Bible Babble Buffet Six
Jeremiah 3:7 and 19 God "said" or God "thought"? Different Words = Different Meaning and Different Theology.
Jeremiah 3:7 KJB - "And I SAID after she had done all these things, TURN UNTO ME. But she returned not. And her treacherous sister saw it."
ESV, NIV - "I THOUGHT after she had done all this SHE WOULD RETURN TO ME but she did not, and her unfaithful sister Judah saw it."
Jeremiah 3:19 KJB - "But I said, How shall I put thee among the children, and give thee a pleasant land, a goodly heritage of the hosts of nations? AND I SAID, THOU SHALT CALL ME, MY FATHER; AND SHALL NOT turn away from me."
ESV, NIV - "I said How I would set you among my sons, and give you a pleasant land, a heritage most beautiful of all nations. And I THOUGHT YOU WOULD CALL ME, MY FATHER, AND WOULD NOT turn away from following me."
Many new Vatican Versions like the ESV, NIV, NASB, NET, Holman and the modern Catholic Versions translate these two verses in such a way as to end up portraying a god who THOUGHT something would turn out a certain way, but he was wrong, and things didn't turn out the way he'd hoped they would.
The Open Theists love to pounce on these two verses as they stand in many modern versions, and say "See, God doesn't know how things will turn out in the future."
Some modern versions like the NASB, NET and Holman even go so far as to have a verse in Psalms 78:36 that tells us that the children of Israel DECEIVED God; not just tried to deceive Him, or thought they had deceived Him, but actually DECEIVED God!
For more on this see - "Can God be deceived?" -
Jeremiah 3:7 and 19 "I SAID" versus "I THOUGHT"
Agreeing with the King James Bible in both Jeremiah 3:7 and in 3:19 and showing God as saying something, rather than just thinking that it might turn out a certain way and being wrong about it, are the so called Greek Septuagint "AND I SAID, after she had committed all these acts of fornication, TURN AGAIN TO ME. Yet she returned not...AND I SAID, ye shall call me my Father", Wycliffe 1395 - "And Y seide, whanne sche hadde do alle these thingis, Turne thou ayen to me; and sche turnede not ayen…And Y seide, Thou schalt clepe me fadir, and thou schalt not ceesse to entre aftir me.", Coverdale 1535, the Great Bible 1540, Matthew's Bible 1549, the Bishops' Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1587 "And I sayde, when shee had done all this, Turne thou vnto me: but she returned not…", the Douay-Rheims 1610, the KJB 1611, Webster's translation 1833, Noyes Translation 1869, the Revised Version 1881, Darby 1890, Young's 1898, the ASV 1901, JPS 1917 (Jewish Publication Society) “And I said: ‘Thou shalt call Me, My father; and shalt not turn away from following Me.”, 1936 Hebrew Publishing Company Bible, Lamsa's 1936 translation of the Syria Peshitta - "And I SAID, after she had done all these things, RETURN TO ME,but she did not return...AND I SAID, YOU SHALL CALL ME, MY FATHER, and shall not turn away from me.", Bible in Basic English 1961, the New Berkeley Version in Modern English 1969, the New English Version 1970, the NKJV 1982 - “And I said, after she had done all these things, "Return to Me.' But she did not return…"And I said: "You shall call Me, "My Father," And not turn away from Me.”, Amplified Bible 1987, Third Millennium Bible 1998, the Jubilee Bible 2000 and the 2011 Orthodox Jewish Bible - "And I SAID after she had done all these things, TURN THOU UNTO ME. But she returned not…And I SAID, Thou shalt call Me, Avi; and shalt not turn back from following Me."
Different Words = Different Meaning = Different Theology.
The first major English Version to change the traditional reading into another was the liberal RSV 1952, then followed by the NRSV 1989 and now such versions as the ESV 2001-2011, NIV 1978-2011, Dan Wallace's NET Version, Holman Standard 2003, Common English bible 2011 and Names of God Bible 2011 -
“And I THOUGHT, ‘After she has done all this she will return to me’; BUT SHE DID NOT RETURN…And I THOUGHT YOU WOULD CALL ME, My Father, and would not turn from following me.” (RSV)
The Voice 2012 - “I THOUGHT, “After she’s done all this, she’ll return home to Me,” BUT IT NEVER HAPPENED. She didn’t come back….I HOPED FOR the day when you would call Me ‘My Father,’ and no longer pull away from Me and My ways.”
Jehovah Witness New World Translation 2013 - “I also THOUGHT that you would call me, ‘My Father!’ and that you would not turn away from following me. “
The NASBs are interesting in that in Jeremiah 3:7 they read: "I THOUGHT, After she has done all these things, she will return to Me, but she did not." But in Jeremiah 3:19 it has: "...And I SAID, You SHALL CALL ME, My Father, And not turn away from following me."
The Catholic Connection
The older Douay Rheims of 1610 and the Douay of 1950 both read like the KJB saying: “I SAID: RETURN TO ME, and she did not return. And her treacherous sister Juda saw…And I SAID: THOU SHALT CALL ME FATHER AND SHALT NOT CEASE TO WALK AFTER ME."
However the 1968 Jerusalem bible, Saint Joseph New American Bible 1970 and the New Jerusalem bible 1985 all read like many modern versions and say: "I THOUGHT, After doing all this she will come back to me. BUT she didn't come back...I THOUGHT, you will call me Father, and will never cease to follow me."
But, once again in 2009 the Catholic Public Domain Version (The Sacred Scriptures) has gone back to the traditional Hebrew text and says: "I said: ‘Return to me.’ But she did not return….And I said: You will call me Father, and you will not cease to walk after me."
"My son, fear thou the LORD and the king: and meddle not with them that are given to change." Proverbs 24:21
Get yourself the King James Bible and stick with it. It is God's infallible Book.
Jeremiah 4:30 - “though thou rentest thy face with painting”
Jeremiah 4:30 - “And when thou art spoiled, what wilt thou do? Though thou clothest thyself with crimson, though thou deckest thee with ornaments of gold, though THOU RENTEST THY FACE WITH PAINTING, in vain shalt thou make thyself fair; thy lovers will despise thee, they will seek thy life.”
I want to examine this phrase “retest thy face with painting” and try to explain what it means. This is a literal translation of what the Hebrew text actually says. Many modern versions have modified the text in an attempt to interpret it. But it may not mean what these non-literal, paraphrases think it means. Some Bible commentators think it means literally what both the Hebrew text and the KJB (and many other too) say it does.
Other bibles differ only in a spelling change of the word “rentest” to “rendest”. Both forms are found in the King James Bible itself, and both are valid ways to spell the word “to rend” - which means to cut, tear in two.
The Hebrew word is # 7167 kah-rag, and it is found some 62 times ini the Hebrew O.T. It is translated as either “rend” or “rent” some 57 times, as as “to tear” three times and “to cut” or “to cut out” twice.
It is most commonly used in the expression “Then THEY RENT their clothes” (Genesis 44:13) and “A time TO REND and a time to sow.” (Ecclesiastes 3:7)
It is also uses in such expressions as when Samuel speaks to king Saul, saying: “The Lord HATH RENT the kingdom of Israel from thee this day, and hath given it to a neighbour of thine, that is better than thou.” (1 Samuel 15:28).
We also see it used in Isaiah 64:1 where we read: “Oh that thou wouldest REND the heavens, that thou wouldest come down, that the mountains might flow down at thy presence.”
The ASV 1901 is one of the paraphrases. It says: “though thou ENLARGEST thine eyes with paint” and then Footnotes “Hebrew - RENDEST”. It admits that this is the literal Hebrew text, and it is.
Well known Jewish scholar and commentator Rashi notes - “Hebrew. תקרעי. An expression of TEARING, for the paint appears as widening the opening of the eye. “ This is a possibility, but there are also other ways to understand what this expression -"thou retentest thy face with painting" - means, as we shall soon see.
Many modern versions like the ESV, NKJV, NASB read something like “though you ENLARGE your eyes with paint”
Some modern versions are full blown paraphrases, like the ISV 2014 which says “AND HIGHLIGHTING YOUR EYES WITH MAKEUP” or Dan Wallace’s NET version, with: “and PUTTING ON EYE SHADOW!”
The Geneva bible, as well as the earlier English bibles like Coverdale, the Great Bible, Matthew’s bible, and the Bishop’s bible, were all an interpretation - “though thou PAINTEST thy face with colors” - and not a translation.
The King James Bible translators were well aware of this paraphrased meaning, but they deliberately chose to give us a more literal translation from the Hebrew text itself.
The word for “painting” is the same one used to describe the wicked queen Jezebel in 2 Kings 9:30 where we read: “And when Jehu was come to Jereel, Jezebel heard of it; and she PAINTED HER FACE, and tired her head (attired), and looked out at a window.”
“though THOU RENTEST THY FACE WITH PAINTING”
Bibles that agree with the King James Bible and have “though thou RENTEST (or RENDEST) thy face with painting” are The Bill Bible 1671- “though thou RETENTEST THY FACE WITH PAINTING”, the Webster Bible 1833, the Julia Smith Translation 1855, The Jewish Family Bible 1864, The Smith Bible 1876, The Revised English Bible 1877, the Darby Translation 1890, Young’s literal Translation 1898, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, The Word of Yah Bible 1993, the KJV 21st Century Version 1994, The Third Millennium Bibe 1998, The Hebrew Transliteration Scripture 2010 - “though thou rentest thy face with painting”, and The Bond Slave Version 2012.
And this online Hebrew Interlinear translation -
“though thou rentest with painting thy face”
http://studybible.info/IHOT/Jeremiah%204:30
A couple of modern versions are a bit awkward with “and YOU TEAR YOUR FACE WITH PAINT”. These are the Biblos Bible 2013 and The Scripture 4 All Translation 2010.
Some Bible Commentators Interesting Remarks on Jeremiah 4:20
Matthew Henry - “She rents her face with painting, puts the best colours she can upon her present distresses and does her utmost to palliate and extenuate her losses, sets a good face upon them. But this painting, though it beautifies the face for the present, REALLY RENDS IT; the frequent use of paint SPOILS THE SKIN, CRACKS IT, AND MAKES IT ROUGH; so the case which by false colours has been made to appear better than really it was, when truth comes to light, will look so much the worse.”
Matthew Pool’s English Annotations - “Though thou rentest thy face with painting: it is observed that they that paint much MAKE THEIR SKINS WITHERED"
Adam Clarke’s Commentary - “Though thou rentest thy face with painting - This probably refers to the custom of introducing stibium a preparation of antimony, between the eye and the lids, in order to produce a fine lustre, which occasions a distension of the eye-lid in the time of the operation. In order to heighten the effect from this some may have introduced a more than ordinary quantity, so as nearly TO REND the eye-lid itself.”
Ellicott’s Bible Commentary - “The “rending the face” is, literally, enlarging the eyes with kohl, or antimony, still used for this purpose in the east, the black powder being laid on horizontally with a small stylus, or pencil, drawn between the eyelashes.”
Whedon’s Commentary on the Bible - “This pigment was a black powder made of sulphur-antimony, and was applied by drawing a style smeared with it horizontally between the closed eyelids. This Jeremiah calls rending the face (eyes) with paint.”
Jeremiah 10:3 “cutteth a tree out of the forest…with the AX.”
Joakim A. writes: A guy online in a forum on religion published a lot of alleged mistranslations in the KJV Bible. What is your opinion on one of these that I show you?
(Jeremiah 10:3,4) For the customs of the people are vain: for one cutteth a tree out of the forest, the work of the hands of the workman, with the axe. They deck it with silver and with gold; they fasten it with nails and with hammers, that it move not.
