Author Topic: Bible Corruptions (Read 967 times)

BlessedCreator · « **on:** Thu Apr 23, 2020 - 10:38:32 »

Thread post was removed because I found out later that some of the content was in violation of a copyright. Please visit https://www.gffg.info/1/corruptedbibles.html for proof of corruption in modern Bibles. The copyrighted content were the list items of corruptions found in the different Bibles. The content is available in the above link with proper copyright rules followed

Christian Forums and Message Board · « **on:** Thu Apr 23, 2020 - 10:38:32 »

Jaime · « **Reply #1 on:** Thu Apr 23, 2020 - 12:58:29 »

Watch this ALL the way through and THEN tell me what you think about the KJV as well as OTHER translations including my favorite NASB.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=VI1yRTC6kGE

Texas Conservative · « **Reply #2 on:** Thu Apr 23, 2020 - 13:30:22 »

Quote from: Jaime on Thu Apr 23, 2020 - 12:58:29

Watch this ALL the way through and THEN tell me what you think about the KJV as well as OTHER translations including my favorite NASB.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=VI1yRTC6kGE

Remember that the word "church" was an evil plot by King James to start the infection known as "Mad Church Disease."

Christian Forums and Message Board · « **Reply #2 on:** Thu Apr 23, 2020 - 13:30:22 »

seekingHiswisdom · « **Reply #3 on:** Thu Apr 23, 2020 - 13:37:25 »

You have no trouble the King's men's translation of Acts 12:4 ? (Refering to Peter, of course)

If not, how do you explain the glaring introduction of a concept that had not even taken place yet?

"And when he had apprehended him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four quaternions of soldiers to keep him; intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people."

Textus Receptus: "ον και πιασας εθετο εις φυλακην παραδους τεσσαρσιν τετραδιοις στρατιωτων φυλασσειν αυτον βουλομενος μετα το πασχα αναγαγειν αυτον τω λαω"

The Greek word, "πασχα (pascha)", is correctly translated as "Passover" 28 times in the New Testament in the King Bible.

Originally the King's men had not translated Pascha in this verse, but left it alone. They should have left it alone.

This was not a time that Easter was being celebrated for what it was.
Easter, Latin Pascha, Greek Pascha, principal festival of the Christian church, which celebrates the Resurrection of Jesus Christ on the third day after his Crucifixion.
The earliest recorded observance of an Easter celebration comes from the 2nd century, though the commemoration of Jesus’ Resurrection probably occurred earlier.

https://www.britannica.com/topic/Easter-holiday

2nd century
Direct evidence for a more fully formed Christian festival of Pascha (Easter) begins to appear in the mid-2nd century. Perhaps the earliest extant primary source referring to Easter is a mid-2nd-century Paschal homily attributed to Melito of Sardis, which characterizes the celebration as a well-established one.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Easter

Now if Peter died in the first Century, as , and Easter was not celebrated as such until the 2nd century
someone messed up.

Herod , it is said in Act 12...

And because he (Herod) saw it pleased the Jews, he proceeded further to take Peter also. (Then were the days of unleavened bread.) (Days meaning plural, ie Passover)

And when he had apprehended him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four quaternions of soldiers to keep him; intending after Pascha to bring him forth to the people.

NOPE: they messed up on this one because you can argue all you want that Pascha means Easter as many do, but Easter does not fall on the heels of Passover all the time..... But after Passover would mean that. After Passover.

Christian Forums and Message Board · « **Reply #3 on:** Thu Apr 23, 2020 - 13:37:25 »

Follow @GraceCentered Pinterest: GraceCentered.com

seekingHiswisdom · « **Reply #4 on:** Thu Apr 23, 2020 - 13:39:53 »

Quote from: Texas Conservative on Thu Apr 23, 2020 - 13:30:22

Remember that the word "church" was an evil plot by King James to start the infection known as "Mad Church Disease."

Christian Forums and Message Board · « **Reply #4 on:** Thu Apr 23, 2020 - 13:39:53 »

BlessedCreator · « **Reply #5 on:** Thu Apr 23, 2020 - 17:17:22 »

There may be a few mistranslations in the KJB but it was not done on purpose as you see being done in modern Bibles that remove and alter key verses and butcher the word of God completely as is proven in the original post. The KJB stands strong.

