Have you ever observed the speed limit? "AN UNLETTERED EXAMPLE #1: MARK 6:20 on "an holy, and observed him"

[Alan Dale Gross]

From Top 10 Problem Passages for the King James Bible Translation​

by Craig Lantz, ThD, PhD, Theologian, Author, and Friend of Jesus.

So, for the Bible to say, "a just man and an holy, and observed him"​

are a couple of the top ten Problems Passages in the King James Translation, is being a “Friend of Jesus”?

The ‘problem’ is not with the King James translation,
but with the lack of comprehending the English language.

”Speak to all the congregation of the people of Israel and say to them, You shall be Holy,
for I the Lord your God Am Holy.”– Leviticus 19:2

In English, the indefinite articles are used to indicate membership in a group:

• I am a teacher. (I am a member of a large group known as teachers.)
• Brian is an Irishman. (Brian is a member of the people known as Irish.)
• Seiko is a practicing Buddhist. (Seiko is a member of the group of people known as Buddhists.)

How to Use Articles (a/an/the) - Purdue OWL® - Purdue University

This handout discusses the differences between indefinite articles (a/an) and definite articles (the).

owl.purdue.edu

Question: Is ‘an holy’ thought of as 'one of a group that is holy'?

Answer: "Yes, in a foundational and spiritual sense, "holy" is fundamentally about belonging to a specific, sacred group or category rather than just describing moral perfection."

• "The Group: In ancient texts, calling a group of people "holy" means they are a distinct collective of individuals who have been consecrated, chosen, or dedicated for a special purpose."

“There is absolutely nothing wrong with saying "a just man and an holy." It is a beautiful, deeply traditional phrase. [1, 2]

• “It sounds religious: The phrase is famously used in the Bible to describe John the Baptist
• ("knowing that he was a just man and an holy"). People might assume you are quoting scripture or talking about a saint. [1]

“If you are using "an holy" in a religious or literary context, it is perfectly fine."

AI Overview Google Search

...
Con't; "and observed him".

​

 

[Alan Dale Gross]

Mark 6:20 - "observed him"​

"For Herod feared John, ​

knowing that he was a just man and an holy, and observed him;​

and when he heard him, he did many things, and heard him gladly."

From Top 10 Problem Passages for the King James Bible Translation​

by Craig Lantz, ThD, PhD, Theologian, Author, and Friend of Jesus.

"The second point is that the phrase “and observed him” is outdated in our modern English."

The ‘problem’, again, is not with the King James translation,
but with the lack of comprehending the English language.

Actually, "observed him” is not outdated in our modern English language, in the least, even after over 400 years.

Have you ever observed the speed limit when you’re driving, to not break the law of the land?

​

The following is an excerpt from Dr. Thomas Holland's Crowned With Glory, ©2000;

"It is suggested that the phrase observed him is incorrect and should be translated kept him safe. [1] The problem is not with the translation, but with the lack of comprehending the English language.​

"According to Webster's Third New International Dictionary, the word observe comes from the Latin word observare, which means to watch, guard, and observe. [2]​

"This agrees with Dr. John C. Traupman's Latin Dictionary which defines observare as "to watch, watch out for, take careful note of; to guard; to observe, keep, obey, comply with; to pay attention to, pay respect to." [3]

"Further, the Oxford English Dictionary offers the definition of observe as, "To regard with attention; to watch; to watch over, look after." [4]

"For the most part, we think of the word observe as meaning to watch, study, or take notice of.

"However, to observe also means to keep, protect, or preserve.

"For example, we speak of observing the speed limit.
We do not mean that we are watching how fast we travel down the road;
we mean we are obeying or keeping the law of the land.

"Some observe the Sabbath or a religious holiday. Again, this means they keep or respect the day.

"When the Coast Guard speaks of observing our shores, they are protecting them.

"So it is with forest rangers who set up observation posts for the purpose of protecting the wilderness.

"Both observe and preserve mean to keep something. This is why the same Greek word is used in Luke 2:19 and is translated as kept: "Mary kept all these things, and pondered them in her heart."