The mistranslation here is axe. The Hebrew word ma atsad does not translate to axe. It literally translates to a tool used for carving. It's clear that the KJV authors didn't have a good understanding of ma atsad because they mistranslate it again in Isaiah 44:12 except that time it's translated as tongs.
Hi Joakim. Thanks for writing. Bible critics like this are simply puffed up buffoons. They are their own authority and not one of them will EVER show you a copy of what he honestly believes IS now or ever WAS the complete, inspired, infallible and 100% true words of God.
Just ask him to show it to you. He won’t. In his mind, he is still working on it.
Hebrew words as well as Greek words have MULTIPLE meanings, depending on the context. So too do English or Spanish words, or words found in any language.
Context often determines the meaning.
"For the customs of the people are vain: for one cutteth a tree out of the forest, the work of the hands of the workman, WITH THE AXE..
4 They deck it with silver and with gold; they fasten it with nails and with hammers, that it move not."
And what exactly is this man cutting down the tree with? Why…It’s an AXE! Who’d a thunk?
Does this bozo think he should have cut down the tree with a “tool for carving”?
Not only does the King James Bible say “cutting down the tree,,,,with THE AXE” but so too do the following Bible translations, to name but a few - Wycliffe bible 1395, Coverdale 1534, The Great Bible 1540, Matthew’s Bible 1549, the Bishops’ Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1587, Douay-Rheims 1610, Lesser O.T. 1853, Young’s 1898, the ASV 1901, Rotherham’s Emphasized bible 1902, Jewish Publication Society 1917, RSV 1952, New Life Version 1969, The NKJV 1982, NRSV 1989, God’s Word Translation 1995, Complete Jewish Bible 1998, Jubilee Bible 2010, the ESV 2011, Orthodox Jewish Bible 2011 - "for one cutteth etz out of the ya’ar (forest), the ma’aseh (handiwork) of the hands of the charash (workman, artisan), with the AXE.”, Green’s Literal 2000, The Sacred Scriptures of Yah 2001, World English Bible 2000, Context Group Version 2007, New Heart English Bible 2010, The New European Version 2010, The Hebraic Transliteration Scripture 2010, Names of God Bible 2011, International Standard Version 2014, Modern English Version 2014, Hebrew Names Version 2014, The Judaica Press Complete Tanach 2003 - "3For the statutes of the peoples are vanity, for it is but a stock that one cut from the forest, the handiwork of a carpenter with a small AXE.” and The Hebrew Roots Bible 2015 - "For the customs of the people are vanity. For one cuts a tree out of the forest with THE AXE, the work of the hands of the craftsman.”
And this online Hebrew Interlinear O.T. -
http://studybible.info/IHOT/Jeremiah%2010:3
Jeremiah 10:3
IHOT(i) (In English order)
3
כי
For
חקות
the customs
העמים
of the people
הבל
vain:
הוא
כי
for
עץ
a tree
מיער
out of the forest,
כרתו
cutteth
מעשׂה
the work
ידי
of the hands
חרשׁ
of the workman,
במעצד׃
with the axe.
So, go tell this “expert” that may he should soak his head in a pale of epsom salts for about 20 minutes to take down the swelling.
God bless.
Jeremiah 10:5 KJB - “THEY ARE UPRIGHT AS THE PALM TREE”
Modern English Version 2014 - "THEY ARE AS A SCARECROW IN A CUCUMBER FIELD"
ESV - “THEIR IDOLS ARE LIKE SCARECROWS IN A CUCUMBER FIELD.”
NIV 1978, 1984 editions - "Like A SCARECROW IN A MELON PATCH, their idols cannot speak"
NIV 2011 edition - "Like A SCARECROW IN A CUCUMBER PATCH, their idols cannot speak"
Jeremiah 10 is speaking about the idols of the heathen and tells the children of Israel not to be like them.
“2 Thus saith the Lord, Learn not the way of the heathen, and be not dismayed at the signs of heaven; for the heathen are dismayed at them.
3 For the customs of the people are vain: for one cutteth a tree out of the forest, the work of the hands of the workman, with the axe.
4 They deck it with silver and with gold; they fasten it with nails and with hammers, that it move not.
5 THEY ARE UPRIGHT AS THE PALM TREE, but speak not: they must needs be borne, because they cannot go. Be not afraid of them; for they cannot do evil, neither also is it in them to do good.”
The Hebrew word here for “PALM TREE” is # 8560 tohmer, and is only used twice in the O.T. The other instance is in Judges 4:5 where we are told about the prophetess Deborah “And she dwelt under the PALM TREE”. Even versions like the ESV, NIV, NASB etc. translate the word as “palm tree” in that place.
Strong’s Complete Concordance - # 8560 tomer, from the same root as 8558; a PALM trunk; PALM TREE.” Then if you look up # 8558 is says: “from an unused root meaning to be erect. A PALM TREE.”
The Catholic Connection
However in this place the ESV, NIV, NASB, NET, Holman, Modern English Version 2014 and the modern Catholic versions like the St. Joseph NAB 1970 and the New Jerusalem bible 1985 read - “They are like SCARECROWS IN A CUCUMBER PATCH.” - or “Scarecrows in a melon patch.”
Likewise, the Jehovah Witness New World Translation reads: "They are like A SCARECROW OF A CUCUMBER FIELD, and cannot speak."
However the previous Douay-Rheims 1610 and Douay 1950 both read “palm tree” and now the 2009 Catholic Public Domain Version has gone back to - “They have been fabricated in the likeness of A PALM TREE”
Agreeing with the King James Bible’s “they are upright as THE PALM TREE” are Wycliffe 1395, Coverdale 1535, the Great Bible 1540, Matthew’s Bible 1549 - “It standeth as styfe as the PALMTREE”, the Bishop’s Bible 1568 - “It standeth as stiffe as the Palme tree”, the Geneva Bible 1599 - “The idols stand up as the PALM TREE”, Lamsa’s translation of the Syriac Peshitta - “They are set upright as PALM TREES”, Julia Smith Translation 1855, Noyes Translation 1869, the Revised Version 1881 - “They are like a PALM TREE,” Darby 1890, Young’s 1898 - “As A PALM they are stiff”, the ASV 1901 - “They are like a PALM-TREE”, Rotherham’s Emphasized Bible 1902, The Word of Yah 1993, God's First Truth 1999, The Judaica Press Tanach 2004, the Context Group Version 2007, the Orthodox Jewish Bible 2011 - “They [the idols] are upright as the tomer (palm tree]”, the KJV 21st Century 1994, the Third Millennium Bible 1998, Green's Literal 2005, Bond Slave Version 2008, the Concordant Literal Version, the 2012 Natural Israelite Bible - “They are upright, like A PALM TREE”, the Hebraic Transliteration Scripture 2010, the Holy Scriptures VW Edition 2010, the New European Version 2010, the Online Interlinear 2010 (André de Mol), the Jubilee Bible 2010, The Orthodox Jewish Bible 2011, the Biblos Interlinear Bible 2013 - "They are UPRIGHT AS THE PALM TREE", The Work of God's Children Illustrated Bible 2011, the World English Bible 2012 and The Modern Literal Version 2017.
Foreign Language Bibles = KJB - "a PALM TREE"
Foreign language Bibles that follow the Hebrew text and also read “PALM TREE” are the Spanish Sagradas Escrituras 1569, Cipriano de Valera 1602, the Reina Valera 1909-1995 and Reina Valera Gómez 2004 - “Erguidos están como PALMERA”, the Portuguese Almeida Corrigida E Fiel 1681 and A Biblia Sagrada em Portugués - “Säo como a PALMEIRA”, the German Schlachter Bible 2000 - "sie sind gedrechselten Palmbäumen gleich", the Tagalog Ang Dating Biblia - “Sila'y gaya ng puno ng PALMA”, the Italian Diodati 1649 and La Nuova Diodati 1991 - “Son tratti diritti, a guisa di PALMA”, the Albanian bible - “Idhujt qëndrojnë drejt si një palmë”, the Lithuanian Bible - “Jie yra tiesūs kaip palmė”, the Hungarian Karoli Bible - "Olyanok, mint az egyenes pálmafa"
AND The Modern Greek Bible - Ειναι ορθια ως φοινιξ, αλλα δεν λαλουσιν· = "They are straight as THE PALM TREE (φοινιξ) , but they do not speak."
And the Hebrew Rashi Complete Tanach 2004 - “Like a PALM TREE” and the Hebrew Interlinear Old Testament - “כתמר as the palm tree, מקשׁה upright המה They”
Where does this weird change from “a palm tree” to “a scarecrow in a cucumber patch” come from? Not the so called Greek LXX (It is really messed up in this section - it omits verses 6, 7, 8 and 10, and has two verse fives, neither one of which reads like the Hebrew or these modern Vatican Versions) nor the Syriac Peshitta, which reads just like the KJB has it - “They are set up straight as PALM TREES, but they do not speak.”
The Pulpit Commentary tells us - “They are upright as the palm tree; rather, they are like a pillar (i.e. a scarecrow) in a field of cucumbers. This is the interpretation given to our passage in Ver. 70 of the apocryphal Epistle of Jeremiah (written in the Maccabean period, evidently with reference to our prophecy), and is much more striking than the rival translation, "like a palm tree”.
https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/tpc/jeremiah-10.html
So, in other words, it has nothing to do with the Hebrew text, which reads “palm tree” but with some APOCRYPHAL book that is not even in the Bible, and it is “an interpretaion” they like it because “it is much more striking” than that dull old “palm tree”. Folks, this is how modern scholarship works.
John Gill comments: “They are upright as the palm tree, Being nailed to a post, or fastened to a pillar, or set upon a pedestal, and so stand erect without bending any way; and are like a palm tree, which is noted for its uprightness.”
Jamieson, Fausset and Brown comment: -“5. upright—or, "They are of turned work, resembling a palm tree" [Maurer]. The point of comparison between the idol and the palm is in the pillar-like uprightness of the latter”
John Calvin translated it into Latin as “palm tree” - “Sicuti palma aequalis” and then comments: “They are indeed erect as the palm-trees; and thus there appears in them something remarkable: but they speak not.”
Adam Clarke Commentary - “They are upright as the palm tree - As straight and as stiff as the trees out of which they are hewn.”
Matthew Poole’s Commentary - “They are upright as the palm tree; the nature of which is to grow upright and tall, without any branchings, till it comes to the top, thereby possibly representing majesty.”
Some Other Weird Versions (so you can get a better sense of the meaning, don't ya know ;-)
The Ancient Roots Translinear bible 2008 says: "HAMMERED TO A DATE-PALM, it speaks nothing"
Interlinear Hebrew Scriptures 2012 (Mebust) - "LIKE A ROUNDED POST, THEY ARE, and they cannot speak"
The King James Bible is right, as always.
Jeremiah 17:9 KJB - The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?
Unbelievably there are some Bible agnostics who rabidly object to the King James Bible’s translation of this verse.
They tell us that instead of “desperately wicked” it should have been translated something like “the heart IS SICK” or “the heart IS FRAIL”.
We live in a day when every man thinks he is an “expert” and is free to change the Bible that has stood the test of time and is the only one believed by multiplied thousands to be the inerrant words of God.
Does this Bible critic have ANY Bible in any language he can show us that he honestly believes IS the complete and inerrant words of God? Not a chance. They are still working on piecing one together, and you can bet their particular version will differ from everybody else’s.
It’s Every Man For Himself Bible Versionism gone to seed, and it is only getting worse.
Let’s look at the verse more closely.
“The heart is… desperately wicked, who can know it?”
Individual Hebrew words often have multiple meanings. Sometimes even the opposite meanings.
