"wimples, crisping pins and a stomacher" Isaiah 3:16-24 -
"Archaic and Inerrant" beats "Modern but Corrupt" any day
King James Bible critics and Bible correctors in general are a funny bunch. Not one of them believes that any Bible in any language is or ever was the complete, inspired and inerrant words of the living God, and yet each one of them seems to think he can do a better job of writing the Bible than anyone has ever done before.
Of course he is not quite sure which specific Hebrew or Greek he would use as his base texts or how exactly he would go about translating it, (and nobody else would agree with all his decisions were he to put it all together), but this doesn't seem to stop them from criticizing the only English Bible believed by thousands of blood bought saints of God even today to be the complete and inerrant words of God.
One such Bible agnostic who was criticizing the words "wimples and crisping pins", named Hugh, writes: "Can you point us to the infallible Word (Hebrew & Greek) that the KJV translators used?"
To whom I answered: "No, I cannot with 100% accuracy, nor do I need to. You see, "the" Hebrew and "the" Greek (there is no such animal) is not my final written authority. The English text of the King James Bible is. That is what God has used to convert hundreds of thousands and been translated into hundreds of different languages. It is the English text of the King James Bible that I read every day.
I would not change a single word of it. Look at the pattern God has given us from history. Are "the" biblical Hebrew and Greek that most bible correctors refer us to (without ever identifying for us "WHICH" the Hebrew and Greek they mean) - are these "modern" or "archaic" forms of language? They are both slightly archaic, and yet native Hebrew and Greek speakers can understand them, even though they don't talk or write that way. And, Yes, there will be some words they are not familiar with and will have to learn as well.
I see the same pattern in the language where God has put His perfect words in today - the English text of the King James Bible. It has a slight "archaic" ring to it, but all those "thee"s and "ye"s are far more accurate to the underlying texts than is the modernized generic "you".
And this "archaic" feature shows us that God's Book reads like no other; it has been around for a long time and it speaks of eternal truths. Plus it sticks in the mind and is far easier to memorize than are today's cardboard, dumbed down and textually corrupt Bible Babble Buffet versions.
Nobody believes these bogus bible versions are the inerrant words of God and their shelf life is comparable to that of a gnat.
So I will stick to the Bible God has clearly set His mark of approval on like no other in history, Thank you very much."
Now, let's take a closer look at some of the specific words this man who wants to write his own bible version was criticizing that are used here in the King James Bible to describe the attire or dress of the daughters of Zion who "are haughty, and walk with stretched forth necks and wanton eyes, walking and mincing as they go" (Isaiah 3:16)
In verse 3:18 we read: "In that day the Lord will take away the BRAVERY of their tinkling ornaments about their feet, and their CAULS, and their ROUND TIRES LIKE THE MOON,"
In Isaiah 3:22 are mentioned "The changeable suits of apparel, and the mantles, and the WIMPLES, and the CRISPING PINS"
and end up in 3:24 with: "And it shall come to pass, that instead of sweet smell there shall be stink; and instead of A GIRDLE A RENT; and instead of well set hair baldness; and instead of A STOMACHER a girding of sackcloth, and burning instead of beauty."
The word "wimples" is found only one time in the King James Bible, and the specific underlying Hebrew word is only used twice in the entire Old Testament. The other time it is used it is translated as "the vail" in Ruth 3:15 - "Bring the VAIL that thou hast upon thee, and hold it."
The word itself is not even considered "archaic". It admittedly is an unfamiliar English word to most, but it IS a legitimate English word and it is accurate to the text here in Isaiah chapter four.
I actually saw this word in print while reading the book "Follow the River", by James Alexander, written in 1981 and made into a TV movie in 1995.
I also found the word used in a novel I was recently reading called Jerusalem Interlude by Bodie Thoene, published by Bethany House Publishers 1990. On page 383 it says: "She stepped into a public restroom and removed THE WIMPLE from her head. Then she loosened the scarf that tied back her hair and draped it loosely over her head like a veil."
The American Heritage Dictionary defines wimple as: "A cloth wound around the head, framing the face, and drawn into folds beneath the chin, worn by women in medieval times and as part of the habit of certain orders of nuns."
The Oxford Dictionary has "Wimple - A cloth headdress covering the head, the neck, and the sides of the face"
Webster's 1828 Dictionary has this entry - "Wimple, noun. A hood or vail. Isaiah 3:22 Wimple, verb transitive - To draw down, as a vail."
Merriam Webster's Dictionary College Edition - "Wimple - a cloth covering worn over the head and around the neck and chin especially by women in the late medieval period and by some nuns"
Collins English Dictionary - Wimple - A piece of cloth draped around the head to frame the face."