Christian Forums and Message Board · « **Reply #5 on:** Thu Apr 23, 2020 - 17:17:22 »

Jaime · « **Reply #6 on:** Thu Apr 23, 2020 - 18:15:23 »

Not if it stands on the Mesoretic manuscripts as the video showed. The ages of Shem’s descendants was rigged by the Jews. If you didn’t finish the video, you missed the best part as to why.

dpr · « **Reply #7 on:** Thu Apr 23, 2020 - 23:49:00 »

Quote from: Jaime on Thu Apr 23, 2020 - 12:58:29

Watch this ALL the way through and THEN tell me what you think about the KJV as well as OTHER translations including my favorite NASB.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=VI1yRTC6kGE

1. First fallacy of that video - the condition the Great Pyramid is in today is not the state it was originally in, the polished limestone covering having been removed sometime in the 13th century A.D. to build the city of El Kaherah. Diodorus Siculus (1st century A.D.) reported the polished limestone was still intact and without the least decay. The polished limestone would become harder with weathering and more polished, not decayed. So comparisons to today's condition of the Great Pyramid as if it always was in that state is a fallacy. The fact that the polished limestone covering was still intact even to the time of Christ's 1st coming reveals weathering had no effect like the video is trying to infer.

2. Geologists well know the Giza plateau has been dry for at least 5,000 years. However, as per the discoveries by Boston University geologist Robert Schoch, the water erosion weathering on the Sphinx reveals the Giza plateau was once a tropical climate, that it reveals the Sphinx was built much earlier than Egyptian history, possibly even 10 to 14 thousand years ago, since the weathering on its base is water type erosion. That would also account for the water fossils showing they existed prior to the time of Noah's flood.

3. Based on geologist Schoch's water erosion findings at the Sphinx, the evidence shows the Egyptians did not build it, but only modified it. Same with the temple next to the Sphinx dated to the same time. And based on the tropic climate water erosion evidence for the Giza plateau, the Great Pyramid had to have been built before Egyptian history also, and thus prior to Noah's flood.

4. The Great Pyramid of Giza was completely sealed until the Arabs around 820 A.D. started chipping away at it to gain entrance (see Al Mamun). This would completely hide any signs of a previous flood waters, like in the time of Noah's flood.

5. The idea that the step pyramid at Saqqara was the very first pyramid built is a fallacy, because all the pyramids are an attempt to model the Great Pyramid using smaller stones or brick. And they are revealed as poor copies, which further revealed the Egyptians were trying to 'reverse engineer' the construction of the Great Pyramid but failed.

That's enough to show the assumptions in that video are based on false evidence.

TrevorL · « **Reply #8 on:** Fri Apr 24, 2020 - 00:49:51 »

Greetings “BlessedCreator”,

Quote

There may be a few mistranslations in the KJB but it was not done on purpose as you see being done in modern Bibles that remove and alter key verses and butcher the word of God completely as is proven in the original post. The KJB stands strong..

If this is your overall position, then I agree, but I would like to comment on a few things regarding the KJV. I mainly read from the KJV, but I also read one chapter in the morning from an Interlinear RV/KJV Bible. I agree with what you say about the NT portion and its text, but there are many improvements as far as a particular word is concerned, even in the NT. Also the RV of the OT portion uses the same manuscript as the KJV. Again there is some improvement in some of the words. One of my mentors did an extensive study and speaking on the Book of Job. He claimed that the RV translation of Job is much improved from the KJV translation of the Book of Job. My position then is that each word and verse need to be considered carefully whatever translation we use.

Perhaps a few other examples:
Exodus 3:12–15 (Tyndale): 12 And he sayde: I wilbe with the. And this shalbe a token vnto the that I haue sent the: after that thou hast broughte the people out of Egipte, ye shall serue God vppon this mountayne. 13 Than sayde Moses vnto God: when I come vnto the childern of Israell and saye vnto them, the God of youre fathers hath sent me vnto you, ad they saye vnto me, what ys his name, what answere shall I geuethem? 14 Then sayde God vnto Moses: I wilbe what I wilbe: ad he sayde, this shalt thou saye vnto the children of Israel: I wilbe dyd send me to you. 15 And God spake further vnto Moses: thus shalt thou saye vnto the children of Israell: the Lorde God of youre fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Iacob hath sent me vnto you: this is my name for euer, and this is my memoriall thorow out all generacyons.
Exodus 3:12–15 (KJV): 12 And he said, Certainly I will be with thee; and this shall be a token unto thee, that I have sent thee: When thou hast brought forth the people out of Egypt, ye shall serve God upon this mountain. 13 And Moses said unto God, Behold, when I come unto the children of Israel, and shall say unto them, The God of your fathers hath sent me unto you; and they shall say to me, What is his name? what shall I say unto them? 14 And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you. 15 And God said moreover unto Moses, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, The LORD God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, hath sent me unto you: this is my name for ever, and this is my memorial unto all generations.
The KJV translates “ehyeh” as “I will be” in Exodus 3:12, but as “I AM” in Exodus 3:14. Tyndale translated “ehyeh” as “I will be” in Exodus 3:12 and Exodus 3:14. I suggest that the KJV is incorrect and Tyndale is correct, and “I will be” is also given in the RV and RSV margins.