See many examples of this in my article “The Hebrew Word Game the “Wannabe Scholars” Like to Play”
https://brandplucked.webs.com/hebrewwordgame.htm
The particular Hebrew word translated here in the KJB as “desperately wicked” is #605 ah-nash. It is found 9 times in the Hebrew text. In the KJB it is translated in such varied ways as “incurable” 5 times, once as “very sick”, “desperate” as in “desperate sorrow” Isaiah 17:11, “woeful” as in “the woeful day” Jeremiah 17:16 and once as “desperately wicked”.
In the context of this verse God is talking about the ways and doings of sinful man. He is not talking about a physical heart that needs some physical medicine to get physically healed. He is talking about the deceitfulness and sinfulness of the human heart.
Not only does the King James Bible say the heart is DESPERATELY WICKED, but so also do the following Bible translations - Webster’s Bible 1833, The Hebrew Publishing Company Old Testament 1936, the NKJV 1982, the KJV 21st Century 1994, Jubilee Bible 2010, The Biblos Bible 2013, and the Modern English Version 2014 - and DESPERATELY WICKED; who can understand it?
The Jewish Virtual Library Complete Tanach 1994 reads just like the KJB with - The heart is deceitful above all things, and DESPERATELY WICKED: who can know it?
https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/yirmeyahu-jeremiah-chapter-17
The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907 reads just like the KJB with - The heart is deceitful above all things AND DESPERATELY WICKED; who can know it?
https://archive.org/details/ancienthebrewlit03yyyauoft/page/130/mode/2up
This online Hebrew interlinear - “and DESPERATELY WICKED”
https://studybible.info/IHOT/Jeremiah%2017:9
The Hebrew Transliteration Scriptures 2010 reads like the KJB, with - The heart [is] deceitful above all [things], and DESPERATELY WICKED: who can know it?
https://www.messianic-torah-truth-seeker.org/Scriptures/Tenakh/YirmeYahu/YirmeYahu17.htm
The Living Bible 1971, New Living Translation 2015 -The heart is the most deceitful thing there is AND DESPERATELY WICKED. No one can really know how bad it is!
Other Translations
ASV 1901, World English Bible, New Simplified Bible, New Heart English Bible 2010, The New European Bible 2010 - it is EXCEEDINGLY CORRUPT: who can know it?
New Life Version 2003 - and is VERY SINFUL. Who can know how bad it is?
Geneva Bible 1587 -The heart is deceitfull and WICKED ABOVE ALL THINGS, who can knowe it?
Dan Wallace’s NET version 2006 - It is INCURABLY BAD. Who can understand it?
RSV 1971 - and DESPERATELY CORRUPT; who can understand it?
NRSB 1989 - IT IS PERVERSE
Orthodox Jewish Bible 2011 - INCURABLE [IN WICKEDNESS]
Amplified Bible 1987 - The heart is deceitful above all things, and it is exceedingly perverse and corrupt and severely, mortally sick!
Lexham English bible - and it is DISASTROUS
Young’s, CSB, Holman Standard, Names of God Bible - heart is deceitful…and INCURABLE - who can understand it?
ESV, NASB - and DESPERATELY SICK
NIV - and BEYOND CURE.
Common English Bible 2011 - IT’S BEYOND HELP.
New Catholic Bible 2019 - and it is also PERVERSE
Some Really Weird Versions
The so called Greek Septuagint - The heart is deep beyond all things, and IT IS THE MAN, and who can know him? (Yep, that is actually what it says).
Complete Apostle’s Bible 2005 - The heart is deep beyond all things, AND IT CONSTITUTES THE MAN, and who can know him? (Say What?)
Matthew Bible 1549, Bible in Basic English 1961 - the heart is…NOT TO BE SEARCHED OUT BY MAN man: who is able to have knowledge of it?
Great bible 1540, Bishops’ bible 1568, Lamsa’s translation of the Syriac - man hath the most deceitful and STUBBORN heart: Who can then know it?
Wycliffe, Douay-Rheims 1610 - UNSEARCHABLE, who can know it?
There is nothing at all wrong with the KJB translation. All the Bible critic who has NO inerrant Bible to show us has is his own personal opinion and preference; and obviously many others disagree with his opinion on how this verse should be translated.
False prophets steal the words of God.
Jeremiah 23 is one of the many chapters in the Holy Bible which speaks of the false prophets that continually rose up to deceive God's people. By the simple twisting of just a few words, the ESV, NIV and NASB are hiding the very sins they themselves are committing.
Jeremiah 23:26-32 - "the prophets (and Bible versions) that steal my words every one from his neighbor"
God says: "How long shall this be in the heart of the prophets that prophesy lies? yea, they are prophets of the deceit of their own heart; Which think to cause my people to forget my name by their dreams which they tell every man to his neighbour...he that hath my word, let him speak my word faithfully. What is the chaff to the wheat? saith the LORD. Therefore, behold, I am against the prophets, saith the LORD, THAT STEAL MY WORDS EVERY ONE FROM HIS NEIGHBOR, Behold, I am against the prophets, saith the LORD, that use their tongues, and say, He saith. Behold, I am against them that prophesy false dreams, saith the LORD, and do tell them, and cause my people to err by their lies, and by their lightness; yet I sent them not, nor commanded them: therefore they shall not profit this people at all, saith the LORD."
It is clear from the immediate context that these false prophets were stealing the true words of God from the Lord's people. In Jeremiah 23: 30 the King James Bible says: "Therefore, behold, I am against the prophets, saith the LORD, THAT STEAL MY WORDS EVERY ONE FROM HIS NEIGHBOUR." The word "neighbour" refers to those around them, and it is the same word translated as neighbour in verse 27 and 35. God refers to them as "my people" in verse 27 and 32.
Other bibles that agree with the KJB reading here are the Revised Version 1885, ASV 1901, NKJV 1982, the Geneva Bible 1587 - "Therefore beholde, I will come against the prophets, saieth the Lorde, THAT STEALE MY WORD EUERIE ONE FROM HIS NEIGHBOUR.", Wycliffe 1395, Coverdale 1535, the Bishops' Bible 1568, The Lesser O.T. 1835, Darby 1890, Young 1898, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, 1917 Jewish Publishing Company Bible, 1936 Hebrew-English versions, Douay-Rheims 1610, Rotherham's Emphasized bible 1902, Bible in Basic English 1961, Lamsa's 1933 translation of the Syriac, The Koster Scriptures 1998, The Third Millennium Bible 1998, The Yah Sacred Scriptures 2001, The Complete Apostle's Bible 2003, The Apostolic Polyglot Bible 2003, Green's interlinear 2005, The Mebust Bible 2007, Jubilee Bible 2010, New Heart English Bible 2010, Lexham English Bible 2012, Orthodox Jewish Bible 2011, The Biblos Bible 2013, the Hebrew Names Version 2014, and The Modern English Version 2014.
Foreign Language Bibles = KJB
the Spanish Reina Valera 1909, 1960 and the 2010 Reina Valera Gómez Bible - "Por tanto, he aquí yo contra los profetas, dice Jehová, que hurtan mis palabras cada uno de su compañero.", the French Martin bible 1744 - "C'est pourquoi voici, j'en veux aux Prophètes, dit l'Eternel, qui dérobent mes paroles, chacun de son prochain." = "Therefore behold, I am against the prophets, says the Lord, that steal my words, each of his neighbor."
and the Modern Greek Bible - "Δια τουτο, ιδου, εγω ειμαι εναντιον των προφητων, λεγει Κυριος, οιτινες κλεπτουσι τους λογους μου, εκαστος απο του πλησιον αυτου." = "who steal My words, each one from his neighbor."
Matthew Henry comments: "(Some) understand it of the word of God as it was received and entertained by some of the people; they stole it out of their hearts, as the wicked one in the parable is said to steal the good seed of the word, Matthew 13:19. By their insinuations they diminished the authority, and so weakened the efficacy, of the word of God upon the minds of those that seemed to be under convictions by it. (2.) They stand indicted for counterfeiting the broad seal. Therefore God is against them (Jeremiah 23:31), because they use their tongues at their pleasure in their discourses to the people; they say what they themselves think fit, and then father it upon God, pretend they had it from him, and say, He saith it."
John Trapp, English Puritan - “That steal my word every one from his neighbour. That filch it, either by hiding it from others, as the Popish doctors do from the common people, or by wresting it to the defence of their false doctrines… by causing the people to forget and lose the good that they had once learned of the true prophets.”
Matthew Poole’s Annotations - “That steal my words every now from his neighbour - the generality of the people, from whom they are said to steal the Lord’s word because they withheld it from them injuriously; or by their arts and flatteries brought men out of love with or fear of the words of the Lord, which had by the true prophets been delivered to them.”
Bogus Bible Versions try to hide their sins.
However, when we look at the NASB, RSV, ESV, and Holman we read "I am against the prophets, declares the LORD, WHO STEAL MY WORDS FROM EACH OTHER."
While the NIV says: "I am against the prophets who STEAL FROM ONE ANOTHER WORDS SUPPOSEDLY FROM ME."
Dan Wallace and company's NET version says: "So I, the Lord, affirm that I am opposed to those prophets who STEAL MESSAGES FROM ONE ANOTHER THAT THEY CLAIM ARE FROM ME."
The Message shows the similarity to these modern perversions, saying: “I’ve had it with the ‘prophets’ who get all their sermons secondhand from each other. Yes, I’ve had it with them. They make up stuff and then pretend it’s a real sermon."
(Actually, this is a very good description of today's many Bogus Bible Babble Buffet versions on the market that NOBODY seriously believes are the infallible words of God.)
The Catholic Connection
The older Catholic versions like the Douay-Rheims 1610 and the Douay of 1950 read like the King James Bible "the prophets who steal my words every one from his neighbor" but the newer Catholic versions like the Jerusalem bible 1968 and the 1970 St. Joseph New American Bible read like these modern versions and say: "I am against the prophets, says the LORD, who steal my words FROM EACH OTHER."
These bible versions are merely saying that the false prophets are just stealing the words from each other, and not from the people.
Others like the NET version and the Message are telling us that the false prophets are just stealing their "messages" from each other. Notice the Dan Wallace's NET version doesn't even mention that these are in fact "God's words".
The word "supposedly" as found in the NIV, is not in any Hebrew text. These versions do not even make sense. The prophets did not have God's words to begin with, so how could they possibly steal GOD'S words from each other? You cannot take from someone something he does not possess.
Maybe, that is why the NIV added the word "supposedly". Yet, in the NIV the false prophets are just stealing false words from one another, and doing no real harm to God's people nor perverting the true words of God by their lies.
These bogus bible versions have done the very thing God is condemning. They have stolen the words of God from His people by giving us words NOT from God and omitting many thousands of words that ARE from God. We would do well to ask ourselves the very question God puts to His people. "What is the chaff to the wheat?"
Jeremiah 36:26
Bible Babble buffoon, T.L.H. posts - Jer 36:26 (KJV): But the king commanded Jerahmeel the son of Hammelech...
The Hebrew says :
Jer 36:26 ויצוה המלך את־ירחמאל בן־המלך
The KJV wrecks it by saying that בן־המלך is a formal name "Hammelech", which is how it is pronounced, but not what is says. בן־המלך means "the son of the King"
It's absolutely hilarious to read it. But the KJV is not alone, the DRB is even worse than the KJV- "And the king commanded Jeremiel the son of Amelech"
Every Hebrew speaker and reader sees this and literally laughs.
My Response -
TLH, like most presuming Bible agnostics, thinks he knows far more than he really does, and once again demonstrates that he is his own authority.
You are wrong, sir, and the KJB got it right, and here is why.
Jeremiah 36:26 KJB - But the king commanded Jerahmeel THE SON OF HAMMELECH, and Seraiah the son of Azriel, and Shelemiah the son of Abdeel, to take Baruch the scribe and Jeremiah the prophet: but the Lord hid them.
