like the RSV and reads: "They bend their tongue like their bow; LIES AND NOT TRUTH PREVAIL IN THE LAND; For they proceed from evil to evil, And they do not know Me," declares the LORD. This is the Greek reading; not the Hebrew text.
The Holman Standard is much like the NASB/LXX reading: "lies and not faithfulness prevail in the land, for they proceed from one evil to another"
NET has - "They have become powerful in the land, but they have not done so by honest means."
The NIV changes the meaning from both the KJB and the NASB with - "They make ready their tongue like a bow, to shoot lies; IT IS NOT BY TRUTH THAT THEY TRIUMPH IN THE LAND. They go from one sin to another; they do not acknowledge me," declares the LORD. " Then they footnote : "Or, they are not valiant for the truth", which would be the meaning found in the KJB.
Darby is a little skewed but still more like the KJB with - "and not for fidelity are they valiant in the land"
The Great Speckled Bird is an old gospel song.
Jeremiah 12:9 "a speckled bird" or "a hyena's lair"?
The Hebrew and Jewish translations say "Mine heritage is unto me as A SPECKLED BIRD" in Jeremiah 12:9 (JPS 1917)
But the ESV goes with what passes for the LXX reading of "Is my heritage to me like a HYENA'S LAIR?", but not even all the so called Septuagint copies say the same thing.
My hard copy of the LXX has a footnote there telling us that the Alexandrinus copy of the LXX says "A CAVE OF ROBBERS."
What passes today as "the" Septuagint comes from Vaticanus, Sinaiticus and Alexandrinus, and of course they all differ radically from the Hebrew and from each other.
The ESV came from the RSV and the NRSV, but they don't read like the ESV either. The RSV had it more or less right with "A SPECKLED BIRD of prey", but then the NRSV changed this to read: "Is the HYENA GREEDY FOR MY HERITAGE AT MY COMMAND?" (Huh?)
The Holman Standard says "Is My inheritance like A HYENA to Me?" and drops the "lair" or "cave" part.
And the NKJV changed this to: "My heritage is to Me like a speckled VULTURE.?, even though it translated the same word as ?bird? in Job 28:7 - ?the path no BIRD knows?.
Dan Wallace's goofy NET version is even different still, with: "The people I call my own ATTACK ME like BIRDS OF PREY OR LIKE HYENAS." He just paraphrases what both the Hebrew and the LXX say and combines them to make up his own text.
I'm sure God will appreciate his efforts and reward him accordingly.
How these "scholars" who put together these fake bibles like the ever changing ESVs try to justify ridiculous textual changes like this is a mystery to me.
I think maybe God is turning them over to a reprobate mind because they have rejected his true words.
Also reading "A SPECKLED BIRD" are the NASB 1995-2020, NIV 2011, ASV, Jewish Publication Society O.T. 1917, the Complete Jewish Bible 1998, Orthodox Jewish Bible 2011, Wycliffe, Coverdale, Great Bible, Matthew's bible, Bishops' Bible 1568, Darby, Young's, World English Bible and the International Standard Version 2014 to name but a few.
Jeremiah 27:1 JEHOIAKIM or ZEDEKIAH? Has the Hebrew text been corrupted?
Jeremiah 27:1 - Is there a scribal error in the King James Bible and in the Hebrew Masoretic text?
Jeremiah 27:1 KJB - "In the beginning of the reign of JEHOIAKIM the son of Josiah king of Judah came this word unto Jeremiah from the LORD, saying...."
ESV, RSV, NIV, NASB, NET, Catholic New Jerusalem bible 1985 - "In the beginning of the reign of ZEDEKIAH the son of Josiah, king of Judah, this word came to Jeremiah from the LORD."
Jeremiah 27:1 "In the beginning of the reign of JEHOIAKIM the son of Josiah king of Judah came this word unto Jeremiah from the LORD, saying...".
Here versions like the NASB, NIV, RSV, ESV, NET version and Holman all reject the Hebrew text as being "corrupt" and follow the Syriac version which reads ZEDEKIAH instead of JEHOIAKIM. Dan Wallace of the NET version says the Hebrew text has been corrupted here.
The Catholic Connection
The Catholic versions are interesting in that the earlier Douay and even the St. Joseph NAB 1970 stick with the Hebrew reading of Jehoikim, but the New Jerusalem bible of 1985 goes with "ZEDEKIAH" and then footnotes that the Hebrew reads "Jehoiakim".