Revelation 2:1 (Tyndale): Unto the messenger of the congregacion of Ephesus wryte: These thynges sayth he that holdeth the vii. starres in his right honde and walketh in the myddes of the vii. golden candlestyckes
Revelation 2:1 (KJV): Unto the angel of the church of Ephesus write; These things saith he that holdeth the seven stars in his right hand, who walketh in the midst of the seven golden candlesticks;
Revelation 2:1 (NASB95):“To the angel of the church in Ephesus write: The One who holds the seven stars in His right hand, the One who walks among the seven golden lampstands, says this:
Tyndale translated “ekklesia” as congregation, while the KJV and NASB have “church”. Tyndale and the KJV have “candlesticks”, while the NASB has “lampstands”. I prefer “congregation” and “lampstands” and I suggest that these are more correct.

Quote

They attack the Godhead. The manifestation of God to us through the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. 1 John 5:7.

Most Trinitarian scholars consider 1 John 5:7 to be spurious and it appears that mostly KJV only people demand that it should be retained.

Quote

New versions exalt man to being "a little lower than God" and omit many references to his fallen spiritual condition. Cults, the New Age and false religions also raise mankind to the level of being divine or in the process of evolving into gods. Psalm 8:5

I accept the KJV “a little lower than the angels” as the better translation, and that most of the modern translations are wrong here, but from what you say I have some doubts about your understanding here.

Kind regards
Trevor

Christian Forums and Message Board · « **Reply #8 on:** Fri Apr 24, 2020 - 00:49:51 »

Reformer · « **Reply #9 on:** Fri Apr 24, 2020 - 14:14:04 »

Blessed Creator:

"You can have full confidence in your King James Bible."

"Easter" in Acts 12:4 of the KJV is a total, 100% mistranslation. The Greek pascha translates Passover.

Should we now lose our "full confidence" in King James' Bible? The King also has a "church" under Moses. Does that increase or decrease your "full confidence?"

Buff

yogi bear · « **Reply #10 on:** Sun Apr 26, 2020 - 06:31:14 »

So my observation is that we no longer have the true word of God but that all versions today are littered with misinterpretation and no way to find the truth if you can not find or read the original language as was recorded.

TrevorL · « **Reply #11 on:** Sun Apr 26, 2020 - 16:02:39 »

Greetings Yogi Bear,

Quote

So my observation is that we no longer have the true word of God but that all versions today are littered with misinterpretation and no way to find the truth if you can not find or read the original language as was recorded.

We have to be careful to not rely on only one translation such as the KJV. I suggest that we can determine the essential meaning of the Bible, its great themes, especially the Gospel centred in the Name of Jesus Christ and the Kingdom of God. When and where there are some variations in the text, and sometimes these are only minor and do not affect the overall message of the Bible, then we can compare translations, we can look up word reference material, and we can study and meditate on the various verses and their context. The concept of the clarity of the Scriptures holds good. We do not need priests to interpret, or some unique latter day prophet or religious organisation. God has revealed the Gospel as revealed in the Son of God and preached by Jesus and the Apostles.

Kind regards
Trevor

BlessedCreator · « **Reply #12 on:** Sun Apr 26, 2020 - 16:12:30 »

No. The KJB stands strong.

Jaime · « **Reply #13 on:** Sun Apr 26, 2020 - 18:47:59 »

Except for where it doesn’t.

winsome · « **Reply #14 on:** Mon Apr 27, 2020 - 06:36:29 »

Quote from: BlessedCreator on Thu Apr 23, 2020 - 10:38:32

I believe there is none of that in the King James Bible and that it is the purest translation of original manuscripts for all English readers.

We don't have the original manuscripts - nor did the translators of the KJV.
The notion that the KJV is the purest translation is laughable.