NASB (NKJV, ESV, NIV, CSB, Jehovah Witness NWT, Catholic New Jerusalem) And the king commanded Jerahmeel THE KINGS SON, Seraiah the son of Azriel,…
The NKJV footnotes “Or son of Hammelech.”
Was Jerahmeel the son of a man named Hammelech or was Jerahmeel the kings son? That is the difference in meaning.
John Gill - But the king commanded Jerahmeel the son of Hammelech - it rather seems to be the proper name of a person, one of the king's servants; since it is not probable he would send his own son on such an errand; and had he, he would rather have been called his own son than the king's son; besides, Jeconiah, who succeeded him, seems to be his eldest son, and yet he now could not be more than twelve years of age; whereas this Jerahmeel must be a man grown.”
Jamieson, Fausset and Brown Commentary - Hammelech--not as Margin, "of the king." Jehoiakim at this time (the fifth year of his reign) had no grown-up son: Jeconiah, his successor, was then a boy of eleven (compare 2 Kings 23:36 , with 2 Kings 24:8 ).
Agreeing with the King James Bible that Jerahmeel was the son of Hammelech and not the kings son are the following Bible translations - the Wycliffe Bible 1395, Coverdale 1535, The Great Bible 1540, Matthew’s Bible 1549, the Bishops’ Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1587, Webster’s Bible 1833, Darby 1890, Young’s literal 1898, J.P. Green’s Literal Translation 2000, the Third Millennium Bible 1998, God’s First Truth, the Concordant Literal Version 2009, the Modern English Version 2014, and the Jubilee Bible 2020.
This online Hebrew Interlinear - Jerahmeel the son of Hammelech
https://studybible.info/IHOT/Jeremiah%2036:26
The Jewish Virtual Library Complete Tanach 1994 - But the king commanded Jerahmeel the son of Hammelech,
https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/yirmeyahu-jeremiah...
The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907 - But the king commanded Jerahmeel the son of Hammelech, and Seraiah the son of Azriel…
https://archive.org/.../ancienthebre.../page/168/mode/2up...
Foreign Language bibles
Foreign language bibles that read like the KJB are the Spanish Sagradas Escrituras 1569, the Reina Valera 1960- 1995 editions - “También mandó el rey a Jerameel hijo de Hamelec”, the Italian Diodati - “Anzi il re comandò a Ieremeel, figliuolo di Hammelec”, the Romanian Fidela Bible 2015 - Iar împăratul a poruncit lui Ierahmeel, fiul lui Hamelec., The French Martin Bible 1744 and the French Ostervald Bible 1996 - Et le roi commanda à Jérachméel, fils de Hammélec,
The King James Bible is always right. Get used to it.
Jeremiah 27:1 JEHOIAKIM or ZEDEKIAH? Has the Hebrew text been corrupted?
Jeremiah 27:1 - Is there a scribal error in the King James Bible and in the Hebrew Masoretic text?
Jeremiah 27:1 KJB - "In the beginning of the reign of JEHOIAKIM the son of Josiah king of Judah came this word unto Jeremiah from the LORD, saying...."
ESV, RSV, NIV, NASB, NET, Catholic New Jerusalem bible 1985 - "In the beginning of the reign of ZEDEKIAH the son of Josiah, king of Judah, this word came to Jeremiah from the LORD."
The King James Bible is right, as always. And here is why -
Jeremiah 30:21 and 31:3
The context speaks of God restoring His people back to fellowship with Himself. He says "For I will restore health unto thee, and I will heal thee of thy wounds, saith the LORD." verse 17. Then in verse 21 God continues with "And their nobles shall be of themselves, and their governor shall proceed from the midst of them; and I will cause him to draw near, and he shall approach unto me: FOR WHO IS THIS THAT ENGAGED HIS HEART TO APPROACH UNTO ME? saith the LORD?"
This phrase can be looked at in two ways in the KJB. "Who is this that engaged his heart" can be looked at as it is God Himself who engaged this man's heart. The context suggests this meaning, because God is He who will cause him to approach. Compare Psalms 65:4 "Blessed is the man whom thou choosest, and causest to approach unto thee".
However a second view is allowable, in that it is the man himself who has engaged his heart to approach unto the Lord, because God has caused him to draw near. The NKJV has so translated this phrase as to limit the possible meaning only to this second view. The NKJV has "For who is this who PLEDGED his heart to approach Me?"
The NIV goes further off on it's own tangent with "I will bring him near and he will come close to me, for who is he who WILL DEVOTE HIMSELF to be close to me?"
Here, the NIV has clearly limited the possible interpretations. The word is "heart" however, just as in verse 24 "performed the intents of his heart" and not "himself" as the NIV has it.
However, when we get to the NASB, we find a totally different and absurd rendering. "And their ruler shall come forth from their midst; And I will bring him near, and he shall approach Me; FOR WHO WOULD DARE TO RISK HIS LIFE to approach Me? declares the LORD."
Are you beginning to get a glimpse of just how confusing the modern bibles are? That is why this section is called Bible Babel.
Just 6 verses later, we read in the KJB Jer. 31:3 "The LORD hath appeared of old UNTO ME, saying, Yea, I have loved thee with an everlasting love; therefore with lovingkindness have I drawn thee."
Again it is God who does the drawing, so this would also support the idea that it is God who engaged his heart to approach unto Him in the previous verse. The use of "thee" as opposed to the general "you" of the NKNV, is much better and more meaningful. Thee is the singular. God loves me, He loves you, as an individual, not just as a group or mass of people. It is much more comforting to know this, and the KJB's use of the singular "thee" brings this out here and in hundreds of other verses much better than the generic "you" - But that is another subject.
The Lord hath appeared of old UNTO ME, is found in the NKJV, RV, ASV, 1917, 1936 Jewish translations, Geneva, Darby, Spanish, Youngs, Green interlinear. The NASB says: "The LORD appeared TO HIM from afar, saying..."
"Of old" would suggest a long time ago, and this is true for us who hear these words today. It is an ancient revelation, that has lasted through time and continues today, that God loves each one of His people, and has drawn us to Himself. The NASB suggests that God appeared from "afar", like He is distant. But the main thing here is that the NASB says "to him" rather than "to me".
The RSV, NRSV and the ESV read the same as the NASB, but they have a footnote that says Greek - to him; Hebrew - to me. The NASB has followed the LXX and rejected the clear Hebrew text. I know of at leaast 40 examples of where the NASB does this, and usually they do not tell you in their footnotes.
The NIV has something even different with its "The LORD appeared to US in the past, saying..."Here the NIV differs from the "afar" of the NASB, and agrees more with the KJB, but the NIV has "TO US" instead of the Hebrew "to me" or the Greek "to him", and just makes up their own text as they go along.
This all may seem minor to some, but when we begin to pile example upon example of these type of blunders, it is apparent that the NASB, NIV and NKJV are false bibles. They are not God's true words, nor His perfect revelation of Himself to us.
The word of the LORD is perfect, converting the soul. The new version promoters do not believe any bible or translation is perfect. They have no bible either in English or Greek or Hebrew. When we say, Yes, there is a perfect Bible, they say No, there isn't. We can present evidence and facts only to a certain point, but we need faith to believe God has kept His promises and His words. He has given many of us that faith to believe His perfect words are still with us today, and they are found in the King James Bible.
Jeremiah 46:20 "destruction" or "a gadfly"?
James Snapp says: “The second kind of flaw in the KJV consists of instances where the KJV’s rendering does not convey the meaning of the original text. In Jeremiah 46:20, what the KJV calls “destruction” is better rendered “a gadfly” or “a horsefly.” (The NKJV retains the KJV’s rendering.)
KJB - “Egypt is like a very fair heifer, but DESTRUCTION cometh; it cometh out of the north.”
Agreeing with the KJB's "destruction" are the Great Bible 1540, Bishops’ Bible 1568, Geneva Bible 1587 - “ DESTRUCTION commeth”, Webster’s translation 1833, Noyes Translation 1869 “but DESTRUCTION cometh”, Revised Version 1881 - “DESTRUCTION out of the north is come, it is come.”, ASV 1901 - “Egypt is a very fair heifer; but DESTRUCTION out of the north is come, it is come.”, Brenton’s Greek Septuagint - “Egypt is a fair heifer, but DESTRUCTION from the north is come upon her.”, the 1936 Hebrew Publishing Company Version “DESTRUCTION cometh from the north”, the World English Bible, the NKJV 1982, Third Millennium Bible 1998, Hebrew Names Version, The Updated Bible Version 2004, English Jubilee Bible 2010, the Complete Apostle’s Bible 2005, A Conservative Version 2005 - “Egypt is a very fair heifer, [but] DESTRUCTION out of the north has come, it has come.”, New Heart English Bible 2010 - “but DESTRUCTION out of the north has come, it has come.”, the Natural Israelite Bible 2012 -“"Egypt is a very pretty heifer, But DESTRUCTION comes, it comes from the north.” and the Complete Hebrew Tanach - “Egypt was a fair heifer; DESTRUCTION from the north is coming, yea it is coming!”
The Modern Greek Bible - “Η Αιγυπτος ειναι ως δαμαλις ωραιοτατη, πλην ο ολεθρος ερχεται· ερχεται απο βορρα.” = “Egypt is a heifer A lovely, except the DESTRUCTION ( ο ολεθρος ) cometh; coming from the north.”
Darby 1890 - Egypt is a very fair heifer; the GAD-FLY cometh, it cometh from the north. JPS 1917 - “Egypt is a very fair heifer; but the GADFLY out of the north is come, it is come.
Lesser Bible 1853 - “O fairest heifer, Egypt! THE BUTCHER from the north cometh, he cometh.”
Dan Wallace’s NET Version Egypt is like a beautiful young cow; But northern armies will attack her like SWARMS OF STINGING FLIES. (41) Then he footnotes: “The exact meaning of the word translated “stinging fly” is uncertain due to the fact that it occurs nowhere else in Hebrew literature.” So, in other words, he is just guessing; and so is James Snapp.
Common English Bible 2011 - “ but a HORSEFLY [a] from the north is coming to bite her.” Footnote - Hebrew is uncertain.
ESV - ““A beautiful heifer is Egypt, but A BITING FLY from the north has come upon her.”
NASB - ““Egypt is a pretty heifer, But a [a] HORSEFLY is coming from the north—it is coming!” Footnote - or possibly a mosquito.
RSV, NRSV - “A beautiful heifer is Egypt, but A GADFLY from the north has come upon her.”
Young’s 1898 - “A heifer very fair is Egypt, RENDING from the north doth come into her.”
Foreign language Bibles that agree with the KJB “destruction” are the Spanish Sagradas Escrituras 1569, Spanish Reina Valeras from 1909 to 2011 - “»Una becerra hermosa es Egipto, mas viene destrucción: ¡Del norte viene!, the French Martin 1744, Louis Segond and the French Ostervald 1996 - “L’Egypte est une très belle génisse; mais la destruction vient, elle vient de l'Aquilon.” - the Italian Nuova Diodati 1991 - “L'Egitto è come una giovenca bellissima, ma viene la distruzione, viene dal nord.”
“L’Egypte est une très belle génisse; mais la destruction vient, elle vient de l'Aquilon.” - the Italian Nuova Diodati 1991 - “L'Egitto è come una giovenca bellissima, ma viene la distruzione, viene dal nord.”
Bible Commentators -
As usual, Bible commentators are all over the board with multiple interpretations and opinions. What one affirms another denies. But here a few to give you some idea.
Jamieson, Faussett and Brown - “destruction—that is, a destroyer: Nebuchadnezzar. Vulgate translates, "a goader," answering to the metaphor, "one who will goad the heifer" and tame her.”