The King James Bible is right, as always. And here is why. See the whole study here -
Jeremiah 31:3 "unto ME", "unto HIM", "unto THEM", "unto US" or "to ISRAEL"? (Hey, it's all the same meaning, right?)
Jeremiah 31:3 KJB - "The LORD hath appeared of old UNTO ME, saying, Yea, I have loved thee with an everlasting love; therefore with lovingkindness have I drawn thee."
NASB (ESV, RSV, Holman Standard, Catholic St. Joseph NAB) says: "The LORD appeared TO HIM from afar, saying, "I have loved you with an everlasting love; Therefore I have drawn you with lovingkindness."
NIV - "The LORD appeared to US in the past, saying, "I have loved you with an everlasting love; I have drawn you with loving-kindness."
The Lord hath appeared of old UNTO ME, is the Hebrew text reading and is found in Wycliffe 1395, Coverdale 1535, the Great Bible 1540, Matthew's Bible 1549, the Bishops' Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1587, the Douay-Rheims 1610, the KJB 1611, the NKJV 1982, the Revised Version 1885, the 1901 ASV - "Jehovah appeared of old unto ME, saying, Yea, I have loved thee with an everlasting love: therefore with lovingkindness have I drawn THEE.", The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, the 1917 Jewish Publication Society version, the 1936 Jewish translation, The New Jewish Version 1985, The Complete Jewish Bible 1988, the Judaica Press Tanach of 2004, Orthodox Jewish Bible 2011, the Hebrew Names Bible 2014, Rotherham's Emphasized bible 1902, Darby 1890, Youngs 1898 - "From afar Jehovah hath appeared TO ME, With love age-during I have loved thee, Therefore I have drawn thee with kindness." Douay 1950, New Berkeley Version in Modern Speech 1969, The Koster Scriptures 1998, World English Bible 2000, The Yah Sacred Scriptures 2001, Green's interlinear 2000, Third Millennium Bible 1998, New Heart English Bible 2010, The New European Version 2010, Lexham English bible 2012, and the Tree of Life Version 2015 (just to name a few).
The word "thee" seen twice in this verse, is the SINGULAR you, as opposed to the plural English "you" found in the KJB, Geneva Bible, RV, ASV and JPS 1917 - "the LORD appeared unto ME, Yea, I have loved THEE with an everlasting love; Therefore with affection have I drawn THEE.", and the only reading that grammatically makes sense is the Hebrew reading found in the KJB - the Lord appeared to ME, saying, I have loved THEE...
Foreign Language Bibles
Foreign language translations that follow the Hebrew text and read like the KJB are Lamsa's translation of the Syriac Peshitta - "The LORD has appeared TO ME from afar, saying, Yea, I have loved you with an everlasting love; therefore with lovingkindness have I drawn you.", the Portuguese Almeida Actualizada - "De longe o Senhor ME apareceu, dizendo: Pois que com amor eterno te amei, também com benignidade te atraí." = "to ME...therefore with lovingkindness have I drawn thee.", the Spanish Sagradas Escrituras 1569 and Reina Valera 1909 - "El SEÑOR se manifesto A MI hace ya mucho tiempo, diciendo : Con amor eterno te he amado , the Italian Nuova Diodati of 1991 - "Molto tempo fa l'Eterno MI è apparso, dicendo: «Sí, ti ho amata di un amore eterno; per questo ti ho attirata con benevolenza." = "appeared TO ME...I have drawn thee with lovingkindness.", the French Martin 1744 and Ostervald 1996 - "De loin l'Éternel M'EST apparu, et m'a dit: Je t'ai aimée d'un amour éternel", Luther's German Bible 1545
and the Modern Greek Bible - = "The Lord appeared to me of old, saying, Yea, I have loved thee with an everlasting love. Therefore with mercy (lovingkindnes) HAVE I DRAWN THEE to me."
However the NASB says: "The LORD appeared TO HIM from afar, saying, "I have loved you with an everlasting love; Therefore I have drawn you with lovingkindness."
The RSV, NRSV, ESV and Holman Standard read the same as the NASB (to HIM), but they all have a footnote that says GREEK - TO HIM; HEBREW - TO ME. The NASB, RSV, NRSV, ESV have all followed the LXX and rejected the clear Hebrew text.
