- This topic has 63 replies, 8 voices, and was last updated 3 years, 6 months ago by
.
- Posts
I'm pretty sure Hebrew doesn't have the w sound. At least, that's what Ed and others have said 1000 times.
Quote (2besee @ July 23 2013,10:25) Ed, your link is “Bible wheel” numbers. Mine is Wikipedia, and some other. 
Why don't we have someone on here that speaks Hebrew? That would really help.David,
My Bible (the Jerusalem Bible) has the name, Yahweh, all through the Old Testament, and I love it.
Ed tried to say that the AKJV is the only true version of the Bible and (t8?) mentioned something about the “dead sea scrolls”, and Ed challenged (t8?) to find any discrepancy in the AKJV and the “dead sea scrolls” – and that is when I mentioned that the AKJV DOES have a very significant discrepancy compared to the dead sea scrolls – that being the NAME, Yahweh, which apparently IS in the dead sea scrolls, but it is NOT in the AKJV.I only have a phone to post with, so I googled some words – and the charts that I posted were somewhere on Wikipedia (wikipedia was in the image address), though I do not know where exactly, as mobiles work differently than computers for finding whichever page an image has came from.
I think I googled…”Hebrew w”, or “Hebrew waw”, and “Yahweh”.
Quote (david @ July 23 2013,12:12) I'm pretty sure Hebrew doesn't have the w sound. At least, that's what Ed and others have said 1000 times.
Hi David,“I will make thy name [יהוה] (YÄ-hä-vā) to be remembered in all generations:
therefore shall the people praise thee for ever and ever.” (Psalms 45:17)I have had many Hebrew-speaking people confirm that
God's name [יהוה] is indeed pronounced YÄ-hä-vā.God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.orgQuote (2besee @ July 23 2013,14:12) David,
My Bible (the Jerusalem Bible) has the name, Yahweh, all through the Old Testament, and I love it.
Ed tried to say that the AKJV is the only true version of the Bible and (t8?) mentioned something about the “dead sea scrolls”, and Ed challenged (t8?) to find any discrepancy in the AKJV and the “dead sea scrolls” – and that is when I mentioned that the AKJV DOES have a very significant discrepancy compared to the dead sea scrolls – that being the NAME, Yahweh, which apparently IS in the dead sea scrolls, but it is NOT in the AKJV.I only have a phone to post with, so I googled some words – and the charts that I posted were somewhere on Wikipedia (wikipedia was in the image address), though I do not know where exactly, as mobiles work differently than computers for finding whichever page an image has came from.
I think I googled…”Hebrew w”, or “Hebrew waw”, and “Yahweh”.
The Jerusalem Bible was brought to you by the Catholic Religious Organization.(Link)
The Jerusalem Bible (JB or TJB) is an English-language translation of the Bible which first was introduced to the English-speaking public in 1966 and published by Darton, Longman & Todd. As a Roman Catholic Bible, it includes the deuterocanonical books along with the sixty-six others included in Protestant Bibles. It also contains copious footnotes and introductions.
Excerpts from the Jerusalem Bible are used in the Lectionary for Mass that was approved by the Catholic Bishops' Conference of England and Wales and that is used in most of the English-speaking world.[1] Other translations have also been approved for use in the Liturgy by the English and Welsh bishops.[2]
Hopefully this will be my last post for a while because I really want to concentrate on reading the Bible.
So last thing:
Ancient Hebrew Research Center:
http://www.ancient-hebrew.org/31_psalm138.html
Bye bye for now.
Quote (2besee @ July 23 2013,18:41) Ed J,
You forgot to mention the literal approach to the translation etc
Hi 2Besee,Psalm 12:6-7 The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
1. The Greek Septuagint Bible
2. The Latin Vulgate Bible
3. The Wycliffe Bible (first English)
4. The Tyndale New Testament
5. The Great Bible
6. The Geneva Bible
7. The Bishops BibleThou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them (in the AKJV Bible) from this generation for ever.
Isaiah 28:11 For with stammering lips and another tongue(that is English) will he speak to this people.“AKJV Bible”
1Cor.14:27 (AKJV) If any man speak in an unknown tongue, let it be by two(Hebrew, Aramaic),
or at the most by three(Greek), and that by course; [and let one (“AKJV Bible”) translate].
The “AKJV Bible” we have today was no accident, it is exactly the way YHVH wanted it!God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.orgEd,
From your source: (Wikipedia) – The parts that you missed out:
In 1943 Pope Pius XII issued an encyclical letter, Divino Afflante Spiritu, which encouraged Roman Catholics to translate the Scriptures from the original Hebrew and Greek, rather than from Jerome's Latin Vulgate. As a result, a number of Dominicans and other scholars at the École Biblique in Jerusalem translated the scriptures into French. The product of these efforts was published asLa Bible de Jérusalem in 1956.
This French translation served as the impetus for an English translation in 1966, the Jerusalem Bible. For the majority of the books, the English translation was an original translation of the Hebrew and Greek; in passages with more than one interpretation, the French is generally followed. For a small number of Old Testament books, the first draft of the English translation was made directly from the French, and then the General Editor produced a revised draft by comparing this word-for-word to the original Hebrew or Aramaic. The footnotes and book introductions are almost literal translations from the French.
The translation itself uses a literal approach that has been admired for its literary qualities, perhaps in part due to its most famous contributor, J.R.R. Tolkien (his primary contribution was the translation of Jonah). The introductions, footnotes, and even the translation itself reflect a modern scholarly approach and the conclusions of scholars who use historical-critical method.Translation of the tetragrammaton : In the pursuit of compliance with modernity and evidence, the Jerusalem Bible returns to the use of the historical name Yahweh as the name of God in the Old Testament.The move has been welcomed by some; however, it has not been popular among groups who would prefer the name of God be left unpronounced, or substituted with Lord or another title.
(New Jerusalem Bible notes Wikipedia) Further, this decision is based on translating or reinstating the earliest known copy of parts of the Old Testament found at Qumran in 1947 (the Dead Sea Scrolls), dating to about the second century BCE. Coincidentally, the Qumran text often agrees with the Septuagint, from about the same period, rather than with the later Masoretic text. For example, in Deuteronomy 32:8-9, not only is “Lord” translated as Yahweh, but a phrase “sons of Israel” is corrected to “sons/children of God”on basis of the Qumran and the Septuagint texts. In fact, this change in the New Jerusalem Bible seems to make more sense of the passage than the common translations which retain the Masoretic-based “sons of Israel.” It seems other versions retain the more common Masoretic reading because the Qumran-based reading has polytheistic suggestions, in that it is implied “Yahweh” is one of the sons in a pantheon of gods headed by “Elyon” or “Alyan,” God the Most High.
Quote (Ed J @ July 23 2013,18:56) Quote (2besee @ July 23 2013,18:41) Ed J,
You forgot to mention the literal approach to the translation etc
Hi 2Besee,Psalm 12:6-7 The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
1. The Greek Septuagint Bible
2. The Latin Vulgate Bible
3. The Wycliffe Bible (first English)
4. The Tyndale New Testament
5. The Great Bible
6. The Geneva Bible
7. The Bishops BibleThou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them (in the AKJV Bible) from this generation for ever.
Isaiah 28:11 For with stammering lips and another tongue(that is English) will he speak to this people.“AKJV Bible”
1Cor.14:27 (AKJV) If any man speak in an unknown tongue, let it be by two(Hebrew, Aramaic),
or at the most by three(Greek), and that by course; [and let one (“AKJV Bible”) translate].
The “AKJV Bible” we have today was no accident, it is exactly the way YHVH wanted it!God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org
“And Samuel grew, and the LORD was with him,
and did let none of his words fall to the ground.” (1Sam 3:19)“And the LORD appeared again in Shiloh: for the LORD revealed
himself to Samuel in Shiloh by “The Word” of the LORD.” (1 Sam 3:21)Quote (Ed J @ July 23 2013,13:56) Quote (2besee @ July 23 2013,18:41) Ed J,
You forgot to mention the literal approach to the translation etc
Hi 2Besee,Psalm 12:6-7 The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
1. The Greek Septuagint Bible
2. The Latin Vulgate Bible
3. The Wycliffe Bible (first English)
4. The Tyndale New Testament
5. The Great Bible
6. The Geneva Bible
7. The Bishops BibleThou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them (in the AKJV Bible) from this generation for ever.
Isaiah 28:11 For with stammering lips and another tongue(that is English) will he speak to this people.“AKJV Bible”
1Cor.14:27 (AKJV) If any man speak in an unknown tongue, let it be by two(Hebrew, Aramaic),
or at the most by three(Greek), and that by course; [and let one (“AKJV Bible”) translate].
The “AKJV Bible” we have today was no accident, it is exactly the way YHVH wanted it!God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org
EDJI can do that with French bibles translations ,and some have kept the name of Jehovah were it appeared in the original old copies ,WHAT YOUR KJV DID NOT DO ,BUT HIDE IT ,
The Bible has been criticized for centuries but still remains the most reliable writings of of all time!
Is Our Copy of the Bible a Reliable Copy of the Original?
by Rich DeemIntroduction
Many skeptics believe that the Bible has been drastically changed over the centuries. In reality, the Bible has been translated into a number of different languages (first Latin, then English and other languages, see History of the Bible). However, the ancient manuscripts (written in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek) have been reliably copied over the centuries – with very few alterations.Old Testament
How do we know the Bible has been kept in tact for over 2,000 years of copying? Before the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, our earliest Hebrew copy of the Old Testament was the Masoretic text, dating around 800 A.D. The Dead Sea Scrolls date to the time of Jesus and were copied by the Qumran community, a Jewish sect living around the Dead Sea. We also have the Septuagint which is a Greek translation of the Old Testament dating in the second century B.C. When we compare these texts which have an 800-1000 years gap between them we are amazed that 95% of the texts are identical with only minor variations and a few discrepancies.New Testament
Cold-Case Christianity: A Homicide Detective Investigates the Claims of the GospelsThere are tens of thousands of manuscripts from the New Testament, in part or in whole, dating from the second century A.D. to the late fifteenth century, when the printing press was invented. These manuscripts have been found in Egypt, Palestine, Syria, Turkey, Greece, and Italy, making collusion unlikely. The oldest manuscript, the John Rylands manuscript, has been dated to 125 A.D. and was found in Egypt, some distance from where the New Testament was originally composed in Asia Minor. Many early Christian papyri, discovered in 1935, have been dated to 150 A.D., and include the four gospels. The Papyrus Bodmer II, discovered in 1956, has been dated to 200 A.D., and contains 14 chapters and portions of the last seven chapters of the gospel of John. The Chester Beatty biblical papyri, discovered in 1931, has been dated to 200-250 A.D. and contains the Gospels, Acts, Paul's Epistles, and Revelation. The number of manuscripts is extensive compared to other ancient historical writings, such as Caesar's “Gallic Wars” (10 Greek manuscripts, the earliest 950 years after the original), the “Annals” of Tacitus (2 manuscripts, the earliest 950 years after the original), Livy (20 manuscripts, the earliest 350 years after the original), and Plato (7 manuscripts).Manuscript Evidence for Ancient Writings
AuthorWrittenEarliest CopyTime Span# Mss.
Caesar100-44 B.C.900 A.D.1,000 yrs10
Plato427-347 B.C.900 A.D.1,200 yrs7
Thucydides460-400 B.C.900 A.D.1,300 yrs8
Tacitus100 A.D.1100 A.D.1,000 yrs20
Suetonius75-160 A.D.950 A.D.800 yrs8
Homer (Iliad)900 B.C.400 B.C.500 yrs643
New Testament40-100 A.D.125 A.D.25-50 yrs24,000The Indestructible Book DVD SetThousands of early Christian writings and lexionaries (first and second century) cite verses from the New Testament. In fact, it is nearly possible to put together the entire New Testament just from early Christian writings. For example, the Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians (dated 95 A.D.) cites verses from the Gospels, Acts, Romans, 1 Corinthians, Ephesians, Titus, Hebrews, and 1 Peter. The letters of Ignatius (dated 115 A.D.) were written to several churches in Asia Minor and cites verses from Matthew, John, Romans, 1 & 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, 1 & 2 Timothy and Titus. These letters indicate that the entire New Testament was written in the first century A.D. In addition, there is internal evidence for a first century date for the writing of the New Testament. The book of Acts ends abruptly with Paul in prison, awaiting trial (Acts 28:30-31 (1)). It is likely that Luke wrote Acts during this time, before Paul finally appeared before Nero. This would be about 62-63 A.D., meaning that Acts and Luke were written within thirty years of ministry and death of Jesus. Another internal evidence is that there is no mention of the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. Although Matthew, Mark and Luke record Jesus' prophecy that the temple and city would be destroyed within that generation (Matthew 24:1-2 (2),Mark 13:1-2 (3), Luke 21:5-9,20-24,32(4)), no New Testament book refers to this event as having happened. If they had been written after 70 A.D., it is likely that letters written after 70 A.D. would have mentioned the fulfillment of Jesus' prophecy. As stated by Nelson Glueck, former president of the Jewish Theological Seminary in the Hebrew Union College in Cincinnati, and renowned Jewish archaeologist, “In my opinion, every book of the New Testament was written between the forties and eighties of the first century A.D.”
Conclusion Top of page
With all of the massive manuscript evidence you would think there would be massive discrepancies – just the opposite is true. New Testament manuscripts agree in 99.5% (5) of the text (compared to only 95% for the Iliad). Most of the discrepancies are in spelling and word order. A few words have been changed or added. There are two passages that are disputed but no discrepancy is of any doctrinal significance (i.e., none would alter basic Christian doctrine). Most Bibles include the options as footnotes when there are discrepancies. How could there be such accuracy over a period of 1,400 years of copying? Two reasons: The scribes that did the copying had meticulous methods for checking their copies for errors. 2) The Holy Spirit made sure we would have an accurate copy of God's word so we would not be deceived. The Mormons, theological liberals as well as other cults and false religions such as Islam that claim the Bible has been tampered with are completely proven false by the extensive, historical manuscript evidence.WJ
(I have to read).
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