Benson Commentary - “But destruction cometh, — The Hebrew is very emphatical, קרצ מצפוז בא בא, destruction from the north, it cometh, it cometh. “
John Gill Commentary - “But destruction cometh, it cometh from the north; that is, the destruction of Egypt, which should come from Chaldea, which lay north of Egypt; and the coming of it is repeated, to denote the quickness and certainty of it: the word used signifies a cutting off, or a cutting up; in allusion to the cutting off the necks of heifers, which used to be done when slain, Deuteronomy 21:4; or to the cutting of them up, as is done by butchers: and the abstract being put for the concrete, it may be rendered, the "cutter up" (h); or cutter off; men, like butchers, shall come out of Babylon, and slay and cut up, this heifer. So the Targum,"people, that are slayers shall come out of the north against her, to spoil her ;'' that is, the Chaldean army, agreeably to the Syriac version, "an army shall come out of the north against her.''
John Calvin - “The Egyptians trust in their prosperity, even as though they were like a heifer frisking in the fields; but CALAMITY” he says,.” is coming, is coming from the north.” He repeats the same word, in order to remove every doubt: coming, then, is DISTRESS, it is coming from the north, that is, from the Babylonians, who were situated northward to Judea.”
Ezekiel 7:7 The MORNING is come unto thee, O thou that dwellest in the land: the time is come, the day of trouble is near, and not THE SOUNDING AGAIN of the mountains."
The "morning" is the dawning of the day of trouble and judgment. The phrase "and not the sounding again of the mountains" refers to an echo sounding off the mountain side. An echo would be an empty or hollow sound. This judgement would not be a mere echo, but the real thing.
Adam Clarke comments: " The morning is come unto thee. Every note of time is used in order to show the certainty of the thing. The morning that the executioner has watched for is come; the time of that morning, in which it should take place, and the day to which that time, precise hour of that morning, belongs in which judgment shall be executed. All is come. And not the sounding again of the mountains. - not the reverberation of sound, or reflected sound, or re-echoing from the mountains."
John Gill remarks: "The morning is come upon thee, O thou that dwellest in the land, That is, early ruin was come, or was coming, upon the inhabitants of Judea, which before is said to be awake, and to watch for them; and now the day being broke, the morning come, it hastened to them....and not the sounding again of the mountains; not like the echo of a man's voice between the mountains, which is only imaginary, but this is real; so Kimchi and Ben Melech interpret it."
John Calvin also translates the verse this way in Latin - "Venit mane super to, habitator terrae: venit tempus, propinquus est dies tumultus, et non clamor montium." Then he comments: "But the sentence flows best -- the morning cometh. By "the morning" he implies what he had said before, namely, the hastening of God's vengeance. As, therefore, he said the end was watching, since God was hastening to take vengeance, so also he says, the morning is come to them, and then rouses them from that drowsiness in which they had grown torpid...For this reason, then, the Prophet says, that morning is come to the Israelites, because they had promised themselves perpetual night, as if they were never to be called upon to render an account of their conduct. For the morning, he says, will immediately seize upon you; hence morning is coming upon thee, O inhabitant of the land; afterwards, the time is come: te, gneth, properly signifies all appointed or determined time...I say, of noise, and not the echo of the mountains, says he; that is, it shall not be an empty resounding, as when a sound is produced among the mountains a concussion arises, and since the sounds which are uttered there, when taken up by the neighboring mountains, return to their own place, and thus a greater resounding occurs, called echo. The Prophet therefore says, that the clamor of which he speaks should not be an echo, that is, an empty resounding, because all should seriously cry out."
Ezekiel 7:7
King James Bible - "The MORNING is come". So read the Geneva Bible - "The morning is come vnto thee, yt dwellest in the lande: the time is come, the day of trouble is neere, and not the sounding againe of the mountaines.", the Bishops' Bible 1568 - "The mornyng is come vnto thee that dwellest in the lande, the tyme is at hande, the day of trouble is harde by, and not the foundyng agayne of the mountaynes.", Young's literal - "Come hath the morning unto thee", the Spanish Sagradas Escrituras 1569 - "La mañana viene para ti, oh morador de la tierra; el tiempo viene, cercano está el día; día del alboroto, y no será eco de los montes.", Reina Valera (la mañana), Italian Diotati, 1649 - "Quel mattutino ti è sopraggiunto, o abitator del paese; il tempo è venuto, il giorno della rotta è vicino, che non sarà un’eco di monti.", Webster's 1833, the KJV 21st Century Version and the Third Millennium Bible 1998.
NKJV, NASB, NIV, RSV, ESV - "Your DOOM is come"
Rotherham's Emphasized Bible 1902 - "The CIRCLE hath come"
Bible in Basic English 1961 - "The CROWNING TIME has come on you"
Easy to Read Version 2001 - "Do you HEAR THE WHISTLE?"
Is it "the morning", the "doom", the "circle", the "crowning time" or the "whistle"?
Ezekiel 7:7 -
Ezekiel 7:7 The MORNING is come unto thee, O thou that dwellest in the land: the time is come, the day of trouble is near, and not THE SOUNDING AGAIN of the mountains."
King James Bible - "and not THE SOUNDING AGAIN of the mountains". So read Bishops' Bible, the Geneva Bible, Young's - "And not the shouting of mountains.", Webster's 1833, the Italian Diodati - "che non sarà un’eco di monti.", the Spanish Sagradas Escrituras 1569 -" y no será eco de los montes." and the Third Millennium Bible.
NKJV - "not OF REJOICING in the mountains"
NIV - "there IS PANIC, NOT JOY, upon the mountains"
NASB - "the day is near--tumult rather than joyful shouting on the mountains."
Easy to Read Version - " The NOISE OF THE ENEMY IS GETTING LOUDER AND LOUDER on the mountains."
The Message 2002 - "No dragging of feet now, no bargaining for more time."
So, it is "not the sounding again of the mountains" or "not joy" or "the noise of the enemy" or "no dragging of feet, no bargaining"?
Ezekiel 28:13 Satan and his music - deleted in many modern versions
A King James Bible believer writes: “I have never compared Ezekiel 28 to the modern versions before, but I heard the guys on Sound the Battle Cry talking about this passage. I wish I could say I was surprised.”
Ezekiel 28:13 KJB
“Thou hast been in Eden the garden of God; every precious stone was thy covering, the sardius, topaz, and the diamond, the beryl, the onyx, and the jasper, the sapphire, the emerald, and the carbuncle, and gold: the WORKMANSHIP OF THY TABRETS AND OF THY PIPES was prepared in thee in the day that thou wast created.”
He continues: “I know some dispute whether this passage is speaking about Satan or not, but to me it is clear that it is. This passage is where we get the idea that Lucifer was a musician. Now if Satan is a musician, it would be logical to think that he would use music as a means to deceive man. When we compare to the modern versions, we see that "tabrets" and "pipes" are removed.”
Ezekiel 28:13 ESV -
“You were in Eden, the garden of God; every precious stone was your covering, sardius, topaz, and diamond, beryl, onyx, and jasper, sapphire, emerald, and carbuncle; and CRAFTED IN GOLD WERE YOUR SETTINGS AND YOUR ENGRAVINGS. On the day that you were created they were prepared.”
Ezekiel 28:13 NIV -
“You were in Eden, the garden of God; every precious stone adorned you: carnelian, chrysolite and emerald, topaz, onyx and jasper, lapis lazuli, turquoise and beryl. YOUR SETTINGS AND MOUNTINGS were made of gold; on the day you were created they were prepared.”
“The ESV has “settings and engravings” and then footnotes “The meaning of the Hebrew is uncertain.” Basically agreeing with the ESV and NIV by omitting any reference to musical instruments are the RSV, NASB, NET, Holman.”
My Comments -
Well, the word for “TABRETS” is # 8596 tohph, and it is found 17 times and is always translated as either “tablets” or “timbrels”. For example - “with songs, WITH TABRET, and with harp?” (Genesis 31:27), “came to meet him with TIMBRELS” (Judges 11:34); “with a psaltery, AND A TABRET” (1 Samuel 10:5); “to meet king Saul, WITH TABRETS” (1 Samuel 18:6); “the harp, and the viol, THE TABRET” (Isaiah 5:12); “the mirth of TABRETS ceaseth” (Isaiah 24:8); “shall be with TABRETS and harps” (Isaiah 30:32).
The word for “pipes” is only found once. It is # 5345, but since it is clearly linked with “tabrets” then it must refer to something of a musical nature.
Satan or Lucifer is most definitely associated with a type of music in the King James Bible. We see a similar thing in Isaiah 14:11-13 -
11 Thy pomp is brought down to the grave, and THE NOISE OF THY VIOLS: the worm is spread under thee, and the worms cover thee.
12 How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!
13 For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north:
Yet many modern versions have changed the name of Lucifer and put “morning star” in its place, even though the word “star” is nowhere to be found in this verse, and “the morning star” is none other than the Lord Jesus Christ.
See my article on this here -
Lucifer or Morning Star?
Ezekiel 28:13 -
Agreeing with the King James Bible “ the WORKMANSHIP OF THY TABRETS AND OF THY PIPES was prepared in thee in the day that thou wast created.” are the following Bible versions - the Bishops’ bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1587 - “the woorkemanship of thy timbrels, and of thy pipes was prepared in thee in the day that thou wast created.”, The Longman Version 1841, The Boothroyd Bible 1853, the Julia Smith Translation 1855, The Lesser O.T. 1853, The Jewish Family Bible 1864, The Smith Bible 1876 - “thy DRUMS AND THY PIPES”, The Revised English Bible 1877 - “thy tabrets and thy pipes”, Darby 1890, Young’s 1898, the Revised Version 1885, the ASV 1901, Rotherham’s Emphasized bible 1902, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, The 1936 Hebrew Publishing Company Bible, The NKJV 1982, The Word of Yah Bible 1993, the KJV 21st Century Version 1994, The Third Millennium Bible 1998, World English Bible 2000 - “work of tambourines and of pipes”, The Yah Sacred Scriptures 2001, New Heart English Bible 2005, The Context Group Version 2007, Jubilee Bible 2010, The Hebraic Transliteration Scriptures 2010, The New European Version 2010 - “Gold workmanship of TAMBOURINES AND OF PIPES was yours. In the day that you were created they were prepared.”, The Natural Israelite Bible 2012 - “the workmanship of your TIMBRELS AND PIPES was prepared for you on the day you were created.”, The Bond Slave Version 2012, The Biblos Bible 2013 - “the craftsmanship of your TABRETS AND OF YOUR PIPES in you in the day that you were created was prepared.” and The Hebraic Roots Bible 2015“the workmanship of YOUR TAMBOURINES AND YOUR PIPES in you. In the day you were created, they were prepared.”
And this online Hebrew Interlinear Old Testament - “the workmanship of THY TABRETS AND OF THY PIPES”
http://studybible.info/IHOT/Ezekiel%2028:13
The NASB online edition mentions the KJB reading in its footnotes -
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Ezekiel+28%3A13&version=NASB
And the gold, the workmanship of your [a]settings and [b]sockets,
Was in you. On the day that you were created They were prepared.
Footnotes:
a Ezekiel 28:13 Or tambourines
b Ezekiel 28:13 Or flutes
The Orthodox Jewish Bible 2011 reads: “the workmanship of THY HAND DRUMS AND OF THY WIND INSTRUMENTS was prepared in thee in the day that thou wast created.”
The Judaica Press Tanach 2004 reads: “the work of your DRUMS and your orifices is in you; on the day of your creation they were established.”
Then Rashi comments: “I made in you the work of the perforated drums that let out wind with an instrument sound like a drum.”
The World English Bible 2000 - “Gold work of TAMBOURINES AND OF PIPES WAS IN YOU. In the day that you were created they were prepared.”