Even the Dead Sea Scrolls agrees with the traditional Hebrew Masoretic text and says: "The LORD appeared TO ME long ago, saying: I have loved you with an everlasting love, so I have drawn you..."
The ESV has not only rejected the Hebrew reading of "to ME" and changed it to "to HIM" but has changed the meaning of the verse.
The ESV reads " the Lord appeared to HIM  from far away. I have loved you with an everlasting love; therefore I have CONTINUED MY FAITHUFLNESS TO YOU." instead of "I HAVE DRAWN THEE."
The Hebrew word is "to draw" (as even the RV, ASV, NASB, NIV have it) and is used in "heifer which hath not DRAWN in the yoke" (Deut. 21:3); "a certain man DREW a bow" (1 Kings 22:34); "when he DRAWETH him into his net" (Psalm 10:9), "DRAW me, we will run after thee" (Song of Solomon 1:4); "and they DREW Joseph out of the pit" (Genesis 37:28); "Canst thou DRAW OUT Leviathan with an hook?" (Job 41:1), "So they DREW up Jeremiah with cords, and took him up out of the dungeon." (Jeremiah 38:13) etc.
Furthermore, the ESV says they got their reading of "TO HIM" instead of "TO ME" from the so called Greek Septuagint, but they don't mention the fact that the LXX has chapter 31 not in 31 but in chapter 38 of Jeremiah, AND even the Greek LXX reads "The Lord appeared TO HIM from afar, saying, I have loved THEE with an everlasting love, therefore I HAVE DRAWN THEE"!!!
This is how modern "scholarship" works, folks.
The Catholic Connection
The Catholic bible versions present us with their typical ever-changing textual changes. The older Douay-Rheims of 1610 and the Douay of 1950 both agree with the Hebrew text and the KJB saying "to ME", but the St. Joseph New American bible of 1970 and the Jerusalem bible of 1968 say "to HIM", but then the New Jerusalem bible of 1985 has now gone back to reading "to ME".
Dan Wallace's NET version is so messed up it is unrecognizable. It says: "In a far-off land the Lord will manifest himself TO THEM. He will say to them, "I have loved you with an everlasting love. That is why I have continued to be faithful to you."
This goofy version is much like the ESV and changes the Hebrew "to thee" to "TO THEM" and has altered so many things in the Hebrew text that it is beyond recognition. Also reading "to THEM" is the New English Version 1970 and the Revised English Version of 1989.
Where did they get this "TO THEM" from? NO WHERE. Not from the Hebrew or the Greek or even the Syriac. THEY JUST MADE IT UP!
The "ever dependable" NIVs
The NIV has something even different with its "The LORD appeared to US in the past, saying, "I have loved you with an everlasting love; I have drawn you with loving-kindness."
The NIV has "TO US" instead of the Hebrew "to me" or the Greek "to him", and just makes up their own text as they go along.
However, the NIV Spanish edition follows the Hebrew and says "to ME" - La Nueva Versión Internacional 1999 - "Hace mucho tiempo se ME apareció el Señor y ME dijo..."
The 2007 New Living Translation now has: "Long ago the LORD said TO ISRAEL: "I have loved you, my people, with an everlasting love. With unfailing love I have drawn you to myself."
Let's see - to ME, to HIM, to US, to THEM or to ISRAEL...Yep, pretty much the same thing, right?
Lamentations 3:22 KJB - It is of the LORD'S mercies THAT WE ARE NOT CONSUMED, because his compassions fail not.
ESV 2001 (printed edition hard copy ) - The steadfast love of the Lord NEVER CEASES;  his mercies never come to an end. Footnote: Syriac, Targum; Hebrew - Because of the steadfast love of the LORD, we are not cut off."
To see much more about this verse and how several modern versions reject the Hebrew reading in favor of something found in the Syriac see my article here -
The Selective Silliness of the "Science" of Textual Criticism in Action
Ezekiel 8:2 "Then I beheld, and lo a likeness as the appearance OF FIRE: from the appearance of his loins even downward, fire."