CRISPING PINS -
The one that was really giving our Bible critic a problem was the "crisping pins" mentioned in Isaiah 3:22.
He was telling us that the word should really be "BAGS" because this particular Hebrew word is only used 2 times in the Old Testament and in 2 Kings 5:23 it is translated as "bags" in the verse that says: "And Naaman said, Be content, take two talents. And he urged him, and bound two talents of silver in two BAGS".
The Crisping pins could either have been a heated piece of metal around which the woman's hair was curled and thus "crisped" so as to leave a curl, or it could have been a pin that was placed around a curl of hair to keep it in place.
Matthew Poole - crisping pins - EITHER USED TO CURL THE HAIR, OR RATHER FASTENED AND WORN IN THE HAIR; which custom is not altogether disused at this day.
Webster's New Twentieth Century of the English Language, Unabridged 1968 - Crisping iron - an instrument for curling hair or crimping cloth.
The Collaborative International Dictionary of English and the Online Free Dictionary by Farlex both define as - CRISPING IRON, an instrument by which hair or any textile fabric is crisped. CRISPING PIN, the simplest form of crisping iron. -- Is. iii. 22. [1913 Webster]
American Tract Society Dictionary - Crisping pins - Irons for curling the hair, Isaiah 3:22
International Standard Bible Encyclopedia - Crisping Pins kris´ping : Pins for crisping, or curling, the hair. Thus the King James Version renders Hebrew ?????? the Revised Version substitutes..."satchels". Others think of girdles; still others of veils or head-bands.
Holman Bible Dictionary - Crisping Pin - KJV translation in Isaiah 3:22. A crisping pin was used for curling the hair. Modern versions translate the word ?handbag,? or ?flounced skirt?
Many modern versions like the NKJV, NIV, NASB translate this word in Isaiah 3:22 as "PURSES" instead of "crisping pins". However the ESV has "HANDBAGS", the ASV has "SATCHELS", the JPS 1917 has "GIRDLES", Darby has "WALLETS", Lamsa's translation of the Syriac has "the PURPLE GARMENTS" and the Complete Apostle's Bible 2005 as well as Brenton Translation 1851 have "SPARTAN TRANSPARENT DRESSES" which they picked up from the so called Greek Septuagint!
What our Bible correcting friend seems to ignore is the easily shown fact that one single Hebrew word often has multiple meanings, depending on the context.
For example the NASB translates the same Hebrew word barak #1288 as "to bless" some 300 times, but also as "TO CURSE" 7 times. So have the ESV and the NIV. "Bless" - Job 1:10 vs. "Curse" - Job 1:5. See also Job 1:11; 2:5; 1 Kings 21:10, 13. They also translated the same word as "to kneel", to "salute" and "thanked". All synonyms? Not hardly.
The NASB translates the same Hebrew word abbir #47 as "angels (only once), bulls, chief, mighty man, stallions, stouthearted, stubborn minded, and valient". The NIV and ESV do the same type of thing. Not quite all synonyms, are they?
The NASB has the same word yom # 3117 as "day, age, year, battle (only once), entire, forever, eternity, length (only once), life, lifetime (only once), long, midday (only once), holiday, now, older (only once), reigns (only once), period, time, today (only once), usual (only once), very old (only once), whenever (only once), whole, and yesterday (only once). The NIV and ESV do the same.
The Hebrew word chesed #2671 is most often translated in the NASB, NIV, ESV as "mercy, favor, righteousness (only once), lovingkindness, good (only once in NASB), deeds of devotion, loyalty, and unchanging love (only once in NASB), BUT this same Hebrew word is translated as "a disgrace" or "a reproach" in Proverbs 14:34 "Sin is a REPROACH to any people", and in Leviticus 20:17 as "if she sees his nakedness, it is A DISGRACE" by the NIV and ESV as well. Completely different meanings for the same Hebrew word.
The Hebrew word #2398 ghah-dah is translated in the NASB, NIV, ESV as SIN some 180 times, yet this very same word is also translated as TO CLEANSE, or TO PURIFY some 12 times. In Psalms 51:4-7 the exact same Hebrew word is found twice, yet translated in opposite ways. In Psalm 51:4 David says: "Against thee, thee only have I SINNED, and done this evil in thy sight." But in Psalm 51:7 we read the same word as: "PURGE me with hyssop, and I shall be clean." So do the NIV and ESV.
So when some scholar tries to tell you: "Well, the Hebrew REALLY MEANS...yada, yada, yada" you should know that he frequently is just giving us his own personal opinion, and many others of equal or superiour learning do not agree with him.