It's a far from perfect translation and the NT used Erasmus' Greek texts of which the oldest was 10th century. We have much earlier texts now

The OT used masoretic texts.

yogi bear · « **Reply #15 on:** Mon Apr 27, 2020 - 06:42:07 »

It seems that no translation is perfect so the question is what is your preferred translation in which you think is more accurate???

winsome · « **Reply #16 on:** Mon Apr 27, 2020 - 09:38:40 »

Quote from: yogi bear on Mon Apr 27, 2020 - 06:42:07

It seems that no translation is perfect so the question is what is your preferred translation in which you think is more accurate???

Indeed.
It's worth noting that the OP suffers from several faults..
1. The KJV is the perfect translation.
This seems to be taken as a given but no evidence is provided dor that assumption.

2. That other translations differ is a proof of corruption.
It could equally be that they are correct and the KJV is incorrect.

3. Westcott & Hort were heretics.
No evidence is given.

4. The Westcott and Hort texts were corrupt.
No evidence is given for this, just an ad-hominem attack on them

5. Most modern Bibles are based on the Westcott and Hort texts.
Again no proof is given of this. Moreover it assumes that no progress has been made in textual criticism in the last 120+ years.

In researching some of this I came across an interesting piece of evidence that the KJV is corrupt.. It is based on the "textus receptus". The N|T is based on the Greek text published by Erasmus. He only had one greek text for Revelation and that was missing the last 6 verses (chapter 22). He reconstructed them from a Latin text but made an error.Vs 19 in the KJV and other text based on the textus receptus (and therefore the Erasmus text) reads "book of life". But according to my source no known Greek text says that. It should be "tree of life".

Wycliffes_Shillelagh · « **Reply #17 on:** Thu Apr 30, 2020 - 18:03:39 »

Quote from: yogi bear on Sun Apr 26, 2020 - 06:31:14

So my observation is that we no longer have the true word of God but that all versions today are littered with misinterpretation and no way to find the truth if you can not find or read the original language as was recorded.

If you mean there isn't a one-sentence rule to make it child-proof, then I guess so. But maybe we could use our brains and figure it out?

yogi bear · « **Reply #18 on:** Fri May 01, 2020 - 06:25:05 »

Then I am in trouble because everytime I use my brain someone is always there to tell me I did it wrong

DaveW · « **Reply #19 on:** Fri May 01, 2020 - 07:32:18 »

"Every single word in the Bible is vitally important. Any attempt to add, delete or change a word or text in the word of God,... will attract the wrath of God."

So why then does the KJV and every translation that came after it make the mistake of misnaming a disciple and a whole book?

Ἰάκωβος (Iakōbos) is Jacob, not James.

seekingHiswisdom · « **Reply #20 on:** Fri May 01, 2020 - 09:39:20 »

Quote from: Wycliffes_Shillelagh on Thu Apr 30, 2020 - 18:03:39

If you mean there isn't a one-sentence rule to make it child-proof, then I guess so. But maybe we could use our brains and figure it out?

,

Ay, there's the rub.

Whose brains?

The problem, as I understand it is not just the varied translations of the Holy Bible where a word has been changed here and there, and commentaries from those favoring various bibles have their own opinions of what was meant I do have trouble with the following 2 items. No matter which translation you prefer, especially for #2.

#1. I personally have trouble with the use of the word Easter...in the KJV because

It was not until The Council of Nicaea in 325 decreed that Easter should be observed on the first Sunday following the first full moon after the spring equinox , which is March 21

This is when Easter became of noted importance.

But prior to that, as can be read in the Encyclopedia we learn that The earliest recorded observance of an Easter celebration comes from the 2nd century, long after Peter was jailed. Further suggesting that Herod would not have referred to Pascha as Easter, and likely not Luke ( the author?) who was recording events as accurately as possible.

Alternative Title: Pascha

Easter, Latin Pascha, Greek Pascha, principal festival of the Christian church, which celebrates the Resurrection of Jesus Christ on the third day after his Crucifixion. The earliest recorded observance of an Easter celebration comes from the 2nd century, though the commemoration of Jesus’ Resurrection probably occurred earlier. The English word Easter, which parallels the German word Ostern, is of uncertain origin. One view, expounded by the Venerable Bede in the 8th century, was that it derived from Eostre, or Eostrae, the Anglo-Saxon goddess of spring and fertility.

It should be reasonably safe to say

There were no specific "Easter" observances when Acts 12:4 was taking place. None of the importance of the day like Passover was observed.