So read Wycliffe 1395, Coverdale 1535, the Great Bible 1540, Matthew's Bible 1549, the Bishops' Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1587, Douay-Rheims 1610, the Lesser O.T. 1835, the Revised Version 1885, ASV 1901, Darby 1890, Young's 1898, the NKJV 1982, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, the Jewish translations of 1917, 1936, Lamsa's 1933 translation of the Syriac Peshitta, Bible in Basic English 1961, The Koster Scriptures 1998, World English Bible 2000, Green's Literal 2004, The New European Version 2010, Jubilee Bible 2010, the New Heart English Bible 2010, the Lexham English Bible 2012,
You can also cross reference this verse to Ezekiel 1:27 where the prophet sees a vision "as it were the appearance of fire".
However beginning with the liberal RSV, and now in the NASB, NIV, ESV, Holman Standard, and NET version, these modern versions reject the Hebrew reading and follow the Greek Septuagint saying: "Then I looked and behold, the likeness as the appearance OF A MAN."
The NASB and NIV don't give any footnotes, but the RSV, ESV and Holman and NET do list a footnote telling us the reading of "a man" comes from the LXX, but the Hebrew Masoretic text reads "of fire".
The Catholic Connection
Likewise among the Catholic bible versions, the older Douay-Rheims and the Douay of 1950 read "a likeness as the appearance of FIRE" but the more modern Catholic bibles like the Jerusalem bible 1968 and the New Jerusalem of 1985 read like the NASB, ESV, NIV and say "the appearance of a HUMAN BEING" (or MAN), and then footnote that this reading comes from the Greek but that the Hebrew reads "fire".
But How consistent are they? Let's take a closer look at this so called Greek Septuagint and other verses in this same chapter of Ezekiel 8.
In the very first verse the Hebrew text and the King James Bible says: "And it came to pass in the sixth year, in the SIXTH month, in the fifth day of the month, as I sat in mine house, and the elders of Judah sat before me, that the hand the Lord GOD fell there upon me."
However the Greek LXX says "in the FIFTH month" instead of "in the SIXTH month". Even Dan Wallace's NET version follows the Hebrew reading here, but he footnotes: "The LXX reads "In the sixth year, in the FIFTH month, on the fifth of the month." Do any of these modern versions like the NASB, NIV, ESV or NET follow this reading here? No, they do not.
In Ezekiel 8:7 we read in the Hebrew text and the KJB: "And he brought me to the door of the court; AND WHEN I LOOKED, BEHOLD, A HOLE IN THE WALL."
However the LXX OMITS all of the capitalized words "and when I looked, behold, a hole in the wall." And again we see that all these modern versions followed the Hebrew text and NOT the so called Greek Septuagint here.
In Ezekiel 8:16 we read in the Hebrew and the KJB - "And he brought me into the inner court of the LORD's house, and behold, at the door of the temple of the LORD, between the porch and the altar, were about FIVE AND TWENTY men, with their faces toward the east; and they worshipped the sun toward the east."
However the LXX actually says: "were about TWENTY men". Again, Dan Wallace's NET version notes: "The LXX reads "twenty" instead of twenty-five, perhaps because of the association of the number twenty with the Mesopotamian sun god Shamash."
But do any of these modern versions that rejected the Hebrew reading "of fire" in verse two and opted for the LXX reading "of a man" now chose to follow the LXX? Of course not. They all go with 25 men instead of 20 men.
Then again in Ezekiel 8:17 the last part of the verse reads: "...for they have filled the land with violence AND HAVE RETURNED TO PROVOKE ME TO ANGER; AND, LO, THEY PUT THE BRANCH TO THE NOSE."
However the so called Greek Septuagint completely rejects the Hebrew reading here and instead reads: "...for they have filled the land with iniquity: AND, BEHOLD, THESE ARE AS SCORNERS."
Even Dan Wallace footnotes: "The LXX glosses the expression as "Behold, they are like mockers."
But do any of these modern versions adopt the LXX reading here? Of course not. They just pick out a word here and there from among the THOUSANDS of differences that are found in the various SeptuagintS (there are several of them, and they do not agree with each other) and put them in their "bibles". This is the true nature of what they like to refer to as their "science" of textual criticism.
NASB rejects the Hebrew texts.
Ezekiel 11:15 "Son of man, thy brethren, even THY BRETHREN, the MEN OF THY KINDRED, and all the house of Israel wholly, are they unto whom the inhabitants of Jerusalem have said, Get you far from the LORD: unto us is this land given in possession."