"The Greek word is suntereo. In The Analytical Greek Lexicon this word is defined as "to observe strictly, or to secure from harm, protect." [5]

"James H. Moulton and George Milligan note that one of the uses of this word in ancient non-literary writings was when "a veteran claims that in view of his long military service, exemption from public burdens ought to be 'strictly observed' in his case." [6]

"Clearly either observe or kept safe are proper translations."

“Observed him”.—The word has been differently interpreted, but Luke 2:19, where it is translated “kept,”
seems decisive as to its meaning that Herod had a certain reverence for his prisoner.

"In English, however, to “keep” a man is ambiguous,
and the “observed” of our version seems preferable on the whole to any other.”

Mark 6 Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers

[1] James R. White, The King James Only Controversy: Can You Trust the Modern Translations? (Minneapolis: Bethany House, 1995), 224-225.
[2] Webster's Third New International Dictionary, Philip Babcock Gove, editor (Springfield Massachusetts: Merriam-Webster Inc., 1981), 1558.
[3] John C. Traupman, Latin Dictionary (New York: Amsco School Publications, 1966), 200.
[4] The Oxford English Dictionary 2nd edition, J.A. Simpson and E.S.C. Weiner, editors. (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1989), 1196 (compact edition).
[5] Harold K. Moulton, The Analytical Greek Lexicon (Grand Rapids: Zondervan), 392.
[6] James H. Moulton and George Milligan, The Vocabulary Of The Greek Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1949), 614.

 

[Ascetic X]

The ‘problem’ is not with the King James translation,
but with the lack of comprehending the English language.

”Speak to all the congregation of the people of Israel and say to them, You shall be Holy,
for I the Lord your God Am Holy.”– Leviticus 19:2[/
“There is absolutely nothing wrong with saying "a just man and an holy." It is a beautiful, deeply traditional phrase. [1, 2]

• “It sounds religious: The phrase is famously used in the Bible to describe John the Baptist
• ("knowing that he was a just man and an holy"). People might assume you are quoting scripture or talking about a saint. [1]

“If you are using "an holy" in a religious or literary context, it is perfectly fine."

AI Overview

...

​

No, the problem is using AI to teach theology.

“a just man and an holy” is a ridiculous King James Version phrase. Nobody talks like that these days.

“a just and holy man” is far better.

 

[Alan Dale Gross]

No, the problem is using AI to teach theology.

The way I see it, if we are brushed up on the simplest articulation of any given subject, then we already know what AI breaks out with in an organized fashion and that input acts to provide some needed background, for better clarity, as a starting point.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but 'theology', in general, may be a pet peeve of yours, based on your understanding of what you believe to be its questionable origins, in your mind.

“a just man and an holy” is a ridiculous King James Version phrase. Nobody talks like that these days.

He didn’t include himself as being an English teacher in the large font he himself used to try to make himself a name for himself, at the expense of arguably the most venerable and august manuscript collection in all of antiquity.

What an utterly ridiculous colloquialism like any other expressions that reflect how people actually talked, which was the intension of recording for us what they said and meant to the audience they were speaking to during that period.

That record in Mark 6:20 had no intention of worrying about what we would prefer to hear, exactly, over 400 years removed.

"There are plenty more examples where the choice of wording (which is a translator’s prerogative) has nothing to do with changing "a's" and "an's".

Reference	King James Bible	©1982 NKJV and Others
Acts 4:27	Thy holy child, Jesus	“holy child” changed to “holy servant” (NKJV, NASB, RSV)
Acts 8:9	bewitched the people	“bewitched” changed to “astonished” (NKJV, NASB)
Romans 1:25	changed the truth of God into a lie	“exchanged the truth of God for the lie” (NKJV, NASB, NIV)
Romans 4:25	Who was delivered for our offenses and was raised again for our justification	“for” changed to “because of” (NKJV, NASB)
2 Corinthians 10:5	Casting down imaginations	“imaginations” changed to “arguments” (NKJV, NIV, RSV)
Colossians 3:2	Set your affection on things above	“affection” changed to “mind” (NKJV, NASB, NIV, RSV)
1 Thessalonians 5:22	Abstain from all appearance of evil	“appearance” changed to “form” (NKJV, NASB, RSV)
2 Timothy 2:15	Study to shew thyself approved unto God	“study” changed to “be diligent” (NKJV, NASB)
Titus 3:10	A man that is an heretick ... reject	“heretick” changed to “divisive man” (NKJV, NIV)