And with Peter's death around 64 AD. The recording of any such observances such as Easter not being noted anywhere... Herod would not have used that term and if Luke had used it there , without explanation of where the name came from ??

Fact: The first Christians, Jewish and Gentile, had to be aware of the Hebrew calendar. All ,at that time, would have been aware of the Jewish celebrations and festivals.

Jewish Christians, the first to celebrate the resurrection of Jesus, timed the observance in relation to Passover for a reason. This was fact in that it was right after Passover that Mary and company discovered the empty tomb.

We do not see a more fully formed Christian festival of Pascha (Easter) begin to appear until the mid-2nd century.

Ergo, So when Peter was jailed they did NOT celebrate Easter as such.
It was all the kings men who likely thought it best to not confuse the people who, by that time were well accustomed to the word and its meaning.

#2. The most troubling is all the translations of the Holy Bible that likely got the ending of Mark wrong.

I have read and studied Mark over and over again. I have researched it and am fairly convinced that the original
writings of Mark ended at Mark 16:8.

Now if it was the intention of Mark to end his commentaries there, so be it.

Has a nice ring and truly fits the entire narration as Mark was telling the things of Jesus' ministry as he walked the earth teaching.

Mark 16 [8] And they went out quickly, and fled from the sepulcher; for they trembled and were amazed: neither said they any thing to any man; for they were afraid

Some have suggested that the rest of the story of Mark's has been lost.

And there are disputes that the ending of Mark 16: 9-19 were not of him but other scribes and therefore should
not be included.

The most inclusive explanations of the following links is this...

This original ending of Mark was viewed by later Christians as so deficient that not only was Mark placed second in order in the New Testament, but various endings were added by editors and copyists in some manuscripts to try to remedy things. The longest concocted ending, which became Mark 16:9-20, became so treasured that it was included in the King James Version of the Bible, favored for the past 500 years by Protestants, as well as translations of the Latin Vulgate, used by Catholics. This meant that for countless millions of Christians it became sacred scripture–but it is patently bogus.

https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/biblical-topics/new-testament/the-strange-ending-of-the-gospel-of-mark-and-why-it-makes-all-the-difference/

Mark 16:9-20 includes the disputed longer ending of Mark that is included in later Greek manuscripts yet is missing from earlier ones, including Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus. Should these verses be in the Bible?

https://www.compellingtruth.org/Mark-16-9-20.html

Especially informative:

http://www.bible-researcher.com/endmark.html

BlessedCreator · « **Reply #21 on:** Fri May 01, 2020 - 16:42:58 »

There may be errors in the KJB. But you will not find intentional ones and satanic agendas that you will find in modern Bibles.
The KJB is the only English Bible I would recommend an English reader to read unless they want to read/research earlier translations/manuscripts that existed pre KJB.

GB · « **Reply #22 on:** Sat May 02, 2020 - 08:10:21 »

Quote from: Wycliffes_Shillelagh on Thu Apr 30, 2020 - 18:03:39

If you mean there isn't a one-sentence rule to make it child-proof, then I guess so. But maybe we could use our brains and figure it out?

I agree. Surely God is able to preserve HIS Truth in the Bible HE had written for our admonition. What, did God not know of all these translations? IMV It isn't the Bible that leads men astray, it's the "other religious voices" in the land we are born into that lead us astray.

From Eve to the Pharisees to "Those who come in Christ's Name" to deceive that Jesus warned of, the greatest danger for the true Seeker of God's Truth isn't the Word's of the Bible, it is the "other religious voices" in the garden/ land we are born into, that we let interpret His Word for us.

I still believe Paul and his assertion that the Holy Scriptures are able to make us wise unto salvation. All we need to do is believe the instructions of God's Son.

As Jesus said to the "other religious voice" of HIS time, in every translation available to mankind today.

Matthew 4:4 (NIV) Jesus answered, “It is written: ‘Man shall not live on bread alone, but on every word that comes from the mouth of God.’”

Good advice that is not followed by many.

robycop3 · « **Reply #23 on:** Sat May 02, 2020 - 13:29:04 »

Quote from: BlessedCreator on Fri May 01, 2020 - 16:42:58

There may be errors in the KJB. But you will not find intentional ones and satanic agendas that you will find in modern Bibles.
The KJB is the only English Bible I would recommend an English reader to read unless they want to read/research earlier translations/manuscripts that existed pre KJB.

What's a "KJB" ? The Russian replacement for the KGB?

The Satanic agenda I see for English Bible translations is the false KJVO myth.

