And what do you base this on? You have no more to go on than this definiion.
אֱלָהּʼĕlâhh, el-aw'; (Aramaic) corresponding to
H433; God:—God, god.
Do you know of bible before Wescott and Hort that had son of the gods?
I base my statements [about the Aramaic word for God, ’ělâhîn (found in Daniel 3:25),
always being a plural form] upon the Aramaic language—the language in which Daniel 2:4 – 7:28 was written. James Strong and his opinions had nothing to do with my statement.
The
first authorized (by both houses of the Convocation of the Province of Canterbury) revision of the KJV was completed in 1881 (the New Testament) and in 1885 (the Old Testament). The whole Bible, without the Apocrypha which was not completed till 1895, bore the title,
THE HOLY BIBLE CONTAINING THE OLD AND NEW TESTAMENTS TRANSLATED OUT OF THE ORIGINAL TONGUES : BEING THE VERSION SET FORTH A.D. 1611 COMPARED WITH THE MOST ANCIENT AUTHORITIES AND REVISED. This Bible accurately translates Daniel 3:25 as follows:
25. He answered and said, Lo, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the aspect of the fourth is like a son of the gods.
This Bible, known today as the
English Revised Version, is the earliest translation of the Bible that I know of that accurately translates the Aramaic word ’ělâhîn. Westcott and Hort were scholars of the New Testament, not the Old Testament, and even their views on the Greek text of the New Testament have been superseded by new and more accurate views based upon much more recent textual studies. Moreover, Westcott and Hort had nothing to do with the translation of the Old Testament in the English Revised Version.
In 1901, an American edition of the
English Revised Version was published as
The Holy Bible, Containing the Old and New Testaments, Translated out of the Original Tongues, Being the Version Set Forth A.D. 1611, Compared with the Most Ancient Authorities and Revised A.D. 1881-1885, Newly Edited by the American Revision Committee A.D. 1901, Standard Edition. New York: Thomas Nelson & Sons, 1901. This American edition, known today as the
American Standard Version, translates Daniel 3:25 as follows:
25 He answered and said, Lo, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the aspect of the fourth is like a son of the gods.
A further revision was published in 1952 as the
Revised Standard Version. The
Revised Standard Version translates Daniel 3:25 as follows:
25 He answered, “But I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they are not hurt; and the appearance of the fourth is like a son of the gods.”
Beginning in 1971, the
Revised Standard Version was published with the Second Edition of the New Testament. Yet a further revision was published in 1989 as the
New Revised Standard Version. The
New Revised Standard Version translates Daniel 3:25 as follows:
25 He replied, “But I see four men unbound, walking in the middle of the fire, and they are not hurt; and the fourth has the appearance of a god.”
However, it includes the following footnote:
“Aram
a son of the gods”
The original KJV gives us an incorrect and very misleading translation of Daniel 3:25,
25 He answered and said, Loe, I see foure men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they haue no hurt, and the forme of the fourth is like the sonne of God.
After three revisions and over 100,000 changes, today’s “KJV” still gives us an incorrect and very misleading translation of Daniel 3:25,
25 He answered and said, Lo, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God.