J.P. Green’s Literal 2005 - “The workmanship of YOUR TAMBOURINES AND OF YOUR FLUTES in you. In the day you were created, they were prepared.”
Foreign Language Bibles
Foreign Language bibles that read like the KJB and refer to these musical instruments are the Spanish Sagradas Escritureas 1569, Cipriano de Valera 1602, the Spanish Reina Valera 1960-1995 - “Los primores de tus TAMBOUILLES Y FLAUTAS fueron preparados para ti en el día de tu creación!”, The French Martin Bible 1744, French Ostervald 1996 and The French Louis Segond 2007 - “Tes TAMBOURINS ET TES FLUTES étaient à ton service, préparés pour le jour où tu as été créé.”, The Italian Diodati 1991 and the Italian Riveduta 2006 - “TAMBOUR E FLAUTI erano al tuo servizio, preparati il giorno che fosti creato.”, and the Portuguese Almeida Corrigida 2009 - “a obra dos teus TAMBORES e dos teus PIFAROS estava em ti; no dia em que foste criado, foram preparados.”, The Portuguese Almeida Atualizada 2009 - “os teus tambores e os teus pífaros”,
And The Modern Greek Bible - “η υπηρεσια των τυμπανων σου και των αυλων σου ητο ητοιμασμενη δια σε την ημεραν καθ' ην εκτισθης.”
Matthew Henry - “Another thing that made him think his palace a paradise was the curious music he had, the tabrets and pipes, hand-instruments and wind-instruments. The workmanship of these was extraordinary, and they were prepared for him on purpose”
Now who do you think would want to hide the fact that it was Lucifer who fell from heaven when he wanted to be like God and that he has his own brand of music he uses to influence those he is trying to deceive?
Ezekiel 29:7 Hebrew, Syriac or Greek? - The NKJV, NIV, NASB, ESV all depart from the Hebrew texts.
Ezekiel 29:7 "When they took hold of thee by thy hand, thou didst break, and rend all their SHOULDER; and when they leaned upon thee, thou breakest, and madest ALL THEIR LOINS TO BE AT A STAND."
"all their loins to be at a stand" is the reading of ALL Hebrew texts, and of the Revised Version 1881, the American Standard Version 1901, the Jewish Publication Society translation of 1917, the 1936 translation of the Hebrew Publishing Company, the Hebrew Names Version, Bishops' Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1599, Young's, Webster's 1833 translation, World English Bible, The Updated Bible Version 2003, and Green's MKJV 1998.
Even the Amplified Bible of 1987 got the idea right, which surprised me. It says: "When they grasped you with the hand and leaned upon you, you broke and tore their whole shoulder, and they could do no more than stand."
Some have asked me about the Third Millenium Bible, and the KJV 21. They are very similar to the KJB but not always. Here they say: "When they took hold of thee by thy hand, thou didst break and rend all their shoulder; and when they leaned upon thee, thou brokest and madest all THEIR LOINS TO BE AT A HALT."
Here is the American Standard Version of 1901: "When they took hold of thee by thy hand, thou didst break, and didst rend all their SHOULDERS; and when they leaned upon thee, thou brakest, and MADEST ALL THEIR LOINS TO BE AT A STAND." It reads exactly like the King James Bible.
The Geneva Bible of 1599 reads: "When they tooke holde of thee with their hand, thou diddest breake, & rent all their SHOULDER: & when they leaned vpon thee, thou brakest and madest ALL THEIR LOYNES TO STAND UPRIGHT."
The Updated Bible Version of 2003 reads correctly saying: "When they took hold of you by your hand, you broke, and rent all their SHOULDERS; and when they leaned on you, you broke, and MADE ALL THEIR LOINS TO BE AT A STAND."
I think John Gill is pretty close to the right idea when he comments: "and when they leaned upon thee thou brakest, and madest all their loins to be at a stand; when they put their confidence in the king of Egypt, and sent to him for help when besieged by the king of Babylon, and he failed them, they were obliged to raise up themselves, as a man is forced to do when his staff breaks under him, whose loins before were bowed, but now erects himself, and stands and walks as well as he can without it; so the Jews were forced to stand upon their own legs, and exert all the force they had, and make all the efforts they could against the king of Babylon, being left in the lurch by the king of Egypt."
Actually I think the picture more accurately is that of a man who leans for support upon another's staff, which, when it breaks, he is left standing locked into position, unable to go forward. He is stuck just standing there, fixed in place and unable to move.
Another commentator named Fairbairn remarks: - "Thou lettest all their loins stand," that is, by themselves, bereft of the support which they looked for from thee.
The New KJV 1982 both rejects the clear Hebrew text and gives false information in their footnotes, as we shall soon see. The NKJV even changes from one edition to another and BOTH of them are wrong. The NKJV online edition 1982 at Study Light (http://www.studylight.org/) says: "When they took hold of you with the hand, You broke and tore all their shoulders; (F42) When they leaned on you, You broke and made ALL THEIR BACKS QUIVER."
FOOTNOTES: F42 Following Masoretic Text and Vulgate; Septuagint and Syriac read hand.
The NKJV footnote is false on two counts. First of all, the word for "hand" in place of "shoulder" occurs at a different place from what the footnote indicates, in both the Septuagint and in the Syriac versions. And secondly, the NKJV makes no mention of why it changed the reading "all their loins to be at a stand" to "made all their backs quiver".
The NKJV 1982 edition I have here on my desk reads: "You broke and made all their LOINS TO SHAKE."
The NKJV footnote is incorrect. The Greek Septuagint does have the word "hand" in it, but in a totally different place and reading. The Greek LXX reads very differently from all other versions. Instead of reading "When they took hold of thee by thy hand, thou didst break, and didst rend all their SHOULDERS; and when they leaned upon thee, thou brakest, and MADEST ALL THEIR LOINS TO BE AT A STAND", the Greek LXX says: "When they took hold of thee with their hand, you did break, AND WHEN EVERY HAND WAS CLAPPED AGAINST THEM, and when they leaned on thee, thou wast utterly broken, and DIDST CRUSH THE LOINS of them all."
Furthermore, Lamsa's 1933 translation of the Syriac also reads differently than all other versions. It does have the word "hand" in it, but not where the NKJV footnote indicates, AND more importantly, it is from the Syriac that the NKJV comes up with its reading of "BACKS TO QUIVER" or "LOINS TO SHAKE", depending on which NKJV you happen to be reading!!!
Lamsa's translation of the Syriac reads: "When they held you with their hands, YOU PIERCED THEM, and when they leaned on you, you broke, and made all their LOINS TO TREMBLE." As can be seen from both the Septuagint and the Syriac versions, the word "hand" occurs in the first part of the verse, but NOT in the part about "shoulder". In fact, both these errant translations do not even mention "didst rend all their shoulder".
Both the NKJV and the NASB footnotes are false, as well as their translations of this verse.
The NASB reads: "When they took hold of you with the hand, You broke and tore all their HANDS (F401); And when they leaned on you, You broke and made all their loins QUAKE." (F402)
FOOTNOTES: F401 So with some ancient versions; M.T. (Hebrew Masoretic Text) shoulders F402 Lit stand
From the footnotes of the NASB we clearly see that they have rejected the Hebrew readings TWICE in just this one verse. Instead of the Hebrew word "shoulders" they have followed something else, or made it up, because neither the Greek LXX nor the Syriac read this way. And instead of the Hebrew reading of "to stand" they have substituted the word "quake" but they don't tell you where they got this from.
The versions that clearly tell us where the faulty NKJV, NASB reading comes from are the RSV, NRSV and ESV. Anyone can look this up for themselves and see where the NKJV gets its bogus reading.
Both the RSV 1952 and the English Standard Version of 2001 read: "...you broke, and tore all their shoulders; and when they leaned upon you, you broke, and made all THEIR LOINS TO SHAKE." Both the RSV and ESV then footnote that "to shake" comes from the Syriac, but that the Hebrew says "to stand".
The NRSV of 1989 is similar with: "you broke, and tore all their shoulders; and when they leaned on you, you broke, and made all THEIR LEGS UNSTEADY." Then it footnotes that this reading comes from the Syriac, but the Hebrew says "to stand".
The 2003 Holman Standard reads: "When Israel grasped you by the hand, you splintered, tearing all their shoulders; when they leaned on you, you shattered and made ALL THEIR HIPS UNSTEADY."
The NET Bible
Daniel Wallace, of Dallas Theological Seminary, is in the process of writing his own peculiar version called the NET bible - New English Translation. It is on the internet and well known to many. I personally think it is another fake bible version, but he has many devoted fans who think his version is from God's mouth to Daniel's ear. His versions says: "29:7 when they grasped you with their hand, you broke and ripped open their shoulders; and when they leaned on you, you splintered and CAUSED THEIR LEGS TO BE UNSTEADY.8 "
Then in the footnotes Doctor Wallace tells us: "Hebrew - you caused to stand for them all their hips." An emendation of the text, supported by the Septuagint, yields the reading, "you caused all their hips to shake."
Here the good Doctor Wallace mistranslates the word "loins" as "legs" and he adopts the SYRIAC reading (not the Septuagint) of "shake", yet he tells us the Septuagint reads "shake", when in fact the LXX actually reads "you did CRUSH the loins of them all". The Greek Septuagint copy I have right here in front of me reads "kai suneklasas (broke or crushed) autwn pasan osfun." (and you crushed the loins of them all) This is how the English translation reads along-side the Greek Septuagint. Again, anyone who knows how to read Greek can look it up for themselves and see that Daniel Wallace is wrong. The Greek LXX does not say "to shake" as he alleges, but it says "to crush", and it is the Syriac that says "to shake" or "to tremble".
The NIV is similar to the NKJV, RSV, but it too gives a misleading footnote. It says: "When they grasped you with their hands, you splintered and you tore open their shoulders; when they leaned on you, you broke and THEIR BACKS WERE WRENCHED." F 70.
FOOTNOTES: F70 Syriac (see also Septuagint and Vulgate); Hebrew and you caused their backs to stand.
The NIV footnote is misleading in that neither the Septuagint nor the Syriac reads "wrenched" and the Hebrew word is "loins" and not "back". The word for "loins" is #4975 moth-nah-yim, and the word for "backs" is a totally different word in Hebrew.
In closing, I would like to point out two more "minor" departures from the Hebrew texts found in this chapter of Ezekiel 29.
In 29:6 we read: "And all the inhabitants of Egypt shall know that I am the LORD, because THEY have been a staff of reed to the house of Israel."
The correct Hebrew reading of "THEY have been a staff of reed" is found in the Jewish translations of 1917, 1936, the Revised Version, American Standard Version, Geneva Bible, NKJV, the NET version, and the NASB.
However, the RSV, ESV, NIV and Holman all say: "because HE has been a staff of reed..." The RSV and Holman footnote that the reading of HE comes from the Septuagint, Syriac and Vulgate, but the Hebrew texts read THEY.
Then again in verse 27:9 we read: "And the land of Egypt shall be desolate and waste; and they shall know that I am the LORD: because HE hath said, The river is mine, and I have made it."
"because HE hath said" is the Hebrew reading and that of the RV, ASV, NKJV, the Jewish translations, the NET version, and the Geneva Bible. But the NASB, NIV, RSV, ESV, and Holman Standard say: "because YOU have said...". Then the RSV and Holman Standard again footnote that the reading of YOU comes from the Septuagint, the Syriac and the Vulgate, but that the Hebrew texts read HE.
Dear Christian people, these are the types of lies and changes being foisted on the church today by all these "scholars", none of whom believes any Bible or any text in any language is now the inerrant, complete, inspired word of God. Their spiritual sickness of unbelief is spreading like a cancer in the body of Christ. Yet most of these same scholars, pastors, and seminarians think we King James Bible believers are the ones who are raising all the rucus over nothing, and are causing divisions by our "ridiculous claims" that God has indeed given us His pure words in an inerrant Book called the King James Holy Bible. The irony is simply overwhelming. "He that hath ears to hear, let him hear." Matthew 11:15
Ezekiel 32:5 "I will...fill the valleys with thy height."
