Things to Consider Before Attempting to Correct the King James Bible
- Thread starter Andrew1
- Start date
-
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.
S
Hello dear brothers and sisters in the Lord isn't it wonderful how God sends us his word to teach us and train us how to live in obedience. Our Abba God gave us his instruction book the (Holy Bible) the written word...to show us his heart teaching all that he desires for us as Born-again Christians....and how to come to Jesus and his salvation what a wonderful God and Lord we serve...thank you Father for your truth...Holy Spirit teach us, help us Father to know your truth...i know you folks love Gods word as it brings life...it is so very good to see many of you folks hungry for Gods understanding....i praise the Lord for each of you...matthew 6:33 But seek ye 1st the kingdom of God and his righteousness and all these things will be added to you..thanks for being you & your love for God is awesome....love in Christ Sherril 
....just an old gal that loves God...
....just an old gal that loves God...-
1
- Show all
Therefore is the name of it called Babel; because the Lord did there confound the language of all the earth: and from thence did the Lord scatter them abroad upon the face of all the earth.
(Genesis 11:9)
i doubt even Hebrew is perfect -- although it is possible that it is the 'pure' language that was spoken before Genesis 11, and was preserved while all other peoples tongues were confounded. it makes more sense to me that every language was confounded, and every human tongue has deficiency now. if that is really the case, then it must be, can only be through the Spirit teaching us understanding, if ever we comprehend the Word fully.
that's not actually mathematically true. translation can be expressed as a function f: A → B, and whether any properties present in A are also found in B depends on the nature of the function, whether it preserves them or not. it may also depend on the properties of the target set B whether the pattern of interest is possible even to express in B. B has to also share whatever properties A has that the pattern is made up of / expressed in terms of.
furthermore it may be the case that the pattern can be extracted from B by an inverse function f': B → A -- but it's not necessarily the case that f is invertible; it has to be a special type of function ((called a bijection, btw))
but it is possible that a pattern remain unchanged over a map from A to B. just for example suppose we're talking about the Fibonacci sequence, {1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, . . .} and we use a function like f(x) = x + 3
then we have a new sequence { 4, 4, 5, 6, 8, 11, 16, 24 . . .}
the Fibonacci sequence is generated from a specific equation, that any number in it ((from the 3rd on forward)) is the sum of the previous two. 2 = 1+1, 3 = 2+1, 5 = 3+2, etc.
the new sequence in the translated space doesn't follow the same generating equation A(i)= A(i-1) + A(i-2)
but it does follow a similar equation B(i) = B(i-1) + B(i-2) - 3
and if you graphed the two sequences in B and in A the only difference is that the graph is shifted by 3 in the new space. that's because "x + 3" has an inverse, f'(x) = x-3. the pattern is preserved, in a sense because the pattern is about distance, and distance is preserved by the transformation. the same wouldn't be true if we used another function like g(x) = x^2 -- it would look similar in parts of the graph but it would be stretched out and distance between the points wouldn't match. g(x) isn't invertible - you can do square root for g'(x) but it isn't 1-to-1, the square root of 4 isn't 2, it's the set {2, -2} - without prior knowledge, we can't extract the original pattern before the transformation this way because we can't know whether we should go to the positive or the negative root.
these are simple examples -- but the act of translating from one language to another is far more complex, and the kind of pattern we're talking about is far more complex, too. it is possible that a complex pattern can be preserved under a complex map, and ((i think - check me on this)) it isn't even necessary that the map be invertible. what's necessary is that whatever properties present in the original set A where the real pattern is found are preserved by the map into B.
that said, i do agree that the best place to look for a possible mathematical pattern in scripture is in the original, because just with raw probability, chances are any actual pattern is not preserved through the map called "translation to another language" --- unless you're able to prove that the "Bible code" ((if there is one)) is preserved through the map h: (some form of) Hebrew → (some form of) English, then you're just spinning your wheels making numerological lists from KJV.
furthermore it may be the case that the pattern can be extracted from B by an inverse function f': B → A -- but it's not necessarily the case that f is invertible; it has to be a special type of function ((called a bijection, btw))
but it is possible that a pattern remain unchanged over a map from A to B. just for example suppose we're talking about the Fibonacci sequence, {1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, . . .} and we use a function like f(x) = x + 3
then we have a new sequence { 4, 4, 5, 6, 8, 11, 16, 24 . . .}
the Fibonacci sequence is generated from a specific equation, that any number in it ((from the 3rd on forward)) is the sum of the previous two. 2 = 1+1, 3 = 2+1, 5 = 3+2, etc.