Johnb · « **Reply #24 on:** Sat May 02, 2020 - 22:23:24 »

Rella · « **Reply #25 on:** Sun May 03, 2020 - 08:11:36 »

Quote from: BlessedCreator on Fri May 01, 2020 - 16:42:58

There may be errors in the KJB. But you will not find intentional ones and satanic agendas that you will find in modern Bibles.
The KJB is the only English Bible I would recommend an English reader to read unless they want to read/research earlier translations/manuscripts that existed pre KJB.

I so totally disagree that the King James Version is the only bible to read.

As to researching and reading earlier versions. YES. That is most incumbent on getting closer to original truth and intention of the authors of each of the books.

We know that King James commissioned all his men to do a King James version because of his disdain for the Geneva Bible:

From some of my easier to read and understand explanations....

The Story behind the King James.... seemed to be political.

https://www.christianity.com/church/church-history/timeline/1601-1700/story-behind-king-james-bible-11630052.html

How we got the KJV

https://www.whatchristianswanttoknow.com/how-we-got-the-king-james-version-of-the-bible/

And of course there are stories and explanations ad nauseum.

If you can find and download some of the older versions... Such as Tyndales New Testament or the Geneva bible, it would be wise to run your own comparisons.

To me, the actual version does not matter so long as the meaning of the verses are consistent with each other.

For me, the older the better, though I so have problems with a word or two in the KJV that I generally quote from NKJV these days .

Rella · « **Reply #26 on:** Sun May 03, 2020 - 09:10:14 »

So now we see that KJ was not the only bible to call Pascha Easter.

It came earlier in the Tyndale bible:

From the English Interlinear comparrisons

http://www.genevabible.org/files/Geneva_Bible/6_Version_Comparison.pdf

PG 743 of book 44

Tyndale: And when he had caught him, he put him in prison,and delivered him to four quaternion of soldiers, to be kept, intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people.

KJV: And when he had apprehended him, he put him in prison,and delivered him to four quaternion of soldiers, to keep him; intending after Easter {Gr. Passover} to bring him forth to the people.

So now we have 2.

robycop3 · « **Reply #27 on:** Sun May 03, 2020 - 09:39:07 »

Quote from: Rella on Sun May 03, 2020 - 09:10:14

So now we see that KJ was not the only bible to call Pascha Easter.

It came earlier in the Tyndale bible:

From the English Interlinear comparrisons

http://www.genevabible.org/files/Geneva_Bible/6_Version_Comparison.pdf

PG 743 of book 44

Tyndale: And when he had caught him, he put him in prison,and delivered him to four quaternion of soldiers, to be kept, intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people.

KJV: And when he had apprehended him, he put him in prison,and delivered him to four quaternion of soldiers, to keep him; intending after Easter {Gr. Passover} to bring him forth to the people.

So now we have 2.

But, once Tyndale coined the word 'passover' in the 1530s, it quickly replaced using 'Easter' for 'pask', etc. The ONE-TIME rendering of 'pascha' as Easter, outta 29 appearances of pascha in the Greek was clearly a goof.

Rella · « **Reply #28 on:** Sun May 03, 2020 - 19:52:37 »

Quote from: robycop3 on Sun May 03, 2020 - 09:39:07

But, once Tyndale coined the word 'passover' in the 1530s, it quickly replaced using 'Easter' for 'pask', etc. The ONE-TIME rendering of 'pascha' as Easter, outta 29 appearances of pascha in the Greek was clearly a goof.

The point I was trying to make with the interlinear is that I have always been told that KJV was the only "English" translation that used the word Easter in Acts 12:4.

But that is not so.

The Tyndale publication of 1525 used Easter. So that was the first mention.

The Geneva publication of 1557 used Passover.

Then King James men, in their 1611 used Easter.

Now it is not a secret that KingJames was at odds over the Geneva bible and declared a new translation to be undertaken.

Seeing that Easter is used in no other translations, after KJV.... I cannot help but wonder if King James men did a little borrowing from the Tyndale translation.
Perhaps to speed things along? Perhaps to vary from Geneva?

I only know that until I got my hands on this interlinear that I was unaware of that.

robycop3 · « **Reply #29 on:** Mon May 04, 2020 - 05:15:33 »

Most Bible translations in whatever language, made before the 1560s, used Easter or whatever word meant Easter in their respective languages, when translating 'pascha'.

