KJV leaves words of God out of it's version.

Discussion in '2004 Archive' started by tinytim, Apr 23, 2004.

  1. tinytim

    tinytim
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/tim2.jpg>

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2003
    Messages:
    11,250
    Likes Received:
    0
    Heb 1:6, "And again, when he bringeth in the firstbegotten into the world, he saith, and let all the angels of God worship him.

    QUESTION: Where did God say, "and let all the angels of God worship him?"

    ANSWER: Deut. 32:43
    Look it up in a KJV.
    What it's not there?
    Oh, that's right, the KJV uses the Masoretic text.
    It is only found in the LXX, or the Dead Sea Scrolls.

    Now look up both passages in a NIV.
    Read the footnotes.
    There, you learned something.

    The LXX and the DSS, both say in Deut. "Rejoice o nations, with his people and let all the angels worship him for he will avenge the blood of his servents."

    The KJV deleted this phrase.
    What? Is the KJV taking away from the Word of God?
    You may say, "but it shouldn't have been there, that they are not God's words."
    WEll, in that case you disagree with the Writer of Hebrews when he says that God said it!

    The phrase according to the Hebrew's Writer is part of God's word.

    Sooooo, The KJV takes away a part of God's words.

    This is proof that the writer of Hebrews considered other texts besides the Massoretic text to be God's words. (The LXX, Dead Sea Scrlls, or something else?)

    BTW the NLT actually includes the phrase in the text of Deut. 32:43. Way to go NLT, you actually are better than the KJV in this verse. [​IMG] [​IMG]
     
  2. Psalm145 3

    Psalm145 3
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2001
    Messages:
    317
    Likes Received:
    0
    (Edward F. Hills, The King James Version Defended, 3rd ed., 1979, p. 95).
     
  3. Askjo

    Askjo
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2003
    Messages:
    3,736
    Likes Received:
    0
    Psalm145 3 - Preach it!!! [​IMG]
     
  4. tinytim

    tinytim
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/tim2.jpg>

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2003
    Messages:
    11,250
    Likes Received:
    0
    "He may have had Deut. 32:43 in mind, but the passage which he was actually citing was Psalm 97:7, which is found both in the Hebrew Old Testament and in the Septuagint and which reads (in the Septuagint), worship Him all ye His angels."

    OK, He is still "quoting" from the Septuagent insted of the underlying text of the KJV.
    In the KJV Ps. 97:7 says

    Psalm 97
    7 Confounded be all they that serve graven images, that boast themselves of idols: worship him, all ye gods.

    So if he quoted from the LXX (as you admit is closer to the quote than the Massoretic) then is the LXX the word of God? After all the writer says that God said it.
    And are you equating "gods" in the KJV OT with angels? Hebrews says "angels" not "gods". To make an angel a god sounds like new age to me.

    Ok, Ok, I'm being sarcastic, don't hang me.
    But seriously, does someone know if the Hebrew word for "gods" and "angels" is the same?
    If so jump in and show me.
     
  5. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yes, elohim can be translated either as angels or gods or God.

    Whatever the case of the LXX, we konw that the phrase is not in the MT. This is a bad passage for KJVOs ... Regardless of what they say about it ...
     
  6. Phillip

    Phillip
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2001
    Messages:
    6,708
    Likes Received:
    0
    tinytim, isn't it interesting that the KJV1611 contained the apocrypha and so did the LXX?
     
  7. Phillip

    Phillip
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2001
    Messages:
    6,708
    Likes Received:
    0
    tinytim, isn't it interesting that the KJV1611 contained the apocrypha and so did the LXX?
     
  8. tinytim

    tinytim
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/tim2.jpg>

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2003
    Messages:
    11,250
    Likes Received:
    0
    That's the point I'm trying to make. since the writer of Hebrews was using Scripture to prove his point, then why is it missing in the MT? Unless he used other texts. Like it or not even the KJV translators called the LXX "the word of God."
     
  9. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    I agree with you Tim ...
     
  10. tinytim

    tinytim
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/tim2.jpg>

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2003
    Messages:
    11,250
    Likes Received:
    0
    I have another question along these lines. In the book of Jude where Jude quotes from the book of Enoch, is it possible for the KJVOs to argue that God has spoken to others outside of scripture (the canon) and that may be an excuse for using the LXX phrase?
     
  11. robycop3

    robycop3
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    7,573
    Likes Received:
    10
    We definitely know that there was at least one other Book of Kings written, and another Book of Chronicles written, that didn't make Scripture. I've HEARD (not confirmrd) that there was a 3rd letter written by Paul to the Corinthians that didn't make Scripture.

    The Book of Enoch wasn't written by the same Enoch whom God took to heaven, as it refers to a year of 365 1/4 days, same as present, when we know from Scripture(the flood of Noah) and writings & legends worldwide that the year was once only 360 days long.

    BTW, welcome back, Tiny Tim!
     
  12. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    29,402
    Likes Received:
    12
    Scriptures used bits and pieces of many non-canonical writings. Each "bit" was fully and completely inspired but this is no way gives credance to the entire work from which it was lifted.

    Acts 17 is a good example: "For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring. Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man's device."

    Paul is quoting ungodly Greek poets, but just a phrase that happens to be correct. Nothing about the Illiad or Odyssey!!
     
  13. tinytim

    tinytim
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/tim2.jpg>

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2003
    Messages:
    11,250
    Likes Received:
    0
    Is this the same principle that says there are lies in the Bible? Like the Serpent's lies in the Garden. The Bible truthfully records lies that others tell.

    BTW, Thanks for the welcome back, Roby, but I'm not fully back yet. I just have 10 minutes access on the internet/ day at the Ronald Mcdonald House here in Cleveland. ( A great charity if you're looking to donate!)
     
  14. robycop3

    robycop3
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    7,573
    Likes Received:
    10
    I shall pray that God spread His hand over you & yours.

    Most of the writers of Scripture had most likely read a good deal more literature than what they mentioned in their works that became Scripture. The well-educated Paul had prolly read all the Jewish religious commentaries existing at the time as well as the Scriptures, and it's evident that he wasn't unaware of the religious beliefs of the Hellenistic Greeks as he debated with the Athenians.

    I believe other Scripture-writers sometimes quoted from other versions of Scripture as well as from other literature not Scripture. Their quotes were included in Scripture in the manner you stated.
     

Share This Page

Loading...