the new sequence in the translated space doesn't follow the same generating equation A(i)= A(i-1) + A(i-2)
but it does follow a similar equation B(i) = B(i-1) + B(i-2) - 3
and if you graphed the two sequences in B and in A the only difference is that the graph is shifted by 3 in the new space. that's because "x + 3" has an inverse, f'(x) = x-3. the pattern is preserved, in a sense because the pattern is about distance, and distance is preserved by the transformation. the same wouldn't be true if we used another function like g(x) = x^2 -- it would look similar in parts of the graph but it would be stretched out and distance between the points wouldn't match. g(x) isn't invertible - you can do square root for g'(x) but it isn't 1-to-1, the square root of 4 isn't 2, it's the set {2, -2} - without prior knowledge, we can't extract the original pattern before the transformation this way because we can't know whether we should go to the positive or the negative root.
these are simple examples -- but the act of translating from one language to another is far more complex, and the kind of pattern we're talking about is far more complex, too. it is possible that a complex pattern can be preserved under a complex map, and ((i think - check me on this)) it isn't even necessary that the map be invertible. what's necessary is that whatever properties present in the original set A where the real pattern is found are preserved by the map into B.
that said, i do agree that the best place to look for a possible mathematical pattern in scripture is in the original, because just with raw probability, chances are any actual pattern is not preserved through the map called "translation to another language" --- unless you're able to prove that the "Bible code" ((if there is one)) is preserved through the map h: (some form of) Hebrew → (some form of) English, then you're just spinning your wheels making numerological lists from KJV.
E
say what?
don't know nuthin bout dat
missed that. sounds interesting
don't know nuthin bout dat
missed that. sounds interesting
Hosea 11: 12
KJV>>>>>
Ephraim compasseth me about with lies, and the house of Israel with deceit: but Judah yet ruleth with God, and is faithful with the saints.
NIV>>>>
Ephraim surrounds Me with lies. And the house of Israel with deceit; Judah is also unruly against God,
Even against the Holy One who is faithful.
NASB>>>>
Ephraim surrounds Me with liesAnd the house of Israel with deceit; Judah is also unruly against God,
Even against the Holy One who is faithful.
This is a little wordy, but an interesting take on variant translations of Hosea 11:12;
Hosea Translation Difficulties
There are a lot of textual issues that must be dealt with when translating the book of Hosea.1
Meaning of רוּד (Rūd)
The primary difference in the translation of this passage centers around the meaning of the verb רוּד (rūd), which occurs in this verse as a qal masculine singular absolute participle. According to the HALOT Hebrew lexicon, the meaning of this verb in the qal is "to roam about freely":
Is Judah faithful to the Holy One or against Him?
The preposition עִם (im) simply means "with" (in company with, together with).7 Therefore the meaning of this phrase will follow the translation of רוּד. However, some translators (e.g. the NKJV) have made "the Holy One(s)" the subject of "faithful" (נֶאֱמָֽן) rather than "Judah" which is most common (a plural of majesty is used here to refer to God. Although the KJV translated it in the plural as "saints," modern translators usually consider "Holy One" to be the best translation.8 The NKJV seems to give the preposition usage more weight than number agreement between the subject and verb). This seems to be a more "forced" reading, because the number would not agree: "faithful" (נֶאֱמָֽן) is a Nif'al (reflexive) singular participle while "Holy One(s)" (קְדֹושִׁ֖ים) is a plural substantival adjective, so I personally think that "Judah" is the most likely subject of the participle. Therefore, I believe that the best translation of this phrase is that "[Judah] is faithful to the Holy One."
Evidence from the Septuagint
The Septuagint (LXX) text only appears to loosely correspond to the MT, but I think that it provides some (minimal) support for the positive reading of רוּד. The relevant reading in most critical texts of the LXX is:
Proposed Translation
Given the evidence, I personally would side with the positive reading. Also, the immediate context seems to be contrasting Ephraim's wickedness with Judah's faithfulness. Then again, you could also argue the exact opposite since 12:2 says God has a dispute/'covenant lawsuit' against Judah, but I still think this is more of a caveat following the contrast, further supporting the positive reading. I propose the following translation for the contested reading:
1 Richard D. Patterson. "Introduction to Hosea: Literary and Theological Context" from An Exegetical Commentary: Hosea. Retrieved from http://bible.org/seriespage/introduction-hosea-literary-and-theological-context.
