NIV error

Sorry my NIV Bible only has eight verses in 1 Chronicles 20, just like my KJV Bible.

 

I'm afraid to open my NIV.. Afraid I might get cooties!

Lacy:saint:

 

I checked it out and your right.

 

Not to hard to understand, seeing the KJV translators added "the brother of" in 2 Samuel 21:19
(19) And there was again a battle in Gob with the Philistines, where Elhanan the son of Jaareoregim, a Bethlehemite, slew the brother of Goliath the Gittite, the staff of whose spear was like a weaver's beam.

You see everything in italics in the KJV is not part of the original text. the translators added them... sorta like the footnotes in the NIV, which incidently say the same thing...


From the footnotes of the NIV:
[4]2Sa_21:19 Hebrew and Septuagint; 1Ch_20:5 son of Jair killed Lahmi the brother of Goliath

 

Here is info from the NET Bible,
Notice that MT stands for Masoretic Text... the text that underlies the KJV OT...
Here it is:

The Hebrew text as it stands reads, “Elhanan son of Jaare-Oregim the Bethlehemite killed Goliath the Gittite.” Who killed Goliath the Gittite? According to 1 Sam 17:4-58 it was David who killed Goliath, but according to the MT of 2 Sam 21:19 it was Elhanan who killed him. Many scholars believe that the two passages are hopelessly at variance with one another. Others have proposed various solutions to the difficulty, such as identifying David with Elhanan or positing the existence of two Goliaths. But in all likelihood the problem is the result of difficulties in the textual transmission of the Samuel passage; in fact, from a text-critical point of view the books of Samuel are the most poorly preserved of all the books of the Hebrew Bible. The parallel passage in 1 Chr 20:5 reads, “Elhanan son of Jair killed Lahmi the brother of Goliath.” Both versions are textually corrupt. The Chronicles text has misread “Bethlehemite” (בֵּית הַלַּחְמִי, bet hallakhmi) as the accusative sign followed by a proper name אֶת לַחְמִי (’et lakhmi). (See the note at 1 Chr 20:5.) The Samuel text misread the word for “brother” (אַח, ’akh) as the accusative sign (אֵת, ’et), thereby giving the impression that Elhanan, not David, killed Goliath. Thus in all probability the original text read, “Elhanan son of Jair the Bethlehemite killed the brother of Goliath.”

According to the MT (The underlying text of the KJV) it wasn't David that killed Goliath... That it why the translators added to what the MT said in order for it to make sense.... the words in italics.

 

I don't know about you, but I want to know what the text actually says.
The NIV gives the actual reading....with footnotes that make it make sense.
The KJV adds to the actual reading with italicized words to make it make sense.

 

And you mentioned the 1611... my copy doesn't even have the italics....so I can't tell where they added to the word of God....

2 Samuel 21:19
(19) And there was againe a battell in Gob, with the Philistines, where Elhanan the sonne of Iaare-Oregim a Bethlehemite, slewe the brother of Goliath the Gittite, the staffe of whose speare was like a weauers beame.

Now which is worse, adding to the actual text, or taking from it?
adding to it to make it make sense, or leaving it alone the way God inspired it.

The actual text from the MT says that Iaare-Oregim, a Bethlehemite, slewe Goliath. Now is this a mistake in the MT? You have to decide that...

But if you decide it is a mistake, then realize the KJV OT is based on the MT!
Too bad the KJV translators didn't use other more reliable texts.

 

Shouldnt' this be in the translations section?

 

Thats why we have a "Report Post" button.

Give the mods a hand folks, please use this feature

 

Did you check the Hebrew OT to verify your findings?

 

1) I would like to have a 1611 in printed form, the only one I have is from e-sword.

2) is this verse quoted in the NT?

3) are you saying that the italics (that were added by the tranlators of the KJV) are inspired?

4) Do you believe the translators of the 1611 were inspired by God to pen scripture, and fix mistakes in the underlying texts?

5) if you believe that the Holy Ghost is "of" God instead of "is" God, you have a deeper problem than who killed Goliath.

 

So in other words, tinytim, what you are saying is that the NIV translates the text accurately, while the KJV translators added their own words to the text which aren't really there in the manuscript?

Deacon JD above isn't quoting from the 1611 KJV, but rather the nineteenth century revision of it, which is, IMHO, a "modern" version.

THat's why I don't use a KJV. Too many italicized words, where the translators added things that are not in the manuscript. That creates a problem when you are under attack by atheists.

BTW, not that I have been "attacked" by an atheist, but I've noticed, in debates with one atheist in particular that I've been talking to for about five years now, his quotations of scripture come from the KJV, because it is a weaker translation. One of his arguments about the inconsistency of Christianity is pointing out that the KJV translators were biased. I've succeeded in making several corrections in his perspective by pulling out my Oxford RSV (with Apocrypha) and my copies of the Hebrew, Septuagint and Greek NT. Most atheists seem to be well equipped with a strong working knowledge of Biblical languages. A Christian needs to be at least equally as prepared. That's why I won't use a weaker translation like the KJV.

 

I don't like being a snitch

 

http://dewey.library.upenn.edu/sceti/printedbooksNew/index.cfm?TextID=kjbible&PagePosition=431

No italics, but the addition was noted by the translators

 

Please - it would make our jobs SO MUCH easier

 

I did it...

Don't tell my parents...:thumbs: