Perhaps the Poorest Translated Verse, found in Romans 10

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
K

Karraster

Guest
#1
In continuing a study of Romans, I find several erroneous translations, but possibly one of the worst is found in Romans 10. Not accusing any translators of fraud or deliberate deception, just that man is capable of error and that ideology/ preconceived notions, along with threat of life or limb, could taint or sway one's opinion.

Though, to my dismay, I've found such errors in my beloved KJV as well as most modern translations I have sought, I maintain the original autographs to be the inerrant Word of the Most High Almighty, and with the help of the indwelling Spirit bestowed upon believers of Messiah, that no error is big enough to hide the truth, when a proper study of all scripture is engaged upon.

My hope is that any would join in a discussion to cast light upon a true understanding of the Word. Although I do not find it helpful to be inundated with out of context verses to push a personal agenda, no rules of engagement are imposed other than to be courteous.


At the time of this Romans letter, Paul faced several problems. As for the Jews, some maintained the view that gentiles had to become Jews first as part of their faith in Yeshua, while others denied the righteousness of God by asserting their own special place with no regard for God's worldwide intentions. Ironically, those who would ignore history, risk repeating it.
[h=3]Romans 10
[/h]Authorized (King James) Version (AKJV)


10 Brethren, my heart’s desire and prayer to God for Israel is, that they might be saved.

I believe "Brethren" in this context are both Jewish and gentile believers in Yeshua. Though focused on Israel, Paul's message is also for the gentiles in the congregation, as he will later remind the gentiles of the "obedience of faith," (see also Romans 1:1-7) with particular regard to those Jews who do not yet believe in Yeshua. Paul makes clear in Romans 11 that his "ministry to the gentiles" is on behalf of Israel's salvation.

I have yet to come to what I believe to be the worst translated verse, it is but a few verses away...
 
K

Karraster

Guest
#2
[SUP]2 [/SUP]For I bear them record that they have a zeal of God, but not according to knowledge.


Paul continues to treat his Jewish brothers with respect who do not yet believe Yeshua is the Messiah. This is important to remember throughout the rest of the letter. Not only that, Paul had Godly love, in my estimation.
 
A

Ariel82

Guest
#3
I believe Paul and Jesus advocate treating everyone with respect and love....
 
P

phil112

Guest
#5
Not sure what you have in mind...actually, that's not true-I have no clue what you have in mind, but the drama is certainly unnecessary. Whatever point you are trying to make is lost by trying to make us anticipate the verse you have in mind. Hands down, the poorest translated verse in the bible is Acts 12:4.
 
S

Spokenpassage

Guest
#6
Not sure what you have in mind...actually, that's not true-I have no clue what you have in mind, but the drama is certainly unnecessary. Whatever point you are trying to make is lost by trying to make us anticipate the verse you have in mind. Hands down, the poorest translated verse in the bible is Acts 12:4.
She's referring to Romans 10:4. Be on the alert brother.
 

p_rehbein

Senior Member
Sep 4, 2013
30,196
6,539
113
#8
Not sure what you have in mind...actually, that's not true-I have no clue what you have in mind, but the drama is certainly unnecessary. Whatever point you are trying to make is lost by trying to make us anticipate the verse you have in mind. Hands down, the poorest translated verse in the bible is Acts 12:4.



Listed below are the "poorest translated" verses in the Bible:

Beginning in Genesis 1:1..............................................................................ending with Revelation 22:21.

:)

(just saying)
 
P

phil112

Guest
#9
[/COLOR]

Listed below are the "poorest translated" verses in the Bible:

Beginning in Genesis 1:1..............................................................................ending with Revelation 22:21.

:)

(just saying)
I understand what you're saying, but there are actually a couple of errors in the bible. Easy enough to show, should someone be interested. The OP seems to have been trying for some kind of dramatic presentation that falls short of what I would believe informative posts are. The initial post would lead a person to believe that the OP discovered something previously unknown, which I believe to be impossible concerning God's word. He would not allow something to be hidden from man for 2000 years if it was something we needed to know.
 
S

Spokenpassage

Guest
#10
I understand what you're saying, but there are actually a couple of errors in the bible. Easy enough to show, should someone be interested. The OP seems to have been trying for some kind of dramatic presentation that falls short of what I would believe informative posts are. The initial post would lead a person to believe that the OP discovered something previously unknown, which I believe to be impossible concerning God's word. He would not allow something to be hidden from man for 2000 years if it was something we needed to know.
Well, there isnt any errors at all in the word of God. The OP is using messianic commentary (I suppose) for a specific verse (Romans 10:4) because so many people here talk about the law.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

BenFTW

Senior Member
Oct 7, 2012
4,834
981
113
33
#11
She's referring to Romans 10:4. Be on the alert brother.
[h=3]Romans 10:4[/h]King James Version (KJV)

4 For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth.

I could see a legalistic person being against such a verse, or people who are involved in mixture of covenants (what they call "balance"). Legalism refuted in one verse.
 

oldhermit

Senior Member
Jul 28, 2012
9,142
612
113
69
Alabama
#12
Brethren, my heart’s desire and my prayer to God for them is for their salvation

Ἀδελφοί (brethren), ἡ μὲν εὐδοκία (the true desire) τῆς ἐμῆς καρδίας (of my heart) καὶ ἡ δέησις (and the prayer) πρὸς τὸν Θεὸν (to God) ὑπὲρ αὐτῶν (on their behalf) εἰς σωτηρίαν (for salvation).