"The word meanings are clear in the 1611 King James Bible and they are clear in the ©1982 NKJV as well as the other versions. The words aren’t the same and don’t mean the same thing.

"If we assume that the Lord was involved with the translation in the 1611 King James Bible, then we should also assume that He is pleased with the English words as they have appeared for the past 400 years.

"There is no reason to assume he changed His Mind in 1982 and decided to discard the wording He’s presented Billions of times in 400 years."

From: Why Jesus Cannot Use the New King James Version - Jack McElroy

“a just and holy man” is far better.

Isn't "man" entirely understood as implied the same way that "women" should, but has to be, understood by implication when you've used the words "all men". You don't leave "all women and children" out when you've quoted those words from the Bible, have you?

I ask you. Is the word “man” immediately modified by the word “just” before it?

Then the word “man” is followed with the conjunction “and”
which connects the words “an holy” directly back to the word “man”, again.

Isn't “an holy” simply making another modification of the word “man”, or not?

"Holy" is an Adjective.

Why do I sense that had the King James translators rendered those words as “just man” and “an holy man”
the repetition of the second understood and implied “man” would have been condemned for being a “tautology”?

There is no difference between saying, “John was an holy man and just” and “John was a just man and an holy”.

Would that syntax and morphemes arraignment of the same words, meaning the same thing meet your standards?

This guy allows, “If you have been brought up and conditioned by the KJV, it makes sense”, as if that would have been something harmful, instead of one of the greatest privileges on Earth, to sit under the teaching of the Eternal Words of God, from one of the greatest Gifts God ever Bestowed upon Mankind, which happens to contain within it, “he’s a just man and an holy”, the same as we might say, “she’s a Godly woman and a beauty”. No real big deal.

Some “breath of fresh air”.

Some “Friend of Jesus”.

 

[Alan Dale Gross]

“a just man and an holy” is a ridiculous King James Version phrase. Nobody talks like that these days.

To whine and cry and complain about the King James' use of basically normal, everyday language "all seems like 'stuff and nonsense' because we’re still using virtually the same spelling and word forms used back in 1762 and 1769 when the spelling and grammar of the 1611 King James Bible was modernized..."

For example, "(and this is even more telling) why does the ©1982 NKJV still contain difficult words?

WHO TALKS LIKE THIS ANYMORE?

"Wrap your brain around these:

Alighting; Allays; Armlets; Befalls; Belial; Bleat; Bray; Buffet; Burnished; Caldron; Carrion; Chalkstones; Circumspect; Citron; Dainties; Dandled; Daubed; Dappled; Enmity; Entrails; Fallow; Festal; Fowlers; Fuller; Furlongs; Jackdaw; Mammon; Matrix; Paramours; Parapet; Pilfering; Pinions; plaited; Potentate; Potsherd; Poultice; Prattler; Prow; Pyre; Quadrans; Raze; Retinue; Rivulets; Rogue; Satiate; Shards; Sistrums; Skiff; Supplanted; Tamarisk; Terebinth; Timbrel; Tresses; Verdure; Verity; Waifs; Wane; Wend; and woof"

From: Why Jesus Cannot Use the New King James Version - Jack McElroy

Do you see any words there, that you would like to try to put your name in lights with, by saying they are ridiculous for the NKJV to have printed them in their 'modern version', WITH UPDATED LANUAGE FROM THE KJV(?), as late as 1982?

Seems like you or this guy who found such catastrophizing incidents of 'Problems' in the King James Bible could have aimed your guns at some more real obsolete, bygone language from that list, found in the most conservative modern knock-off, the NKJV, THAT HAS AS ONE OF THE ONLY THINGS THAT HAS BEEN ATTEMPTED TO RECOMMEND IT WAS THAT IT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE SO MUCH EASIER TO READ FOR EVERYBODY, especially old ladies and 'the youth'. BUT, IT'S NOT, AT ALL.

Craig Lantz, ThD, PhD, Theologian, Author, and 'Friend of Jesus' had a Top Ten 'Problem' with Mark 6:20.

What about Mark 6:11, or Mark 6:14, 6:16, 6:33, 6:44, or 6:51?

Or a few hundred other far more serious alterations and ommissions from throughout the Bible?

One example, Mark 6:11 (KJV) "And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear you, when ye depart thence, shake off the dust under your feet for a testimony against them. Verily I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city."

"The Lord is saying that where ever He sends His witnesses in the world and if the message of the true Gospel is rejected by those sent to, then it will be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of Judgment.

"Why? Because Sodom and Gomorrha did not have the extensive witness of the true Gospel light as we have today. When the Lord Jesus Christ was on earth, He was the walking witness and the truth personified.

"Sodom and Gomorrha will be judged on the basis of the light which was given to them. The unbelievers who scoff and mock the Gospel will be judged more harshly because they will have been given much more Gospel witness than Sodom and Gomorrha."

"This is another one of those severely mutilated verses. There are 23 words omitted from this verse in the modern versions (above and below in underlined bold red in the KJV quote) and we are supposed to accept the propaganda that the modern versions are better."

What Preservation looks like:

Mark 6:11 (KJV) "And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear you, when ye depart thence, shake off the dust under your feet for a testimony against them. Verily I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city."

(1611 KJV) "And whosoeuer shall not receiue you, nor heare you, when yee depart thence, shake off the dust vnder your feet, for a testimonie against them: Uerely I say vnto you, it shalbe more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of iudgement, then for that citie."

(Geneva Bible of 1587) "And whosoeuer shall not receiue you, nor heare you, when ye depart thence, shake off the dust that is vnder your feete, for a witnes vnto them. Verely I say vnto you, It shalbe easier for Sodom, or Gomorrha at the day of iudgement, then for that citie."

(1568 Bishops Bible) "And whosoeuer shall not receaue you nor heare you, when ye depart thence, shake of the dust that is vnder your feet, for a witnesse vnto them: I say veryly vnto you, it shalbe easyer for the Sodomites and the Gomorrheans in the day of iudgement, then for that citie."

(Coverdale Bible of 1535) "And who so euer wyll not receaue you, ner heare you, departe out from thence, and shake of the dust from youre fete, for a wytnesse vnto them. I saye vnto you verely: It shal be easyer for Sodome and Gomorra in the daye of iudgment, then for that cite."

(1526 Tyndale) "And whosoever shall not receave you nor heare you when ye departe thence shake of the duste that is vnder youre fete for a witnesse vnto them. I saye verely vnto you it shalbe easyer for Zodom and Gomor at the daye of iudgement then for that cite."

What "the author of confusion" looks like:

Textus Receptus - Traditional Text kai osoi an mh dexwntai umaV mhde akouswsin umwn ekporeuomenoi ekeiqen ektinaxate ton coun ton upokatw twn podwn umwn eiV marturion autoiV amhn legw umin anektoteron estai sodomoiV h gomorroiV en hmera krisewV h th polei ekeinh.

Hort-Westcott - Critical Text kai oV an topoV mh dexhtai umaV mhde akouswsin umwn ekporeuomenoi ekeiqen ektinaxate ton coun ton upokatw twn podwn umwn eiV marturion autoiV ____________- Omitted -_____________ _______________________________________.

"If the translators of the modern versions would see that they are nothing more than prostitutes for the kingdom of Satan, they might realize how much of a role they are playing to confuse all of Chrisianity.

"Once again the King James Bible gives us the complete story while the modern versions have just done Satan’s bidding."

From: KJV Comparison Page