2 Biblical Studies Press, The NET Bible First Edition Notes (Biblical Studies Press, 2006), Hosea 1:1.
3 Douglas Stuart. Word Biblical Commentary Vol. 31, Hosea-Jonah. (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, 1987), 13.
4 Patterson, "Unity" section.
5 Ludwig Koehler, Walter Baumgartner, M. E. J. Richardson and Johann Jakob Stamm, The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament, electronic ed. (Leiden; New York: E.J. Brill, 1999), 1194.
6 Biblical Studies Press, Hosea 11:12.
7 Koehler, Baumgartner, Richardson, and Stamm, 839-40.
8 Most modern translations consistently translate קְדֹושִׁ֖ים as "Holy One," to include the NIV, NLT, ESV, NASB, NET, ASV, and WEB. Translations that render it in the plural include the KJV, HCSB, ISV, Douay-Rheims, Darby, and Webster's (mostly older translations).
9 Septuaginta: With Morphology, electronic ed. (Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1979), Hosea 12:1.
Hosea Translation Difficulties
There are a lot of textual issues that must be dealt with when translating the book of Hosea.1
The textual problems in Hosea are virtually unparalleled in the OT. The Masoretic Text (MT), represented by the Leningrad Codex (c. A.D. 1008), which served as the basis for both BHK and BHS, and the Aleppo Codex (c. A.D. 952), are textually corrupt by all accounts and have a multitude of scribal errors. Many medieval Masoretic MSS preserve textual variants that differ from the Leningrad and Aleppo Codices. The Qumran materials (4QXIIc,d,g) contain numerous textual variants that differ from the MT; unfortunately, these texts are quite fragmentary (frequently in the very place that an important textual problem appears). The textual tradition and translation quality of the LXX and the early Greek recensions (Aquila, Symmachus, Theodotion) is mixed; in some places they are inferior to the MT but in other places they preserve a better reading. The textual apparatus of BHK and BHS contains many proposed emendations based on the ancient versions (Greek, Syriac, Latin, Aramaic) that often appear to be superior readings than what is preserved in the MT. In numerous cases, the MT readings are so difficult morphologically, syntactically, and contextually that conservative conjectural emendations are necessary to make sense of the text. Most major English versions (e.g., KJV, ASV, RSV, NEB, NAB, NASB, NIV, TEV, NKJV, NJPS, NJB, NRSV, REB, NCV, CEV, NLT) adopt (either occasionally or frequently) textual variants reflected in the versions and occasionally adopt conservative conjectural emendations proposed in BHK and/or BHS. However, many of the textual problems in Hosea are so difficult that the English versions frequently are split among themselves. With this in mind, the present translation of Hosea must necessarily be viewed as only preliminary. Further work on the text and translation of Hosea is needed, not only in terms of the NET BIBLE but in Hosea studies in general. The text of Hosea should be better clarified when the Hebrew Old Testament Text Project completes work on the book of Hosea. For further study of textual problems in Hosea, see D. Barthélemy, ed., Preliminary and Interim Report on the Hebrew Old Testament Text Project, 5:228–71.2
Stuart points out:Frequently the Masoretic consonantal text proves largely correct and must simply be revocalized on the evidence of the Septuagint with regard for the Mosaic covenant vocabulary.3
Not only that, but the verse in question may in fact be an interpolation.4 With this all being said, it is difficult to determine the proper interpretation of this verse, as the best reading may be that this verse is an interpolation and must thus be regarded as a later addition to the book of Hosea.Meaning of רוּד (Rūd)
The primary difference in the translation of this passage centers around the meaning of the verb רוּד (rūd), which occurs in this verse as a qal masculine singular absolute participle. According to the HALOT Hebrew lexicon, the meaning of this verb in the qal is "to roam about freely":
רוד: Akk. râdu(m) (AHw. 941) to quake; Eth. rōda (Dillmann Lex. 307) to attack; Arb. rāda (rwd) to go back and forth, roam, search: for the meaning of the verb, see Gesenius-B. and esp. Zorell Lex.; see also König.