Looks right to me.
 
P

phil112

Guest
#13
Well, there isnt any errors at all in the word of God. The OP is using messianic commentary (I suppose) for a specific verse (Romans 10:4) because so many people here talk about the law.
Let's start with two, shall we? Acts 12:4....the word easter should not be there. The only time it is in the bible and it has no business being there the one time.
2 Kings 10:34.."Now the rest of the acts of Jehu, and all that he did, and all his might, are they not written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel?"
I challenge you to find the "rest of the acts of Jehu".
 

p_rehbein

Senior Member
Sep 4, 2013
30,196
6,539
113
#14
Let's start with two, shall we? Acts 12:4....the word easter should not be there. The only time it is in the bible and it has no business being there the one time.
2 Kings 10:34.."Now the rest of the acts of Jehu, and all that he did, and all his might, are they not written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel?"
I challenge you to find the "rest of the acts of Jehu".
With regards to 2nd Kings............you are assuming that we have the "complete" book of chronicles yes? Do we know that for sure? We have what we have, but could there have been additional "writings in the book of chronicles" we don't have today?

(just wondering........... :) )
 

p_rehbein

Senior Member
Sep 4, 2013
30,196
6,539
113
#15
[h=1]Acts
12[/h]
1 .) Now about that time Herod the king stretched forth his hands to vex certain of the church.
2 .) And he killed James the brother of John with the sword.
3 .) And because he saw it pleased the Jews, he proceeded further to take Peter also. (Then were the days of unleavened bread.)
4 .) And when he had apprehended him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four quaternions of soldiers to keep him; intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people.
5 .) Peter therefore was kept in prison: but prayer was made without ceasing of the church unto God for him.

OK, LET'S RUN WITH YOUR STANDARD............. :)

John 3:16) For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

John 11:35) Jesus wept.

Galatians 3:28) There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.

Philemon 1:1) Paul, a prisoner of Jesus Christ, and Timothy our brother, unto Philemon our dearly beloved, and fellowlabourer,


Just a few examples of something being in Scripture "only" one time............do we rip them out too? :)

 
P

phil112

Guest
#16
With regards to 2nd Kings............you are assuming that we have the "complete" book of chronicles yes? Do we know that for sure? We have what we have, but could there have been additional "writings in the book of chronicles" we don't have today?

(just wondering........... :) )
The scripture is directing us to inspired writing we don't have. That is an error. Would the author have mentioned it were it not inspired? Do we have any other passages in the bible that direct us to consult something other than God's word?
 

oldhermit

Senior Member
Jul 28, 2012
9,142
612
113
69
Alabama
#17
Let's start with two, shall we? Acts 12:4....the word easter should not be there. The only time it is in the bible and it has no business being there the one time.
2 Kings 10:34.."Now the rest of the acts of Jehu, and all that he did, and all his might, are they not written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel?"
I challenge you to find the "rest of the acts of Jehu".
There were many chronicles written but not all were chosen to be preserved by the Almighty. We only have four books of Chronicles in the Bible. 1 & 2 Kings and 1 & 2 Chro.
 
P

phil112

Guest
#18
Just a few examples of something being in Scripture "only" one time............do we rip them out too? :)

You're reaching now. For hundreds of years easter has been acknowledged to be an error, and indeed, everywhere else in the new testament the word pascha is translated passover. What place does mention of a pagan holiday have in the bible?
 

PennEd

Senior Member
Apr 22, 2013
12,943
8,663
113
#19
She's referring to Romans 10:4. Be on the alert brother.
Dozens of translations, from scholars through the centuries, that all say the same thing, yet this individual claims to know that they got it wrong. Good call on watching shenanigans with 10:4 the HEART of Christianity.
 

p_rehbein

Senior Member
Sep 4, 2013
30,196
6,539
113
#20
You're reaching now. For hundreds of years easter has been acknowledged to be an error, and indeed, everywhere else in the new testament the word pascha is translated passover. What place does mention of a pagan holiday have in the bible?
Oh, sorry, didn't know y'all wuz "Easter Sunday" haters............ :)

Oh, WHO exactly are you referring to that "for hundreds of years have acknowledged?" Man? Oh, ok, and we all know how "perfect" the understanding of man is............ :)

And, I'm not "reaching" whatsoever Brother, you gave the example of the Standard............to be used to discredit.......

Now, I and my church generally refer to that as Resurrection Sunday, but, then since it isn't in Scripture as such, I guess it is PAGAN also?

dunno..............I got no problem with Easter appearing in that Scripture, because I understand what the implication/meaning is intended to be...........