- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Quote (2besee @ Nov. 26 2013,10:57) Quote That's fine, but I remember I've seen you do it yourself, and many others that quote so called “facts” word for word without references. Journey, I would not have done that!
I am always careful, when it comes to quoting.
To the topic, I have nothing to say. God's truth is God's truth, and his truth is not only found in scripture, but all around.
I just read here now and again.
There is more important things to worry about, Journey.
Time is ticking away.
2Besee.I agree; time is ticking away.
Those busy bodies are missing out on the flesh of Christ.
This is the whole purpose for creating confusion amongst brethren. Divide and conquer.This is their policy all along.wakeup.
I would like to quote a poster on another forum – but I will put them as 'original author unknown'.
Quote “Most men try to discern with intellect (religion) what is only discernible by spirit.
The book of Genesis tells us of a place called Babel and how God confounded the speech of man but still we (most) will try to undo that event and we try do it with (of all things) a definition of words. The Creator is the only one with the answers we must learn from Him.” Unquote.Amen.
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Nov. 26 2013,05:13) Kerwin, Could you re-post your information that showed a few verses where the KJV used the LXX instead of the MT? I can't seem to find that post.
Mike,Its from the Wikipedia entry for the King James Verson in the OT section.
Quote For their Old Testament, the translators used a text originating in the editions of the Hebrew Rabbinic Bible by Daniel Bomberg (1524/5),[122] but adjusted this to conform to the Greek LXX or Latin Vulgate in passages to which Christian tradition had attached a Christological interpretation.[123] For example, the Septuagint reading “They pierced my hands and my feet” was used in Psalm 22:16 (vs. the Masoretes' reading of the Hebrew “like lions my hands and feet”[124]). Otherwise, however, the Authorized Version is closer to the Hebrew tradition than any previous English translation – especially in making use of the rabbinic commentaries, such as Kimhi, in elucidating obscure passages in the Masoretic Text;[125] earlier versions had been more likely to adopt LXX or Vulgate readings in such places. Here is something else that might interest you.
Quote For those who favor the King James, the King James Bible, printed in 1810, called the “Potters Standard Edition”, happens to talk about the Septuagint. Here is what that King James Bible said. “The most remarkable translation of the Old Testament into Greek is called the Septuagint, which, if the opinion of some eminent writers is to be credited, was made in the reign of Ptolemy Philadelphus, about 270 years before the Christian era. At any rate, it is undoubtedly the most ancient that is now extant. The five books of Moses were translated first in the time of Ptolemy Philadelphus, King of Egypt, and others were added until the whole Old Testament was finished, and the version dates about 270 years before the birth of Christ. The transcendent value of this version may be seen from the extensive usage that it had attained in Jewish synagogues, from the fact that our blessed Lord and the apostles habitually quoted from it, and also from the fact that it helped to determine the state of the Hebrew text at the time when the version was made. Besides, it establishes, beyond all doubt, the point that our Lord and his inspired apostles recognized the duty of rendering the Word into the vulgar tongue of all people so that all men might, in their own speech, hear the wonderful things of the Lord. All the authors of the New Testament appear to have written in the Greek language. That this tongue was already familiar to them as a vehicle to express God's inspired Word is evident from their frequent use of the Greek translation, the Septuagint, in quoting the Old Testament and from the remarkable accordance of their style with the style of that ancient and precious version.”
Note: what a KJV edition says about the Setusgint
Wakeup,
Quote When I'm speaking of the jews I am not speaking of the true prophets of God and of Jesus Christ. I was hoping that was the case.
Jesus is a Jew both in flesh and spirit. He is in spirit as primarily he is in Spirit the Son of God.
Those Gentiles that believe are Jews in Spirit as they show themselves to be among the children of Abraham while those Jews who do not believe are not Jews in the Spirit for they do not do what what Abraham does.
Quote (kerwin @ Nov. 26 2013,14:33) Wakeup, Quote When I'm speaking of the jews I am not speaking of the true prophets of God and of Jesus Christ. I was hoping that was the case.
Jesus is a Jew both in flesh and spirit. He is in spirit as primarily he is in Spirit the Son of God.
Those Gentiles that believe are Jews in Spirit as they show themselves to be among the children of Abraham while those Jews who do not believe are not Jews in the Spirit for they do not do what what Abraham does.
Kerwin.That is true;All true christians are seen as spirital jews.
wakeup
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Nov. 26 2013,10:11) Quote (journey42 @ Nov. 25 2013,16:43) Seems like I have wasted my time anyway, because no matter what I say or quote with whose name on it, you guys are refusing to really see what's going on and prefer to listen to those that drag the KJV through the mud.
I don't think any of us started this by saying the KJV sucks – or “slinging it through the mud”.We were called into action by YOUR claims that the KJV was “perfect” – or whatever.
We are just showing you that the KJV, like all English translations, has flaws.
Hi MikeYes, Kerwin and Pierre started it. We corrected them with scripture and they attacked our KJV as being translated faulty, which I strongly disagree with.
Theres a language in the KJV, it is the language of God. It is translated how HE wanted it translated and was not privately interpreted. His signature is all over it, and his hidden meanings in his words. The KJV is simple and easy to understand, even easier than the Hebrew, Greek and modern versions. God did all that work for us when translated into English and used men he chose. But man today thinks he knows better, and keeps on translating and translating and the original word is being trampled on. It is easy to cross reference with the KJV. The style is in God's lingo, his style of speech and we can identify it. Don't forget we read other versions before the KJV ourselves and we missed vital key words to cross reference. We don't think of ourselves any higher than any one else, but know for sure that the scholars are only puppets used to carry out Satan's plan, and that is to divide and conquer, and make everyone doubt God's Word. Well that won't work on us. We know his word was preserved for all generations, and that means there's a book out there uncontaminated.
mikeboll64,Nov. wrote:[/quote]
Quote I know there is some talk about Matthew being written in Hebrew originally, and then translated into Greek. I believe Eusebius is the one who wrote that he had actually seen the original Hebrew text with his own eyes in Alexandria. But there is no remaining proof of that Hebrew text of Matthew. The only remaining ones are in the Greek language. So I'm not sure where your source got this “jot” and “tittle” thing, because the Greek words Matthew used in 5:18 were “iota” and “serif”.
Quote Chick Publications
“There are 5,309 surviving Greek manuscripts that contain all or part of the New Testament. These manuscripts agree together 95% of the time. The other 5% account for the differences between the King James and the modern versions.The modern versions had to use the Textus Receptus, since it contains the majority of the surviving Greek manuscripts. The problem is that, when the Textus Receptus disagreed with the Vaticanus or the Sinaiticus, they preferred these corrupted manuscripts over the Textus Receptus.”
So that's how they got it, from the majority texts that agreed with each other. Other than that, I can't tell you any different as to why Jot, and tittle were not written in Greek. Maybe the Greeks used those words also in the day? Just like we use Greek and latin words as part of our english vocabulary today and not to mention the english language contains 30% french words for eg.
faux
fiance
couture
liaison
lieu
sabotage
Cafe
Directions
Dilema
cul de sacSo do we need english translations for these when we use it already? Could be the same principle back then and that is only my guess.
Quote But none of that really matters anyway, because no one is claiming that the HEBREW version of the scriptures didn't exist in Jesus' day, right? In fact, Jesus and the NT writers often quoted directly from the HEBREW OT – proving that they had access to it, and familiarity with it.
They quoted the Hebrew from the OT, but regarding the NT, I would say that even though Jesus and the apostles spoke Hebrew and aramaic, they also spoke Greek, and recorded the scriptures directly into Greek, as it was the main language of the day. This is only my gut feeling and I will look into it more.Quote But that “jot” and “tittle” statement does nothing in the way of disproving that the LXX existed in the time of Jesus. Nor would Jesus using the Hebrew equivalents of “jot” and “tittle” in a statement disqualify the LXX from being a legit Greek translation of the OT.
Not really, that doesn't bother me, the thing that bothers me is the story of the LXX, and how it came to be is not verified with facts, but full of contradictions and false information. This to me is a big “warning sign”.
Mike, I wouldn't know any different if I didn't look it up and you could bedazzle me with many so called facts and fancy words, but I've learn't a bit more now.Quote Unless you assume that the absence of “jots” and “tittles” in the KJV disqualifies it from being a legit English translation of the OT. Do you?
No I don't think it makes much difference. We get what he is saying.Quote So we can assume from your info that Jesus used the HEBREW version of the OT. But nobody has claimed that he didn't.
I guess, but did he read it out in Hebrew? The Jews spoke Hebrew and Greek. Also he didn't cite the scripture word for word, and both our versions prove that.Quote My next post will address the fact that he ALSO used the Greek translation of the Hebrew OT.
OkQuote (Wakeup @ Nov. 25 2013,17:55) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Nov. 26 2013,08:46) Quote (Wakeup @ Nov. 22 2013,02:47) Just some straight answers please:
1.Who created darkness/night?
Jehovah created both darkness/night.IS night “evil” for some reason? YES or NO?
Mike B.DARKNESS IN IT SELF IS NOT EVIL
Okay. Then we'll eliminate #1 from your list, since it doesn't support your claim that God created “evil”.2.Who created lucifer/the axe?
Who is “lucifer”? Never mind. Jehovah created Satan, if that's who you mean.
Was the creation of Satan as a beautiful cherub an “evil” act by God? YES or NO?
Quote (2besee @ Nov. 25 2013,18:50) I would like to quote a poster on another forum – but I will put them as 'original author unknown'. Quote “Most men try to discern with intellect (religion) what is only discernible by spirit.
The book of Genesis tells us of a place called Babel and how God confounded the speech of man but still we (most) will try to undo that event and we try do it with (of all things) a definition of words. The Creator is the only one with the answers we must learn from Him.” Unquote.Amen.
That sounds like the crap people like Trinitarians say when confronted with the fact that their claims are nonsensical.
When your asinine doctrine is getting shot down by God-given logic and scripture, just claim that the Spirit told you those things, and that it's not meant to be fully understood by men.
The Trinitarians have been saying this crap for centuries.
Your source says the Creator is the only one with the answers, and we must learn from Him. Hmmmm………… how is that done? Do you just ask God in your prayers or something, and then believe anything you hear – because you assume it must have been God who answered you? Or are we told to TEST the spirits that tell us things? Yeah, it's that last one. And what exactly do we TEST those spirits against? Well, the scriptures of course.
So the bottom line is: If what you're trying to teach me isn't actually taught in the SCRIPTURES, then don't bother trying to tell me that “the Spirit only shows this to those who are ready” or whatever – because you'll just be wasting your time and making me laugh.
God gave US the Bible to UNDERSTAND. God gave US common sense, reasoning, and logic so WE could study and understand the things in that Bible He gave US.
Quote (kerwin @ Nov. 25 2013,21:15) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Nov. 26 2013,05:13) Kerwin, Could you re-post your information that showed a few verses where the KJV used the LXX instead of the MT? I can't seem to find that post.
Mike,Its from the Wikipedia entry for the King James Verson in the OT section.
Quote For their Old Testament, the translators used a text originating in the editions of the Hebrew Rabbinic Bible by Daniel Bomberg (1524/5),[122] but adjusted this to conform to the Greek LXX or Latin Vulgate in passages to which Christian tradition had attached a Christological interpretation.[123] For example, the Septuagint reading “They pierced my hands and my feet” was used in Psalm 22:16 (vs. the Masoretes' reading of the Hebrew “like lions my hands and feet”[124]). Otherwise, however, the Authorized Version is closer to the Hebrew tradition than any previous English translation – especially in making use of the rabbinic commentaries, such as Kimhi, in elucidating obscure passages in the Masoretic Text;[125] earlier versions had been more likely to adopt LXX or Vulgate readings in such places. Here is something else that might interest you.
Quote For those who favor the King James, the King James Bible, printed in 1810, called the “Potters Standard Edition”, happens to talk about the Septuagint. Here is what that King James Bible said. “The most remarkable translation of the Old Testament into Greek is called the Septuagint, which, if the opinion of some eminent writers is to be credited, was made in the reign of Ptolemy Philadelphus, about 270 years before the Christian era. At any rate, it is undoubtedly the most ancient that is now extant. The five books of Moses were translated first in the time of Ptolemy Philadelphus, King of Egypt, and others were added until the whole Old Testament was finished, and the version dates about 270 years before the birth of Christ. The transcendent value of this version may be seen from the extensive usage that it had attained in Jewish synagogues, from the fact that our blessed Lord and the apostles habitually quoted from it, and also from the fact that it helped to determine the state of the Hebrew text at the time when the version was made. Besides, it establishes, beyond all doubt, the point that our Lord and his inspired apostles recognized the duty of rendering the Word into the vulgar tongue of all people so that all men might, in their own speech, hear the wonderful things of the Lord. All the authors of the New Testament appear to have written in the Greek language. That this tongue was already familiar to them as a vehicle to express God's inspired Word is evident from their frequent use of the Greek translation, the Septuagint, in quoting the Old Testament and from the remarkable accordance of their style with the style of that ancient and precious version.”
Note: what a KJV edition says about the Setusgint
Thank you for those, Kerwin.I do hope journey and Wakeup will not just close their eyes to that info. But let's check out that scripture they listed:
Psalms 22:16 NET ©
Yes, wild dogs surround me – a gang of evil men crowd around me; like a lion they pin my hands and feet. 2Footnote #2:
Hebrew: “like a lion, my hands and my feet.”This reading is often emended because it is grammatically awkward, but perhaps its awkwardness is by rhetorical design. Its broken syntax may be intended to convey the panic and terror felt by the psalmist. The psalmist may envision a lion pinning the hands and feet of its victim to the ground with its paws (a scene depicted in ancient Near Eastern art), or a lion biting the hands and feet.
The line has been traditionally translated, “they pierce my hands and feet,” and then taken as foreshadowing the crucifixion of Christ.
If one were to insist on an emendation of כָּאֲרִי (ka’ariy, “like a lion”) to a verb, the most likely verbal root would be כָּרָה (karah, “dig”; see the LXX). In this context this verb could refer to the gnawing and tearing of wild dogs (cf. NCV, TEV, CEV).
The ancient Greek version produced by Symmachus reads “bind” here, perhaps understanding a verbal root כרך, which is attested in later Hebrew and Aramaic and means “to encircle, entwine, embrace” (see HALOT 497-98 s.v. כרך and Jastrow 668 s.v. כָּרַךְ).
Neither one of these proposed verbs can yield a meaning “bore, pierce.”
Okay, it seems to me that the Hebrew (MT) has “lion” in that psalm. The Greek (LXX) emended that Hebrew word to “dig”. Then the KJV, going off the LXX – not the HEBREW – translated “dig” as “pierced” – aligning it with the events of Jesus' death.
The NETNote scholars say that neither “dig”, nor the other Greek emendation of “bind” would result in an English translation of “pierce”.
So………. there are the FACTS of the matter. It is up to US what to do with them.
Quote (journey42 @ Nov. 26 2013,07:21) It is easy to cross reference with the KJV. The style is in God's lingo, his style of speech and we can identify it.
Do you suppose God spoke Shakespearian English to Abraham, Samuel and Moses?journey, the KJV is just one of many English TRANSLATIONS of the Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek scriptures. It isn't “magical” or “divine” or anything like that. It was just one of the many times that regular old men got together and tried to translate one language into another one. Nothing more, nothing less.
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Nov. 27 2013,11:33) Quote (2besee @ Nov. 25 2013,18:50) I would like to quote a poster on another forum – but I will put them as 'original author unknown'. Quote “Most men try to discern with intellect (religion) what is only discernible by spirit.
The book of Genesis tells us of a place called Babel and how God confounded the speech of man but still we (most) will try to undo that event and we try do it with (of all things) a definition of words. The Creator is the only one with the answers we must learn from Him.” Unquote.Amen.
That sounds like the crap people like Trinitarians say when confronted with the fact that their claims are nonsensical.When your asinine doctrine is getting shot down by God-given logic and scripture, just claim that the Spirit told you those things, and that it's not meant to be fully understood by men.
The Trinitarians have been saying this crap for centuries.
Your source says the Creator is the only one with the answers, and we must learn from Him. Hmmmm………… how is that done? Do you just ask God in your prayers or something, and then believe anything you hear – because you assume it must have been God who answered you? Or are we told to TEST the spirits that tell us things? Yeah, it's that last one. And what exactly do we TEST those spirits against? Well, the scriptures of course.
So the bottom line is: If what you're trying to teach me isn't actually taught in the SCRIPTURES, then don't bother trying to tell me that “the Spirit only shows this to those who are ready” or whatever – because you'll just be wasting your time and making me laugh.
God gave US the Bible to UNDERSTAND. God gave US common sense, reasoning, and logic so WE could study and understand the things in that Bible He gave US.
The “crap” that that guy spoke, is better than half of the crap that can come out of your mouth Mike!
Sorry – just had to say that
Really 2B?
That's it? I painstakingly explained WHY claims like “the Spirit must show it to you” are bunk.
Why not refute my REASONS for saying what I did? Is it because you can't?
Quote (journey42 @ Nov. 26 2013,08:45) Quote My next post will address the fact that he ALSO used the Greek translation of the Hebrew OT.
Ok
It's waiting there when you're ready. Also, take a hard look at the info Kerwin posted for us today.Quote (mikeboll64 @ Nov. 27 2013,12:57) Really 2B? That's it? I painstakingly explained WHY claims like “the Spirit must show it to you” are bunk.
Why not refute my REASONS for saying what I did? Is it because you can't?
Mike,
Your choice to “painstakingly explain…..”
All of this discussion and debate will lead you to nowhere.
Revelations 2.
2 I know thy works,
and thy labor, and thy
patience, and how thou
canst not bear with them
which are evil, and hast
examined them which
say they are Apostles, and
are not, and hast found
them liars.
3 And thou wast
burdened, and hast
patience, and for my
Name’s sake hast labored,
and hast not fainted.
4 Nevertheless, I have
somewhat against thee,
because thou hast left thy
first love.
5 Remember therefore
from whence thou art
fallen, and repent and do
the first works: or else I
will come against thee
shortly, and will remove
thy candlestick out of his
place, except thou amend.Leave that with you.
mikeboll64,Nov. wrote:[/quote]
Quote I do hope journey and Wakeup will not just close their eyes to that info. But let's check out that scripture they listed: Psalms 22:16 NET ©
Yes, wild dogs surround me – a gang of evil men crowd around me; like a lion they pin my hands and feet. 2Footnote #2:
Hebrew: “like a lion, my hands and my feet.”This reading is often emended because it is grammatically awkward, but perhaps its awkwardness is by rhetorical design. Its broken syntax may be intended to convey the panic and terror felt by the psalmist. The psalmist may envision a lion pinning the hands and feet of its victim to the ground with its paws (a scene depicted in ancient Near Eastern art), or a lion biting the hands and feet.
The line has been traditionally translated, “they pierce my hands and feet,” and then taken as foreshadowing the crucifixion of Christ.
If one were to insist on an emendation of כָּאֲרִי (ka’ariy, “like a lion”) to a verb, the most likely verbal root would be כָּרָה (karah, “dig”; see the LXX). In this context this verb could refer to the gnawing and tearing of wild dogs (cf. NCV, TEV, CEV).
The ancient Greek version produced by Symmachus reads “bind” here, perhaps understanding a verbal root כרך, which is attested in later Hebrew and Aramaic and means “to encircle, entwine, embrace” (see HALOT 497-98 s.v. כרך and Jastrow 668 s.v. כָּרַךְ).
Neither one of these proposed verbs can yield a meaning “bore, pierce.”
Okay, it seems to me that the Hebrew (MT) has “lion” in that psalm.
Which Hebrew Masoretic Text?
….from the Ben Chayyim Masoretic Text?,
or from Rudolph Kittel who based it on the Ben Asher Masoretic Text?, who based it on the Lennigrad Text from Cairo?
Two completely different texts, so care must be taken when referring to the MT.Quote The Greek (LXX) emended that Hebrew word to “dig”. Then the KJV, going off the LXX – not the HEBREW – translated “dig” as “pierced” – aligning it with the events of Jesus' death.
Says who? The Rudolph Kittel mob?Quote The NETNote scholars say that neither “dig”, nor the other Greek emendation of “bind” would result in an English translation of “pierce”.
They changed everything don't forget. They set the translation of the OT into a new direction – opposite.Quote So………. there are the FACTS of the matter. It is up to US what to do with them.
That's right, it's our choice. Don't just trust everything they say. They are anti-christ. Wolves that have come in to deceive the followers.Mike,
Can you tell me who is speaking here?
Psalm 22:1 My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? why art thou so far from helping me, and from the words of my roaring. (Matt 27:46, Mark 15:34)
Psalm 22:2 O my God, I cry in the daytime, but thou hearest not; and in the night season, an am not silent
Psalm 22:3 But thou art holy. O thou that inhabitests the praises of Israel.
Psalm 22:4 Our fathers trusted in thee: they trusted, and thou didst deliver them.
Psalm 22:5 they cried unto thee, and were delivered: they trusted in thee, and were not confounded.
Psalm 22:6 But I am a worm, and no man; a reproach of men, and despised of the people. (John 7:7, 15:25)
Psalm 22:7 All they that see me laugh me to scorn: they shoot out the lip, they shake the head, saying, (Matt 9:24, 27:31)
Psalm 22:8 He trusted in the Lord that would deliver him: let him deliver him, seeing he delighted in him. (Matt 27:40, 42,43,44)
Psalm 22:9 But thou art he that took me out of the womb: thou didst make me hope when I was upon my mothers breasts. (Rev 12:5, Luke 1:80, 2:40)
Psalm 22:10 I was cast upon thee from the womb: thou art my God from my mother's belly. (John 1:1)
Psalm 22:11 Be not far from me; for trouble is near; for there is none to help. (Matt 26:38, 39, 42, 43,45)
Psalm 22:12 Many bulls have compassed me: strong bulls of Bashan have beset me round.
Psalm 22:13 They gaped upon me with their mouths, as a ravening and a roaring lion. (Mat 26:67, 27:29,30, 31, 35)
Psalm 22:14 I am poured out like water, and all my bones are out of joint: my heart is like wax; it is melted in the midst of my bowels.
Psalm 22:15 My strength is dried up like a potsherd; and my tongue cleaveth to my jaws, and thou hast brought me into the dust of death. (Mat 27:34)
Psalm 22:16 For dogs have compassed me; the assembly of the wicked have enclosed me; they pierced my hands and my feet. (Luke 24:40)
Psalm 22:17 I may tell all my bones: they look and stare upon me.
Psalm 22:18 They part my garments among them, and cast lots upon my vesture. (Matt 27:35)
Psalm 22:19 but be not thou far from me, O LORD: O my strength, haste thee to help me.
Psalm 22:20 Deliver my soul from the sword; my darling from the power of the dog.
Psalm 22:21 Save me from he lion's mouth: for thou hast heard me from the horns of the unicorns.
Psalm 22:22 I will declare thy name unto my brethren: in the midst of the congregation will I praise thee. (John 17:26, Matt 18:20)If you cannot see that these scriptures are prophesying Jesus death, and it is actually him speaking in the psalm that David wrote, …and cannot connect especially the bolded Psalms to the NT, then you have missed out on something big. These scriptures in psalms are like precious jewels to us and not to be fobbed off as a misinterpretation.
Psalms 22:16 is a dead give away who is speaking, therefore THEY decided to confuse it, and say it i
s a mistranslation.
Can't you see what's going on Mike? Jesus spoke in every verse, …it was him prophesying what they would do to him, and the prophecy would not be picked up until after the advent. The prophecy was fulfilled in the same OT the Jews used, and they refuse to acknowledge that they killed their Messiah.Quote (mikeboll64 @ Nov. 27 2013,11:07) Quote (journey42 @ Nov. 26 2013,08:45) Quote My next post will address the fact that he ALSO used the Greek translation of the Hebrew OT.
Ok
It's waiting there when you're ready. Also, take a hard look at the info Kerwin posted for us today.
Hi MikeI did look into it, and Kerwin cannot profit you in this debate but is only a hindrance.
Mike, some simple tests:
I was only raised on the RSV and the JB and I did not realize how many contradictions there were in other translations, until I saw it on forums.
So these are a few contradictions that I would look for.
And these to me are massive contradictions to other scriptures., and I checked out the Greek as well.Philippians 2.
Revised Standard Version
who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God
a thing to be grasped,Jerusalem Bible
Who, being in the form of God, did not count equality with God something to be grasped.New International Version
Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage;New Living Translation
Though he was God, he did not think of equality with God as something to cling to.English Standard Version
who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped,New American Standard Bible
who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped,King James Bible
Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:Holman Christian Standard Bible
who, existing in the form of God, did not consider equality with God as something to be used for His own advantage.International Standard Version
In God's own form existed he, and shared with God equality, deemed nothing needed grasping.NET Bible
who though he existed in the form of God did not regard equality with God as something to be grasped,Aramaic Bible in Plain English
He who, while he was in the form of God, did not esteem this as a prize, that he was the equal of God,GOD'S WORD® Translation
Although he was in the form of God and equal with God, he did not take advantage of this equality.Jubilee Bible 2000
who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God,King James 2000 Bible
Who, being in the form of God, thought it not a thing to be grasped to be equal with God:American King James Version
Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:American Standard Version
who, existing in the form of God, counted not the being on an equality with God a thing to be grasped,Douay-Rheims Bible
Who being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:Darby Bible Translation
who, subsisting in the form of God, did not esteem it an object of rapine to be on an equality with God;English Revised Version
who, being in the form of God, counted it not a prize to be on an equality with God,Webster's Bible Translation
Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:Weymouth New Testament
Although from the beginning He had the nature of God He did not reckon His equality with God a treasure to be tightly grasped.World English Bible
who, existing in the form of God, didn't consider equality with God a thing to be grasped,Young's Literal Translation
who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal to God,RSV; JB; ESV; NASV; NET; KJ2000; WEB have it correct and not in contradiction to other scriptures (harmony).
All the others have completely reworded and manipulated it.John 1:18.