TrevorL · « **Reply #30 on:** Mon May 04, 2020 - 06:17:39 »

Greetings Rella,

Quote

The Tyndale publication of 1525 used Easter. So that was the first mention.
The Geneva publication of 1557 used Passover.
Then King James men, in their 1611 used Easter.
Now it is not a secret that King James was at odds over the Geneva bible and declared a new translation to be undertaken.
Seeing that Easter is used in no other translations, after KJV.... I cannot help but wonder if King James men did a little borrowing from the Tyndale translation.
Perhaps to speed things along? Perhaps to vary from Geneva?

That is an interesting observation, but I suspect that Easter was used because of the CofE emphasis and use of Easter. Many CofE members in this country only attend Church at Easter and Xmas.

I was interested in comparing the three translations on another two passages.
Exodus 3:12–14 (Tyndale): 12 And he sayde: I wilbe with the. And this shalbe a token vnto the that I haue sent the: after that thou hast broughte the people out of Egipte, ye shall serue God vppon this mountayne. 13 Than sayde Moses vnto God: when I come vnto the childern of Israell and saye vnto them, the God of youre fathers hath sent me vnto you, ad they saye vnto me, what ys his name, what answere shall I geuethem? 14 Then sayde God vnto Moses: I wilbe what I wilbe: ad he sayde, this shalt thou saye vnto the children of Israel: I wilbe dyd send me to you.

Exodus 3:12–14 (Geneva): 12 And he answered, Certainly I will be with thee: and this shall be a token unto thee, that I have sent thee, After that thou hast brought the people out of Egypt, ye shall serve God upon this mountain. 13 Then Moses said unto God, Behold, when I shall come unto the children of Israel, and shall say unto them, The God of your fathers hath sent me unto you: if they say unto me, What is his Name? what shall I say unto them? 14 And God answered Moses, I AM THAT I AM. Also he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.

Exodus 3:12–14 (KJV): 12 And he said, Certainly I will be with thee; and this shall be a token unto thee, that I have sent thee: When thou hast brought forth the people out of Egypt, ye shall serve God upon this mountain. 13 And Moses said unto God, Behold, when I come unto the children of Israel, and shall say unto them, The God of your fathers hath sent me unto you; and they shall say to me, What is his name? what shall I say unto them? 14 And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.
I suggest that Tyndale was correct here, and part of the proof of this is that the same word “ehyeh” is translated as “I will be” in Exodus 3:12 in all the translations. The RV and RSV margins also give “I will be”. The Geneva Bible and the KJV show their bias towards the Trinity.

Revelation 2:1 (Tyndale): Unto the messenger of the congregacion of Ephesus wryte: These thynges sayth he that holdeth the vii. starres in his right honde and walketh in the myddes of the vii. golden candlestyckes

Revelation 2:1 (Geneva): 1 Unto the Angel of the Church of Ephesus write, These things saith he that holdeth the seven stars in his right hand, and walketh in the midst of the seven golden candlesticks.

Revelation 2:1 (KJV): Unto the angel of the church of Ephesus write; These things saith he that holdeth the seven stars in his right hand, who walketh in the midst of the seven golden candlesticks;
Again, I prefer the Tyndale translation here. It speaks more of the believers, rather than the established Church. Tyndale was persecuted by the Church.

Kind regards
Trevor

DaveW · « **Reply #31 on:** Mon May 04, 2020 - 06:26:54 »

Quote from: robycop3 on Sun May 03, 2020 - 09:39:07

But, once Tyndale coined the word 'passover' in the 1530s, it quickly replaced using 'Easter' for 'pask', etc. The ONE-TIME rendering of 'pascha' as Easter, outta 29 appearances of pascha in the Greek was clearly a goof.

So why not just say "Passover" and be done with it?

But actually Resurrection was on Yom haBikkurim, the Day of First Fruits. That occurred DURING the Feast of unleavened bread Chag ha Matzot. But even in the first century First Fruits and Unleavened Bread were lumped in together with Passover. Hence "pascha" being used in the Greek, transliteration from the Hebrew Pesach.

Rella · « **Reply #32 on:** Mon May 04, 2020 - 06:39:02 »

Quote from: robycop3 on Mon May 04, 2020 - 05:15:33

Most Bible translations in whatever language, made before the 1560s, used Easter or whatever word meant Easter in their respective languages, when translating 'pascha'.

Not that I have found.

Please post the bible and date of such.

I am compiling a list.