qal: pf. רָד, רַדְנוּ: to roam about freely Jr 231, see e.g. ZürBib.: we wander freely; NRSV: we are free; see further Weiser ATD 20:20; TOB :: cj. with Aquila, Vulg. מָרַדְנוּ (BHK; BHS; cf. REB: we have broken away); Hos 121 וִיהוּדָה רָד עִם־אֵל MT: but Judah still goes about with God, thus Wolff BK 14/12:266 and TOB; cf. Coote VT 21 (1971) 389-392, alt. cj., see e.g. Gesenius-B. and Rudolph KAT 13/1:220, 221; NRSV: Judah still walks with God (margin: roams, or rules); REB: Judah is still restive under God; cj. Ju 1137 for וְיָרַֽדתִּי prp. with Vulg. וְרַדְתִּי and I wander about, thus Zorell Lex., see further Gray Joshua, Judges and Ruth 338 :: HAL 415a (English edition 434b, s.v. qal 1): יָרַד with the meaning to go up. †5
Note that the literal translation of the MT for this part of Hosea 11:12 is "but Judah still goes about with God." The NET translators further discuss this verb's translation (also using HALOT as a source) by pointing out,The verb רוּד (rud, “to roam about freely”) is used in a concrete sense to refer to someone wandering restlessly and roaming back and forth (BDB 923 s.v. רוּד; Judg 11:37). Here, it is used figuratively, possibly with positive connotations, as indicated by the preposition עִם (’im, “with”), to indicate accompaniment: “but Judah still goes about with God” (HALOT 1194 s.v. רוד). Some English versions render it positively: “Judah still walks with God” (RSV, NRSV); “Judah is restive under God” (REB); “but Judah stands firm with God” (NJPS); “but Judah yet ruleth with God” (KJV, ASV). Other English versions adopt the negative connotation “to wander restlessly” and nuance עִם in an adversative sense (“against”): “Judah is still rebellious against God” (NAB), “Judah is unruly against God” (NIV), and “the people of Judah are still rebelling against me” (TEV).6
The NET translators chose to translate this passage as "But Judah still roams about with God," which supports the positive reading of רוּד. It is difficult to decide between these readings, but I think allowing for ambiguity would not work because of the next phrase:Is Judah faithful to the Holy One or against Him?
The preposition עִם (im) simply means "with" (in company with, together with).7 Therefore the meaning of this phrase will follow the translation of רוּד. However, some translators (e.g. the NKJV) have made "the Holy One(s)" the subject of "faithful" (נֶאֱמָֽן) rather than "Judah" which is most common (a plural of majesty is used here to refer to God. Although the KJV translated it in the plural as "saints," modern translators usually consider "Holy One" to be the best translation.8 The NKJV seems to give the preposition usage more weight than number agreement between the subject and verb). This seems to be a more "forced" reading, because the number would not agree: "faithful" (נֶאֱמָֽן) is a Nif'al (reflexive) singular participle while "Holy One(s)" (קְדֹושִׁ֖ים) is a plural substantival adjective, so I personally think that "Judah" is the most likely subject of the participle. Therefore, I believe that the best translation of this phrase is that "[Judah] is faithful to the Holy One."
Evidence from the Septuagint
The Septuagint (LXX) text only appears to loosely correspond to the MT, but I think that it provides some (minimal) support for the positive reading of רוּד. The relevant reading in most critical texts of the LXX is:
νῦν ἔγνω αὐτοὺς ὁ θεός, καὶ λαὸς ἅγιος κεκλήσεται θεοῦ.9
This translates as:Now God knows them, and they shall be called God’s holy people.
Them (αὐτοὺς) refers to both Israel and Judah (Ισραηλ καὶ Ιουδα) in this context. While this is not a direct correlation to the Hebrew MT, I still think it provides minor support for a positive reading of רוּד.Proposed Translation
Given the evidence, I personally would side with the positive reading. Also, the immediate context seems to be contrasting Ephraim's wickedness with Judah's faithfulness. Then again, you could also argue the exact opposite since 12:2 says God has a dispute/'covenant lawsuit' against Judah, but I still think this is more of a caveat following the contrast, further supporting the positive reading. I propose the following translation for the contested reading:
But Judah still roams about with God and is faithful to the Holy One.