Revised Standard Version
No one has ever seen God; the only Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he has made him knownJerusalem Bible
No one has ever seen God; it is the only Son, who is close to the Father's heart, who has made him known.New International Version
No one has ever seen God, but the one and only Son, who is himself God and is in closest relationship with the Father, has made him
known.New Living Translation
No one has ever seen God. But the unique One, who is himself God, is near to the Father's heart. He has revealed God to us.English Standard Version
No one has ever seen God; the only God, who is at the Father’s side, he has made him known.New American Standard Bible
No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him.King James Bible
No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.Holman Christian Standard Bible
No one has ever seen God. The One and Only Son– the One who is at the Father's side– He has revealed Him.International Standard Version
No one has ever seen God. The unique God, who is close to the Father's side, has revealed him.NET Bible
No one has ever seen God. The only one, himself God, who is in closest fellowship with the Father, has made God known.Aramaic Bible in Plain English
No man has seen God at any time; The Only Begotten God Who is in the bosom of The Father, he has declared him.”GOD'S WORD® Translation
No one has ever seen God. God's only Son, the one who is closest to the Father's heart, has made him known.Jubilee Bible 2000
No man has seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he has declared him.King James 2000 Bible
No man has seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he has declared him.American King James Version
No man has seen God at any time, the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he has declared him.American Standard Version
No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him .Douay-Rheims Bible
No man hath seen God at any time: the only begotten Son who is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.Darby Bible Translation
No one has seen God at any time; the only-begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.English Revised Version
No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.Webster's Bible Translation
No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.Weymouth New Testament
No human eye has ever seen God: the only Son, who is in the Father's bosom–He has made Him known.World English Bible
No one has seen God at any time. The one and only Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he has declared him.Young's Literal Translation
God no one hath ever seen; the only begotten Son, who is on the bosom of the Father — he did declare.Correct and not in contradiction to other scriptures – all except for the NIV; NLT; ESV; NASV; ISV; NET; Aramaic.
I'll cross any of those of the first list, narrowing it down now to:
RSV; JB; KJ2000; WEBIsaiah 45:7
Revised Standard Version
I form light and create darkness,
I make weal and create woe,
I am the LORD, who do all these things.Jerusalem Bible
I form the light and I create the darkness, I make well-being, and I create disaster, I, Yahweh, do all these things.New International Version
I form the light and create darkness, I bring prosperity and create disaster; I, the LORD, do all these things.New Living Translation
I create the light and make the darkness. I send good times and bad times. I, the LORD, am the one who does these things.English Standard Version
I form light and create darkness, I make well-being and create calamity, I am the LORD, who does all these things.New American Standard Bible
The One forming light and creating darkness, Causing well-being and creating calamity; I am the LORD who does all these.King James Bible
I form
the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.Holman Christian Standard Bible
I form light and create darkness, I make success and create disaster; I, Yahweh, do all these things.”International Standard Version
“I form light and create darkness, I make goodness and create disaster. I am the LORD, who does all these things.NET Bible
I am the one who forms light and creates darkness; the one who brings about peace and creates calamity. I am the LORD, who accomplishes all these things.GOD'S WORD® Translation
I make light and create darkness. I make blessings and create disasters. I, the LORD, do all these things.Jubilee Bible 2000
I form the light and create darkness; I make peace and create evil: I am the LORD that does all this.King James 2000 Bible
I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create calamity: I the LORD do all these things.American King James Version
I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.American Standard Version
I form the light, and create darkness; I make peace, and create evil. I am Jehovah, that doeth all these things.Douay-Rheims Bible
I form the light, and create darkness, I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord that do all these things.Darby Bible Translation
forming the light and creating darkness, making peace and creating evil: I, Jehovah, do all these things.English Revised Version
I form the light, and create darkness; I make peace, and create evil; I am the LORD, that doeth all these things.Webster's Bible Translation
I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.World English Bible
I form the light, and create darkness. I make peace, and create calamity. I am Yahweh, who does all these things.Young's Literal Translation
Forming light, and preparing darkness, Making peace, and preparing evil, I am Jehovah, doing
all these things.'KJV; AKJV; ASV; ESV; Jubilee; Douay; Darby; Websters; Youngs have it wrong.
So the list still remains as: RSV; JB; KJ2000; WEB (World English Bible) as safe!
Actually the World English Bible is an interesting one. It retains the tetragrammaton; is FREE, no copyright (the only one), and made use of the dead sea scrolls, and it passes all of the above.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_English_Bible
That is my two cents Mike. I don't want to discuss it any further, with anyone.
Toodaloo!
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