The phrase "even THY BRETHREN, THE MEN OF THY KINDRED" is the reading of all Hebrew texts, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, and that of the Jewish translations of 1917, 1936, the Geneva Bible, Young's, the Revised Version, the American Standard Version of 1901, The Koster Scriptures 1998, the Third Millennium Bible. Even the ESV follows this reading saying "even your brothers, your kinsmen".
The NKJV is different by still fairly close with: "Son of man, your brethren, YOUR RELATIVES, YOUR KINSMEN..." They changed the second "brethren" to "your relatives" and omitted the Hebrew word for "men", but it still basically has the same meaning.
The NASB rejects the Hebrew reading, along with the RSV and NRSV and says: "Son of man, your brothers, your relatives, YOUR FELLOW EXILES, and the whole house of Israel..."
The NASB doesn't tell you when they reject the Hebrew texts (which it does scores of times), but if you look at the RSV, NRSV, and Holman Standard footnotes, they tell us that the reading of "your fellow exiles" comes from the Greek Septuagint and the Syriac, but that the Hebrew reads "the men of thy kindred".
The NIV gives us a made up paraphrase saying: "Son of man, your brothers - your brothers who ARE YOUR BLOOD RELATIVES and the whole house of Israel..." There is no word for "blood" in any text, but at least it is closer to the Hebrew reading than the NASB.
The Holman Standard puts a different twist on this verse by saying: "Son of man, your own relatives, THOSE WHO HAVE A RIGHT TO REDEEM YOU, and the entire house of Israel..." Then in a footnote tells us the LXX and Syriac read "your fellow exiles" (as the NASB has it).
Actually even the footnote of the RSV, NRSV, and Holman Standard is inaccurate. The NIV footnote tells us to see or compare the LXX and the Syriac, whereas the RSV, Holman say the LXX and Syriac read "your fellow exiles". This is not true. The LXX actually says: "thy brothers, AND THE MEN OF THY CAPTIVITY"; whereas Lamsa's translation of the Syriac reads: "your brethren, your KINDRED, WHO ARE IN YOUR CAPTIVITY..."
In any case, the NASB has not followed the Hebrew texts, but reads as do the previous RSV and NRSV and the Catholic St. Joseph by following the so called Greek Septuagint. The Catholic bibles are interesting in that the older Douay read like the KJB and the Hebrew; then the 1970 St. Joseph went with the bogus LXX reading and has "your kinsmen, YOUR FELLOW EXILES", but then the New Jerusalem of 1985 went back to the Hebrew reading. There's nothing like true "scholarship" to clear things up for us, right? And this is "nothing like true scholarship";-)
It should be of interest to see that the 2001 ESV (English Standard Version), which is a revision of the previous RSV, NRSV, has now gone back to the Hebrew reading. It says: "Son of man, your brothers, even your brothers, your KINSMEN..."
Ezekiel 11:19 - KJB - "And I will give them one heart, and I will put a new spirit within YOU; and I will take the stony heart out of their flesh and will give then an heart of flesh."
The Hebrew Masoretic Text reads "within YOU" and so do the Revised Version 1881, Webster?s 1833 translation, Darby 1890, Young's 1898, the American Standard Version of 1901, Rotherham's Emphasized bible of 1902, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, the JPS (Jewish Publication Society) of 1917, the 1936 Hebrew Publishing Company translation, the Complete Jewish Bible 1998, The Koster Scriptures 1998, the Hebrew Names Version 2014, the KJV 21st Century version 1994, the Third Millennium Bible 1998, Green's "literal"translation of 2000, The New European Version 2010,
The Modern Greek (as opposed to the so called LXX) also reads as does the Hebrew texts and the King James Bible.
However the NKJV, RSV, NRSV, ESV, NIV, NASB and Holman Standard all reject the Hebrew reading in this place and change it to read: "Then I will give them one heart, and I will put a new spirit within THEM" (NKJV). Then the NKJV footnotes: "literally YOU".
The NASB online edition gives more information in that it tells us that YOU comes from the Greek LXX and "many manuscripts" but that the Hebrew reads YOU. Likewise the Catholic versions like the Douay, St. Joseph New American bible 1970 and the New Jerusalem bible of 1985 read "them", but then footnote that the Hebrew texts read "you" just as the King James Bible has it.
The NET version also rejects the Hebrew reading and says THEM but then footnotes "The MT reads "you"; many Hebrew mss along with the LXX and other ancient versions read "within them."