Another example of where the NKJV and other modern versions depart from the Hebrew texts.
In Ezekiel 32 God is pronouncing judgment upon Pharoah. God compares him to a young lion and a whale in the seas that He will bring up with His net and cast him upon the open field. In verse 32:5 we read in the King James Bible: "And I will lay thy flesh upon the mountains, and fill the valleys WITH THY HEIGHT."
The phrase "with thy HEIGHT" is the Hebrew word # 7419 and it comes from the verb # 7311 meaning "to be high, to be lifted up, to be exalted, to be lofty".
"with thy HEIGHT" is also the reading of the Hebrew Publishing Company 1936 translation, Coverdale 1535, Bishops' Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1599, the Revised Version 1881, Webster's 1833 translation, the American Standard Version 1901, Spanish Reina Valera of 1909 (not the 1960), the Italian Diodati, Green's interlinear and Green's 1998 Modern KJV, and the Third Millennium Bible.
Many commentators get the explanation of this verse wrong, but Matthew Henry makes plain sense out of the passage saying: "The flesh of this great whale shall be laid upon the mountains (Ezekiel 32:5) and the valleys shall be filled with his height. Such numbers of Pharaoh's soldiers shall be slain that the dead bodies shall be scattered upon the hills and there shall be heaps of them piled up in the valleys...Such shall be the bulk, such the height, of this leviathan, that, when he is laid upon the ground, he shall fill a valley."
Where we find the information that the NKJV has departed from the Hebrew text is from the Revised Standard Version of 1952, the NRSV of 1989, and the ESV (English Standard Version) of 2001. All these versions say: "And I will lay your flesh upon the mountains, and fill the valleys with YOUR CARCASS." Then they all give the footnote saying that "carcass" comes from the Syriac and the Vulgate, but that the Hebrew text reads "your height".
The NKJV says: "I will...fill the valleys with YOUR CARCASS."
NASB - "I will fill the valleys with your REFUSE."
NIV - "I will fill the valleys with your REMAINS."
The 2003 Holman Standard has: "I will fill the valleys with your {GORE}", placing the word in parenthesis, as though it was supplied because there was no Hebrew word there.
The NET bible version by Daniel Wallace reads: " I will put your flesh on the mountains, and fill the valleys with YOUR MAGGOT-INFESTED CARCASS."5
Wallace then gives us this footnote: "The Hebrew text is difficult here, apparently meaning “your height.” Following Symmachus and the Syriac, it is preferable to emend the text to read “your maggots.”
Oh, so the eminent Doctor recognizes that the Hebrew apparently means "your height", but he thinks it is preferable to follow Symmachus and the Syriac, instead of the Hebrew text. Symmachus was one of the four men who wrote four different and conflicting Greek translations of the Old Testament. The Greek Septuagint translation that I have says: "I will fill the valleys with YOUR BLOOD." So it too departs from the Hebrew text and differs from the LXX version of Symmachus.
In any event, the NKJV again departs from the Hebrew text and apparently follows some Syriac versions instead.
NKJV, ESV, NIV, NASB, NET, Holman, Jehovah Witness NWT and Catholic versions follow the Greek Septuagint and NOT the Hebrew reading.
Ezekiel 38: 13 "THE YOUNG LIONS", "villages" or "leaders"?
Ezekiel 38:13a KJB - "Sheba, and Dedan, and the merchants of Tarshish, with all THE YOUNG LIONS thereof, shall say unto thee, Art thou come to take a spoil?"
NIV (NASB, RSV, MEV 2014) - "Sheba and Dedan and the merchants of Tarshish and all HER VILLAGES will say to you, “Have you come to plunder?"
Dan Wallace's NET version 2006 (NRSV) - "Sheba and Dedan and the traders of Tarshish with all ITS YOUNG WARRIORS will say to you, “Have you come to loot?" NRSV footnote - "Hebrew - young lions"
Holman Standard 2009 - “Sheba and Dedan and the merchants of Tarshish with all ITS RULERS will ask you, ‘Have you come to seize spoil?”
ESV 2011 - "Sheba and Dedan and the merchants of Tarshish and all ITS LEADERS will say to you, ‘Have you come to seize spoil?”
International Standard Version 2014 - “Businessmen based in Sheba, Dedan, Tarshish, and all of ITS GROWLING LIONS will ask you, “Are you coming for war spoils?"
Notice that the RSV went with "HER VILLAGES", then the NRSV with "ITS YOUNG WARRIORS" and a footnote that says "Hebrew - young lions", and finally the ESV (all revisions of each other) changed this to "IT'S LEADERS". None of them are right, of course.
The Catholic Connection The earlier Douay-Rheims 1610, Douay 1950 and even the St. Joseph NAB 1970 all have "THE YOUNG LIONS". But then the New Jerusalem bible 1985 changed this to "THE MAGNATES", but then footnoted "literally fierce lions." But now the Public Domain version of 2009 has come out and it goes back to "THE YOUNG LIONS".
The so called Greek Septuagint has "all her VILLAGES"
YOUNG LIONS is the reading of Wycliffe 1395, Bishops' Bible 1568, Geneva Bible 1587, The Jewish Family Bible 1864, the Revised Version 1885, Darby 1890, Young's 1898, ASV 1901, Rotherham's 1902, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, NKJV 1982, The Word of Yah 1993, World English Bible 2000, Sacred Scriptures Family of Yah 2001, Green's literal 2005, Context Group Version 2007, Jubilee Bible 2010, Hebraic Transliteration Scripture 2010, The New European Version 2010 - "the YOUNG LIONS", The Orthodox Jewish Bible 2011, Work of God's Children Bible 2011, The Biblos Interlinear Bible 2011, Natural Israelite Bible 2012, Lexham English bible 2012, The Hebrew Names Version 2014 and the Amplified bible 2015.
Foreign Language Bibles
Foreign language bibles that follow the Hebrew text and read “young lions” are the Spanish Cipriano de Valera 1602, Reina Valera 1909 (but not the newer ones) - “y todos sus leoncillos”, the French Martin 1744, French Louis Segond 2007 - “et tous leurs jeunes lions”, the Italian Diodati 1649 and La Nuova Diodati 1991, and the Italian Riveduta 2006 - “e tutti i suoi leoncelli”, and the Portuguese Almeida Corrigida 2009 - “e todos os seus leõezinhos”
The only thing we can rely on by using these "reliable versions" is that they will leave us in utter confusion.
NKJV, ESV, NIV, NASB, NET, Holman, Jehovah Witness NWT and Catholic versions follow the Greek Septuagint and NOT the Hebrew reading.
Ezekiel 39:2 "And I will turn thee back, and LEAVE BUT THE SIXTH PART OF THEE, and will cause thee to come up from the north parts, and will bring thee upon the mountains of Israel."
NKJV (ESV, NIV, NASB, NET, Holman, Jehovah Witness NWT, Catholic versions) - "and I will turn you around AND LEAD YOU ON, bringing you up from the far north, and bring you against the mountains of Israel."
Some ignorantly criticize the King James Bible as being wrong in this verse, whereas it is the exact opposite. It is the King James Bible that is right, and versions like the NKJV, NIV, NASB, ESV that are wrong.
The verbal phrase "leave but the sixth part of thee" comes from a verb # 8338 shah-shah that is used only one time in the entire Hebrew Bible. It comes directly from # 8337, shish-shah, which is the number SIX. This noun (not the verb) is used a couple hundred times as in "Noah was SIX hundred years old"; "SIX days thou shalt labour"; "he measured SIX measures of barley", etc.
This is the verb form of the number six - Simple as that. Most modern versions like the NKJV, NIV, NASB translate this as "I will LEAD YOU ON" (NKJV), "I will DRAG YOU ALONG" (NIV), or "I will DRIVE YOU ON" (NASB) or "and DRIVE YOU FORWARD" (ESV).
Other weird Versions
The Great Bible 1540 - "and punyshe the with sixe plages" = "and PUNISH THEE WITH SIX PLAGUES"
Young's 1898 says: "And have turned thee back AND ENTICED THEE, And caused thee to come up from the sides of the north..."
Wycliffe 1395 - "And I shall lead thee about, and I SHALL DECEIVE THEE, and I shall make thee to go up from the sides of the north..."
The Jamieson, Faussett and Brown commentary acknowledges that this modern version reading is actually that of the Greek Septuagint version which says: "and I will guide thee" (kai kathodngysw se). Coverdale and the Bishops' Bible also got it wrong.
However, some other Bible versions besides the King James Holy Bible got it right. The Geneva Bible 1587 says: "And I will destroy thee and LEAVE BUT THE SIXTH PART of thee, and will cause thee to come up from the North partes and will bring thee upon the mountaines of Israel"
"I will...LEAVE BUT THE SIXTH PART OF THEE"
Also agreeing with the King James reading are The Bill Bible 1671 - "I WILL LEAVE BUT THE SIXTH PART OF THEE", Webster's 1833 translation, The Wellbeloved Scriptures 1862 - "I will turn thee back and LEAVE BUT THE SIXTH PART OF THEE", The Jewish Family Bible 1864 - "I will turn thee back AND LEAVE BUT THE SIXTH PART OF THEE", The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907 - "AND LEAVE BUT THE SIXTH PART OF THEE", The Word of Yah Bible 1993, the KJV 21st Century Version 1994, The Revised Webster Bible 1995, the Third Millennium Bible 1998, The Revised Geneva Bible 2005, the Jubilee Bible 2010, The Bond Slave Version 2012 and The Biblos Bible 2013 - "AND LEAVE BUT THE SIXTH PART OF THEE"
The Jewish Family Bible 1864 - "and LEAVE BUT THE SIXTH PART OF THEE"
https://archive.org/stream/jewishschoolfami03beni#page/256
The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907 - "and LEAVE BUT THE SIXTH PART OF THEE"
https://archive.org/stream/ancienthebrewlit03yyyauoft#page/274
And this online Hebrew Interlinear "I will turn thee back and LEAVE BUT THE SIXTH PART OF THEE"
http://studybible.info/IHOT/Ezekiel%2039:2
The Jewish Virtual Library Tanach [Full Text] 1994 - "and LEAVE BUT THE SIXTH PART OF THEE"
https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/yichezkel-ezekiel-chapter-39
The Hebrew Transliteration Bible 2010 - "and LEAVE BUT THE SIXTH PART OF THEE"
https://www.messianic-torah-truth-seeker.org/Scriptures/Tenakh/Yechezkel/Yechezkel-39.htm
The Revised Geneva Bible 2005 - "and WILL LEAVE BUT THE SIXTH PART OF THEE"
http://logosresourcepages.org/Geneva/ezekiel.htm#Chapter_39
The Biblos Bible 2013 - "and LEAVE BUT THE SIXTH PART OF THEE"
https://biblehub.com/interlinear/ezekiel/39-2.htm
Foreign Language Bibles = KJB
the Spanish Sagradas Escrituras 1569, Cipriano de Valera 1602, and Reina Valera 1909 - "y te sextaré", the French Martin Bible 1744 - "Et je te ferai retourner en arrière, n'en laissant que de six l'un" = "and leave but one sixth", The Romanian Fidela Bible 2014 - "voi lăsa doar a şasea parte"
The 1999 Sagradas Escrituras says: Ezekiel 39:2 "y te quebrantaré, y TE SEXTARE´, y te haré subir de las partes del norte, y te traeré sobre los montes de Israel". The translation would be "and I will make a sixth of you", which agrees with the meaning found in the King James Bible.