Rella · « **Reply #33 on:** Mon May 04, 2020 - 06:53:39 »

Quote from: TrevorL on Mon May 04, 2020 - 06:17:39

Greetings Rella, That is an interesting observation, but I suspect that Easter was used because of the CofE emphasis and use of Easter. Many CofE members in this country only attend Church at Easter and Xmas.

I was interested in comparing the three translations on another two passages.
Exodus 3:12–14 (Tyndale): 12 And he sayde: I wilbe with the. And this shalbe a token vnto the that I haue sent the: after that thou hast broughte the people out of Egipte, ye shall serue God vppon this mountayne. 13 Than sayde Moses vnto God: when I come vnto the childern of Israell and saye vnto them, the God of youre fathers hath sent me vnto you, ad they saye vnto me, what ys his name, what answere shall I geuethem? 14 Then sayde God vnto Moses: I wilbe what I wilbe: ad he sayde, this shalt thou saye vnto the children of Israel: I wilbe dyd send me to you.

Exodus 3:12–14 (Geneva): 12 And he answered, Certainly I will be with thee: and this shall be a token unto thee, that I have sent thee, After that thou hast brought the people out of Egypt, ye shall serve God upon this mountain. 13 Then Moses said unto God, Behold, when I shall come unto the children of Israel, and shall say unto them, The God of your fathers hath sent me unto you: if they say unto me, What is his Name? what shall I say unto them? 14 And God answered Moses, I AM THAT I AM. Also he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.

Exodus 3:12–14 (KJV): 12 And he said, Certainly I will be with thee; and this shall be a token unto thee, that I have sent thee: When thou hast brought forth the people out of Egypt, ye shall serve God upon this mountain. 13 And Moses said unto God, Behold, when I come unto the children of Israel, and shall say unto them, The God of your fathers hath sent me unto you; and they shall say to me, What is his name? what shall I say unto them? 14 And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.
I suggest that Tyndale was correct here, and part of the proof of this is that the same word “ehyeh” is translated as “I will be” in Exodus 3:12 in all the translations. The RV and RSV margins also give “I will be”. The Geneva Bible and the KJV show their bias towards the Trinity.

Revelation 2:1 (Tyndale): Unto the messenger of the congregacion of Ephesus wryte: These thynges sayth he that holdeth the vii. starres in his right honde and walketh in the myddes of the vii. golden candlestyckes

Revelation 2:1 (Geneva): 1 Unto the Angel of the Church of Ephesus write, These things saith he that holdeth the seven stars in his right hand, and walketh in the midst of the seven golden candlesticks.

Revelation 2:1 (KJV): Unto the angel of the church of Ephesus write; These things saith he that holdeth the seven stars in his right hand, who walketh in the midst of the seven golden candlesticks;
Again, I prefer the Tyndale translation here. It speaks more of the believers, rather than the established Church. Tyndale was persecuted by the Church.

Kind regards
Trevor

Thanks Trevor.

While it can be argued that translations.... how shall I say this.... are a convenience for understanding to certain groups... as we can well see we... of this day and age... certainly cannot speed read through Tyndale, a slight alteration in any given word can give another view of meaning.

Your examples are good, and I do not think others would find much different meaning in you example yet I do.

Tyndale's use of I will be as the name of God.... has a different meaning from I am. No one can argue that.

Tyndale"s use of messenger and not angel also seems to have better context.

This is why , to me, comparisons are far more valuable then any specific translation.

Rella · « **Reply #34 on:** Mon May 04, 2020 - 07:04:50 »

Quote from: DaveW on Mon May 04, 2020 - 06:26:54

So why not just say "Passover" and be done with it?

But actually Resurrection was on Yom haBikkurim, the Day of First Fruits. That occurred DURING the Feast of unleavened bread Chag ha Matzot. But even in the first century First Fruits and Unleavened Bread were lumped in together with Passover. Hence "pascha" being used in the Greek, transliteration from the Hebrew Pesach.

You tell me.

Ya think King James was just a little puffed up with his own self importance?

Trivia... King Henry VIII had broken with the Catholic Church and made himself the head of the Church in England, which soon enough became the Church of England. That position has travelled down through all the monarchy,until current days when even though Queen Elizabeth is head of Church of England, Prince Charles declared he would not be.
Time will tell.

Christian Forums News:

Author Topic: Bible Corruptions (Read 967 times)

Christian Forums and Message Board

Christian Forums and Message Board

Christian Forums and Message Board

Christian Forums and Message Board

Christian Forums and Message Board

Christian Forums and Message Board