Several previous English and foreign language versions followed the Latin Vulgate reading here instead of either the Hebrew Masoretic texts or the so called LXX, and they read something like "in their bowels" - Douay-Rheims - instead of "within YOU".
Wycliffe, Coverdale, the Bishops' bible and even the Geneva bible, along with the early Douay-Rheims, all followed the Latin Vulgate here and read "within their bowels" (Geneva) or "in the entrails of them" (Wycliffe). So the King James Bible was the first English Bible to follow the God inspired Hebrew reading of "within YOU".
Most Spanish versions like the Reina Valera and Gomez translation also got it wrong and read "within them" (ellos), though the French Louis Segond got it right as did Luther's German bible of 1545, reading "within YOU" as do the Hebrew and the King James Bible.
Ezekiel 16:6 - "And when I passed by thee, and saw thee polluted in thine own blood, I said unto thee when thou wast in thy blood, Live; YEA, I SAID UNTO THEE WHEN THOU WAST IN THY BLOOD, LIVE."
Another example of the "science" of textual criticism in action -
Ezekiel 16:6 The NIV, along with the TNIV, The Message, the RSV, NRSV, New English Bible 1970, Common English bible 2011, Names of God Bible 2011 and Lexham English Bible omit "YEA, I SAID UNTO THEE WHEN THOU WAST IN THY BLOOD, LIVE".
The Catholic Connection
Among the Catholic versions we see the usual confusion. The early Douay-Rheims bible of 1610 as well as the Douay of 1950 both included the words. But then the St. Joseph New American Bible of 1970 and the New Jerusalem bible 1985 omitted these words. Oh, but wait! Now the 2009 Catholic Public Domain Version has come out and it put the words back in the text!
All these words are found in most Hebrew manuscripts and in the Jewish bibles like The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, the Jewish Publication Society 1917, the Complete Jewish Bible 1998, The New European Version 2010, the Judaica Press Tanach 2004, the Orthodox Jewish Bible of 2011.
They are also found in Wycliffe 1395, Coverdale 1535, the Great Bible 1540, Matthew's Bible 1549, the Bishops' Bible 1568, the Geneva bible 1587, Darby, Youngs, the Revised Version 1881, ASV 1901, NASB 1995, NKJV 1982, The Koster Scriptures 1998, Holman Standard 2003 and the ESV 2001-2011.
Notice that the previous RSV and NRSV omitted them, but then they were "scientifically" put back in the ESV.
Even Dan Wallace's NET version includes the words, but in typical Bible agnostic fashion he footnotes: "The translation reflects the Hebrew text, which repeats the statement, perhaps for emphasis. However, a few medieval Hebrew manuscripts, the Old Greek, and the Syriac do not include the repetition. The statement could have been accidentally repeated or the second occurrence could have been accidentally omitted. Based on the available evidence it is difficult to know which is more likely."
Among foreign language Bible all these words are found in the Spanish Sagradas Escrituras 1549, the Spanish Reina Valera 1995, R.V. Gómez 2010, the Italian Diodati 1649 and La Nuova Diodati 1991, the French Martin 1744, Louis Segond and the French Ostervald 1996, Luther's German bible 1545, the German Schlachter Bible 2000, the Portuguese Almeida and A Sagrada Biblia em Portugués, and in the Modern Greek Bible -
The NIV footnote informs us that a few Hebrew mss. and the LXX and Syriac omit these words, but they are found in most Hebrew texts. If the NIV wanted to follow the Syriac, then why didn't they follow it when in the very next verse (Ezekiel 16:7) where the KJB and most translations say something like : "...and thou hast increased and waxen great AND ART COME TO EXCELLENT ORNAMENTS" (Geneva, RV, ASV), but the Syriac says "...and you have increased and grown great;THEN YOU WENT INTO THE CITIES."
So, what does the NIV do here? Well, the 1984 NIV says: "You grew up and developed and BECAME THE MOST BEAUTIFUL OF JEWELS." But the 2011 NIV now changed this to - "You grew and developed and ENTERED PUBERTY." Isn't modern scholarship a Wonder to behold; you are always Wondering what they will come up with next.
Ezekiel 17:21 "And ALL HIS FUGITIVES with all his bands shall fall by the sword."
"FUGITIVES" or "CHOICE MEN"?