WIMPLES AND CRISPING PINS
Not only does the King James Bible use the word "WIMPLES and CRISPING PINS" here in Isaiah 3:22 but so do the following Bible translations: The Bishops Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1587, The Bill Bible 1671, Webster's Translation 1833, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, The Word of Yah Bible 1993, The Revised Geneva Bible 2005, The Bond Slave Version 2012 and The Biblos Bible 2013 - "WIMPLES and CRISPING PINS"
Coverdale 1535, the Great Bible 1540 and Matthew's Bible all have "KERCHIEFS and PINS".
Also reading "CRISPING PINS" are the Douay-Rheims 1610, the 1950 Douay Version, the KJV 21st Century Version 1994, the Third Millennium Bible 1998, The Revised Douay-Rheims bible 2012, the English Jubilee Bible 2000-2010
Jewish Virtual Library The Tanakh [Full Text] 1998
"and THE WIMPLES, and the CRISPING PINS"
And this online Hebrew Interlinear Old Testament - "and THE WIMPLES AND THE CRISPING PINS"
The Ancient Hebrew Bible1907 = ?the changeable suits of apparel, and the mantles, and THE WIMPLES and THE CRISPING PINS?
The Hebrew Transliteration Scriptures 2010 - ?The changeable suits of apparel, and the mantles, and the WIMPLES AND CRISPING PINS?
Among foreign language translations the Spanish Sagradas Escrituras of 1569, Cipriano de Valera 1602, Revisada 1865, th Reina Valera 1909 and Spanish Jubilee Bible 2000 have "los velos, y los alfileres" = "vails and PINS", the French Martin 1744 has "les poinçons" which translates as "punches or awls", the Portuguese Almeida Corregida E Fiel has "as coifas, e os alginates" = "the head coverings and the PINS", and the Italian Diodati 1649 reads: "e i veli, e vli spilletti" = "the vail and the little PINS (or needles)" and the 2009 Romanian Fidela Bible has "?i ?alurile ?i ondulatoarele" = "and shawls and CURLING".
So, once again we see that other Bible translators as well have seen these "crisping pins" or "pins" as being something that was used either to make a curl in the hair or a pin to keep the hair in place as a curl.
The last word we are going to look at in this study is the word "STOMACHER" as found in Isaiah 3:24 - "instead of a STOMACHER a girding of sackcloth". The Hebrew word occurs only one time in all the Old Testament, and the word "stomacher" is found only once in the KJB.
Once again we may not be familiar with this word but it is not even Archaic.
Wordsmyth English Dictionary - "Stomacher - an elaborately ornamented garment formerly worn over the stomach and chest, esp. by women."
The American Heritage Dictionary defines Stomacher as "A heavily embroidered or jeweled garment formerly worn over the chest and stomach, especially by women."
Merriam Webster's Collegiate Dictionary defines a Stomacher as "the center front section of a waist or underwaist or a usually heavily embroidered or jeweled separate piece for the center front of a bodice worn by men and women"
Not only does the King James Bible say "a STOMACHER" but so too do Coverdale 1535, the Great Bible 1540, Matthew's Bible 1549, the Bishops' Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1587, the Douay-Rheims 1610, The Bill Bible 1671, Webster's Translation 1833, The Longman Version 1841, The Jewish Family Bible 1864, the Revised Version of 1881, Young's literal 1898, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, the JPS (Jewish Publication Society) Bible of 1917, The Word of Yah Bible 1993, God's First Truth 1999, The Revised Geneva Bible 2005, The Bond Slave Version 2012, The Revised Douay-Rheims bible 2012, the Jubilee Bible of 2010 and The Biblos Bible 2013.
The Ancient Hebrew Bible1907 = “instead of A STOMACHER a girding of sackcloth"
The Hebrew Transliteration Scriptures 2010 - “instead of A STOMACHER a girding of sackcloth"
Most modern versions change this to "fine clothes" (NASB, Holman), "a rich robe" (RSV, NRSV, ESV), "A SASH" (Third Millennium bible), "a robe" (ASV) or "purple robes" (Lamsa), but there are many other Hebrew words that translate as "robes" or "fine clothes" in these modern versions, and this particular word translated as "stomachers" in the King James Bible and several others only occurs one time in the underlying Hebrew text.
I and many others really believe the King James Bible is God's complete and inerrant Book in the English language. Sure, it has some few "archaic" or unfamiliar words, but it is a whole lot easier to understand than equally archaic "the" Hebrew and "the" Greek that none of the Bible agnostics are able to identify or agree on among themselves as the infallible words of God.
It is the Bible God has clearly set His mark of approval on like no other in history. And as I said at the beginning of this article "Archaic and Inerrant" beats "Modern but Corrupt" any day
All of grace, believing the Book - the Authorized King James Holy Bible.
Return to Articles - http://brandplucked.webs.com/kjbarticles.htm