And The Reina Valera Gómez Bible 2010 -Y te quebrantaré, y dejaré de ti sólo la sexta parte, y te haré subir de las partes del norte, y te traeré sobre los montes de Israel." = "and I WILL LEAVE OF YOU ONLY THE SIXTH PART"
Daniel Wallace's NET bible reads: "39:2 I will turn you around and DRAG YOU ALONG; (1) I will lead you up from the remotest parts of the north, and bring you against the mountains of Israel."
Then in his footnote he acknowledges: "The Hebrew root occurs only here in the OT. An apparent cognate in the Ethiopic language means “walk along.” (my note: so what does "an apparent cognate in the Ethiopic language" have to do with the Hebrew text?)
Further confusion is found in the conflicting commentaries.
John Wesley's commentary says "I will leave in thy country but one in six".
Darby's translation has a footnote which says: "Some translate: "I will divide thee into six parts."
Adam Clarke notes in his commentary: "Verse 2 - And leave but the sixth part of thee. The margin has, strike thee with six plagues; or, draw thee back with a hook of six teeth."
Ellicott's Commentary - "Leave but the sixth part of thee. - This word occurs only here, and the translation is based on the supposition that it is derived from the word meaning six; but even on this supposition the renderings in the margin are as likely to be right as that of the text."
John Gill's commentary reveals why there is such confusion among the various versions in this verse. He says: "and leave but a sixth part of thee; meaning, not that a sixth part only should escape the vengeance of God, and all but a sixth part be destroyed in the land of Israel; for it looks as if the whole army would be utterly destroyed, and none left; but that, when he should come out of his own country upon this expedition, A SIXTH PART OF HIS SUBJECTS ONLY SHOULD BE LEFT BEHIND; five out of six should accompany him; so numerous should his army be, and so drained his country by this enterprise of his."
John Gill continues: "Some render the words, "will draw thee out with an hook of six teeth" ; that is, out of his own land.... The sense of it given by Joseph Kimchi and others, "I will judge thee with six judgments, pestilence, blood, an overflowing rain, hailstones, fire, and brimstone." ...Much better is the Targum, "I will persuade thee, and I will seduce thee;" so Jarchi seems to understand it: and the Septuagint and Arabic versions render it, "I will lead thee."
In any event, what we see from John Gill is a variety of interpretations of this verse, and according to Gill, the reading found in many modern versions like the NASB, NKJV, NIV, ESV actually comes from the Greek Septuagint, and not the Hebrew text itself, which literally means "to sixth".
Matthew Henry got it right
I believe Matthew Henry got it right when he says: "There shall be such a general slaughter made that BUT A SIXTH PART SHALL BE LEFT (v. 2), the other five shall all be cut off. Never was army so totally routed as this."
Matthew Henry's comments show how the "scholars" often differ radically among themselves. Matthew Henry affirms one thing, and John Gill just as emphatically denies it.
Instead of relying on the confusion of the multiple-choice bible versions and the conflicting thoughts of commentators, I and thousands of other Bible believers will stick with the King James Bible as being God's providentially preserved and inerrant words of truth and life.
Ezekiel chapter 40 - Total Confusion in the Multiple-Choice Modern Versions
The following examples of textual changes and omissions will prove beyond all doubt that all modern bible versions frequently reject the inspired Hebrew readings, and they are all in disagreement with each other. Yet each "bible" is put together by men who have the same seminary training, and none of them believe there is such a thing as an inerrant, complete Holy Bible on the face of this earth.
Ezekiel chapter 40 begins describing the tabernacle that is to be built in the future.
Ezekiel 40:6
Here we read: "Then came he unto the gate which looketh toward the east, and went up the stairs thereof, and measured the threshold of the gate, which was one reed broad; AND THE OTHER THRESHOLD OF THE GATE, WHICH WAS ONE REED BROAD."
The capital lettered words are found in all Hebrew texts and are included in the Revised Version, American Standard Version, the NKJV, NASB, Geneva and the HOLMAN STANDARD. (I specifically mention the Holman Standard because we will soon see its fickleness.)
However the NIV, TNIV, RSV, and ESV (English Standard Version of 2001) all unite in OMITTING all these words. Then in a footnote they tell us the omission comes from the Greek Septuagint, but that the Hebrew contains these words.
Daniel Wallace's NET version also omits these words. Then he footnotes: "The Hebrew text adds “the one threshold ten and a half feet deep.” This is probably an accidental duplication of what precedes."
(Note: first of all the text does not read "10 and a half feet", but "one reed", and secondly, there were TWO thresholds mentioned in the context. Even Jamieson, Faussett and Brown mention this fact. Their commentary says: "Fairbain considers there is but one threshold, and translates, "even the one threshold, one rod broad." But there is another threshold mentioned in Ezekiel 40:7 The two thresholds here seem to be the upper and the lower."
John Gill comments on the two thresholds: "for after mentioned is the threshold of the inner, and not the outer gate".
Ezekiel 40:8-9
Here we read: "He measured also the porch of the gate, WITHIN, ONE REED. THEN MEASURED HE THE PORCH OF THE GATE, eight cubits; and the posts thereof, two cubits..."
Again, all the capital lettered words are found in the RV, ASV, NASB, NKJV, Geneva Bible, Spanish, AND now again in the ESV! The NET version also includes these words.
However the NIV, TNIV, RSV, NRSV, AND THE HOLMAN Standard all omit these words, telling us in a footnote that some Hebrew manuscripts, the Syriac and the Vulgate omit them, but that they are found in most Hebrew manuscripts.
Did you notice how the Holman Standard and the ESV just switched back and forth with each other? What one included in the previous verse and the other omitted, has now been reversed.
But wait! It gets better (or much worse, depending on how you view the word of God).
In Ezekiel 40:44 we read: "And without the inner gate were the chambers OF THE SINGERS in the inner court..."
This is the reading of the RV, ASV, NKJV, NASB, Youngs, Geneva, Spanish Reina Valera, the NET version, AND NOW THE HOLMAN STANDARD of 2003.
However the RSV, NIV, TNIV, and ESV unite in omitting the words "of the singers", but then tell us in a footnote that the Greek Septuagint omits these words, but the Hebrew texts says "of the singers".
But in the very same verse of Ezekiel 40:44 we read: "...and their prospect was toward the south, one at the side of THE EAST gate, having the prospect toward the north."
Again "the EAST gate" is the reading of the RV, ASV, NASB, NKJV, Geneva, Spanish Reina Valera, the NET version, and Young's. However the NIV, TNIV, RSV, ESV AND the Holman Standard tell us it was the SOUTH gate, instead of the EAST gate, and that this reading comes from the Greek Septuagint, but the Hebrew reads EAST gate.
Notice how the Holman Standard just did another switcheroo in the same verse, going from the Hebrew "of the singers", but then back to the LXX.
In Ezekiel 40:49 we read: "The length of the porch was twenty cubits, and the breadth ELEVEN CUBITS..."
So read the RV, ASV, NKJV, NASB, Geneva and Spanish Reina Valera. However the NIV, TNIV, RSV, and ESV tell us it was TWELVE cubits, instead of eleven. They then footnote that 12 comes from the Greek Septuagint, but the Hebrew reads 11 cubits.
The NET version by Daniel Wallace says: "and the width nineteen and a quarter feet", but then footnotes that the Hebew reads "eleven cubits".
The Holman Standard actually says: "and 21 feet deep", instead of Wallace's "19 and a quarter feet".
Then in Ezekiel 41:1 we find a very interesting example of the total confusion that exists in all modern versions.
In Ezekiel 41:1 we read: "Afterward he brought me to the temple, and measured the posts, six cubits broad on the one side, and six cubits broad on the other side, WHICH WAS THE BREADTH OF THE TABERNACLE."
All these capitalized words are found in the Hebrew Masoretic texts and in the Revised Version, American Standard Version, Geneva, Spanish, NKJV, and Young's.
But this time the NASB, NIV, and Holman Standard all OMIT these last words of the verse. The Holman Standard footnotes that the omission comes from the Greek Septuagint, but that the Masoretic text reads as does the King James Bible.
Wallace's NET bible version also omits these words saying: "Then he brought me to the outer sanctuary, and measured the jambs; the jambs were ten and a half feet wide on each side." But this time Mr. Wallace fails to footnote the fact that he has also omitted several Hebrew words in his new version.
But wait! The RSV and the ESV INCLUDE these words but with a slight change. The 2003 ESV says: "...on each side six cubits, WAS THE BREADTH of the JAMB." Then it footnotes that we should see the LXX for the word "jamb", but that the Hebrew reads "tabernacle", just as the KJB has it.
So in this verse the NASB, NIV, NET, and Holman omit these Hebrew words, but the RSV and ESV include them, though changing the last word from its Hebrew reading to that of something else.
What we see from these very few of many examples that can be given, is the total confusion and disagreement among all these various modern bible versions. Not one of them agrees all the way through with any of the others in just this one chapter of Ezekiel. This is the true nature of the "science" of textual criticism employed by those who bring us the "latest in scholarly findings".
I am reminded of the last verse in the book of Judges where God tells us: "In those days there was no king in Israel: every man did that which was right in his own eyes." Judges 21:25.
Ezekiel 42:4
Here we read: "And before the chambers was a walk of ten cubits breadth inward, A WAY OF ONE CUBIT, and their doors toward the north."
So read all Hebrew texts and the Jewish translations, the Revised Version, American Standard Version, Geneva Bible, and the Spanish Reina Valera.
The walkway of 10 cubits was ONE cubit wide. The NKJV changes the meaning by saying: "a distance of one cubit".
The NASB says: "a way of 100 cubits", the NIV has "100 feet" and the Holman Standard says "175 feet long". The RSV and ESV say "100 cubits long", but then in a footnote tell us the reading of "100" comes from the Greek Septuagint, but that the Hebrew literally reads "a way of one cubit".
Wallaces's NET version says: "at a distance of one and three-quarter feet", then he footnotes "Heb “one cubit”. The Septuagint and the Syriac read “one hundred cubits.”
Ezekiel 45:1 "...the length shall be the length of five and twenty thousand reeds, and the breadth shall be TEN thousand. This shall be holy in all the borders thereof round about."
TEN thousand is the reading of all Hebrew texts and that of the RV, ASV, NKJV, NASB. However the NIV, RSV, and ESV all say "TWENTY thousand", then in a footnote tell us the 20,000 comes from the Septuagint, but that the Hebrew reads 10,000.
The Jehovah Witness version (New World Translation) reads "25,000 cubits in length" here. Apparently they just made this number up.
The Daniel Wallace NET version says: "three and one-third miles". But wait! The Holman Standard says: "six and two-thirds miles." Now I'm really confused. No wonder the Muslims mock at the Christians' "inspired Bible"!
Ezekiel 45:5 "And the five and twenty thousand of length, and the ten thousand of breadth, shall also the Levites, the ministers of the house, have for themselves, for a possession for TWENTY CHAMBERS."
"for a possession for twenty chambers" is the reading of the Hebrew texts and that of the RV, ASV, NKJV, and Spanish.
However the NASB, RSV, ESV, Holman Standard say" "as their possession CITIES TO DWELL IN." Then the RSV, ESV footnote that "cities to dwell in" comes from the Greek Septuagint, but that the Hebrew reads "twenty chambers."
Daniel Wallace's NET version reads: "the Levites, who minister at the temple, as the place FOR THE CITIES IN WHICH THEY LIVE." Then he mentions in his footnote: " The translation follows the Septuagint here. The MT reads “twenty.”
Get yourself the King James Holy Bible and stick to it. It is God’s inerrant book of 100% truth.
ALL of grace, believing the Book - the King James Holy Bible.
Will Kinney
Return to Articles -
kjbarticles.htm