"And ALL HIS FUGITIVES with all his bands shall fall by the sword." So read the King James Bible, Geneva bible, the Lesser O.T. 1835, the Revised Version 1885, American Standard Version 1901, Rotherham's Emphasized bible 1902, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, Concordant Literal Version 1909, the NKJV 1982, Youngs 1898, Darby 1870, Douay-Rheims 1610, Latin Vulgate 425 A.D., Green's MKJV, Italian Diodati, Spanish Reina Valera, The New Jewish Version 1985, The Koster Scriptures 1998, World English Bible 2000, the 2003 Holman Standard, Green's Literal 2004, A Conservative Version 2005, The New European Version 2010, the New Heart English Bible 2010, Jubilee Bible 2010, The Orthodox Jewish Bible 2011, The Biblos Bible 2013, The Hebrew Names Version 2014.
The NIV paraphrases this as "all his fleeing troops will fall by the sword", but still follows most Hebrew manuscripts.
However the NASB, RSV and ESV say: "All HIS CHOICE MEN in all his troops will fall by the sword."
As usual, the printed NASBs don't tell you when they depart from the traditional reading, (though the online edition footnotes "So many ancient mss and versions; M.T. fugitives ", but the RSV and ESV footnote that this reading comes from "some Hebrew mss. and the Syriac, but that most Hebrew mss. read: "all his fugitives".
None of these different versions mention the LXX here. Perhaps because the Septuagint reads differently than them all with: "In every battle of his they shall fall by the sword."
Likewise Daniel Wallace's NET version with his usual "anything but the KJB" slant on things, reads like the NASB with "All the CHOICE MEN among his troops will die", but then he footnotes: "Some manuscripts and versions read "choice men", while most manuscripts read "fugitives".
Ah, but wait. Even though the NIV stuck with the traditional Hebrew reading of "fugitives" (fleeing troops), now the new TNIV of 2005, put out by many of the same men who gave us the old NIV, has decided to adopt this other variant reading: "all his CHOICE TROOPS will fall by the sword."
And this is now the reading too of the "new" New International Version of 2011 reading: "All HIS CHOICE TROOPS" instead of the Hebrew and the 1984 NIV "fugitives".
The Jewish translations themselves are in disagreement. The 1917 JPS reads "his MIGHTY MEN", while the 1936 Hebrew Publishing Company version and the 2004 Judaica Press Tanach both follow the traditional text with "his FUGITIVES shall fall by the sword."
The fugitives were the men who accompanied king Zedekiah when he fled from the city. See Ezekiel 12:12-14; and Jeremiah 52:7-8.
Likewise the Catholic versions are all confused. The earlier Douay-Rheims reads "fugitives", while the latest Catholic versions like the St. Joseph NAB, the Jerusalem and the New Jerusalem versions have adopted the variant reading of "the choice men."
This is the fickle nature of modern scholars; none of whom believes in an infallible Bible in any language.
Ezekiel 18:17 KJB ( NASB, NKJV, RV, ASV, Geneva, Young, Darby, Holman, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, Lamsa's 1933 translation of the Syriac Peshitta, The Koster Scriptures 1998,The New European Version 2010) - "That hath taken off his hand from THE POOR, that hath not received usury nor increase".
NIV 1978 and 1984 editions - "He withholds his hand from SIN..." Footnote LXX, Hebrew reads "the poor".
The RSV, NRSV and ESV also follow the Greek Septuagint here instead of the Hebrew texts, reading "withholds his hand from INIQUITY". The ESV then footnotes that this reading comes from the Septuagint, but that the Hebrew text reads "from the poor".
Oh, but wait. Now the "new" NIV of 2011 has come out and it has once again changed its underlying O.T. text. It now says: "He withholds his hand FROM MISTREATING THE POOR"! This time the NIV editors decided to go back to the Hebrew text.
The Catholic Connection
The Catholic versions likewise are in disarray. The older Douay-Rheims and the Douay of 1950 say "the POOR", but the St. Joseph New American bible of 1970 has "holds off from EVILDOING" and the 1985 New Jerusalem rejects the Hebrew and follows the LXX reading ""abstains FROM EVIL". BUT, now the latest 2009 Catholic Public Domain Version has come out, and it too goes back to the Hebrew and now reads: "who has averted his hand from injuring THE POOR".
Daniel Wallace and company's goofy NET version reads "refrains from WRONGDOING" and then he footnotes: "
Return to Articles - https://brandplucked.webs.com/kjbarticles.htm