Sources1 Richard D. Patterson. "Introduction to Hosea: Literary and Theological Context" from An Exegetical Commentary: Hosea. Retrieved from http://bible.org/seriespage/introduction-hosea-literary-and-theological-context.
2 Biblical Studies Press, The NET Bible First Edition Notes (Biblical Studies Press, 2006), Hosea 1:1.
3 Douglas Stuart. Word Biblical Commentary Vol. 31, Hosea-Jonah. (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, 1987), 13.
4 Patterson, "Unity" section.
5 Ludwig Koehler, Walter Baumgartner, M. E. J. Richardson and Johann Jakob Stamm, The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament, electronic ed. (Leiden; New York: E.J. Brill, 1999), 1194.
6 Biblical Studies Press, Hosea 11:12.
7 Koehler, Baumgartner, Richardson, and Stamm, 839-40.
8 Most modern translations consistently translate קְדֹושִׁ֖ים as "Holy One," to include the NIV, NLT, ESV, NASB, NET, ASV, and WEB. Translations that render it in the plural include the KJV, HCSB, ISV, Douay-Rheims, Darby, and Webster's (mostly older translations).
9 Septuaginta: With Morphology, electronic ed. (Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1979), Hosea 12:1.
E
This was my response. I had to look the word up myself.
[QUOTE="eternally-gratefull, post: 3797875, member: 82611"
I look in the OT. And I can not find a time when Judah RULED with God.
I do however, see that they also, just like israel and Ephram, were unruly, so much in fact. Babylon conquered them, Medea and persia enslaved them Greece defiled their holy place. And even when christ walked the earh, their unruliness cause rome to totally destroy them and scatter them all over the earth.
Also, the hebrew can help.
The term interpreted “rule” in the KJV or “walk” in the NKJV is this
RWD -
BDL - to rome about freely, to tear oneself loose (walk with no guide)
BDB - To wander restlessly, to roam
CHAL - Roam
here accordeing to the dictionary of biblical languages
8113 רוּד (rûḏ): v.; ≡ Str 7300; TWOT 2129—1. LN 34.40–34.41 (qal) disassociate, formally, roam, be in a state of no longer being in an association, as a figurative extension of roaming or wandering about in linear motion (Jer 2:31; Hos 12:1[EB 11:12]+), see also domain LN 15; (hif) start to roam (Ge 27:40+); 2. LN 25.223–25.250 (hif) be troubled, formally, be caused to roam, i.e., have feelings of anxiety or distress as a figurative extension of being driven or caused to flee in linear motion (Ps 55:3[EB 2]+)
[QUOTE="eternally-gratefull, post: 3797875, member: 82611"
I look in the OT. And I can not find a time when Judah RULED with God.
I do however, see that they also, just like israel and Ephram, were unruly, so much in fact. Babylon conquered them, Medea and persia enslaved them Greece defiled their holy place. And even when christ walked the earh, their unruliness cause rome to totally destroy them and scatter them all over the earth.
Also, the hebrew can help.
The term interpreted “rule” in the KJV or “walk” in the NKJV is this
RWD -
BDL - to rome about freely, to tear oneself loose (walk with no guide)
BDB - To wander restlessly, to roam
CHAL - Roam
here accordeing to the dictionary of biblical languages
8113 רוּד (rûḏ): v.; ≡ Str 7300; TWOT 2129—1. LN 34.40–34.41 (qal) disassociate, formally, roam, be in a state of no longer being in an association, as a figurative extension of roaming or wandering about in linear motion (Jer 2:31; Hos 12:1[EB 11:12]+), see also domain LN 15; (hif) start to roam (Ge 27:40+); 2. LN 25.223–25.250 (hif) be troubled, formally, be caused to roam, i.e., have feelings of anxiety or distress as a figurative extension of being driven or caused to flee in linear motion (Ps 55:3[EB 2]+)
E
Its easy to interpret to greek. A more complete language. Its also why they made a septuagint (which was not inspired) of the OT for the greeks to be able to read. In fact, Koine greek was probably well known by the NT writters. As it was a “Common” language of the empire
You fail to grasp language issues.
You fail to grasp language issues.
You're right; it's not impossible for God to translate perfectly to English. However, God didn't do the translation for the KJV; men did. Men did the collation of manuscripts to produce the prior English and printed Greek versions. Men made up the translation committee. Men made up the sub-committees that translated the same word differently in different places.
-
1
- Show all