Vatican Versions reject the Hebrew Texts The NASB, NIV, ESV, NET, Holman Standard and others

 

 

“Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you.” Deuteronomy 4:2.

 

“Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him. Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar.” Proverbs 30:5-6.

 

 

“If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book; And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.” Revelation 22:18, 19.

 

 

The Old Testament scriptures, except for a few chapters of Aramaic, were written in Hebrew – not Greek or Syriac or Latin. The Lord Jesus Christ said in Matthew 5:18 “For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.” Jots and tittles refer to the Hebrew scriptures.

 

Likewise the apostle Paul states: “What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision? Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God.” Romans 3:1-2.

 

The Hebrew Masoretic scribes were used of God to preserve His inspired words in the Old Testament. Of the Bible versions widely used today in the English language, only the King James Bible consistently sticks to the Hebrew text. The NKJV departs at least 10 times I have found so far, the NASB over 40 times and the NIV, ESV reject the Hebrew Masoretic text well over 80 times, and most of these are openly admitted to in the footnotes of the NIV and ESV. The NASB departs from the Hebrew but they don’t tell you when they do this in their footnotes. 

 

The modern Catholic bible versions like the St. Joseph New American Bible 1970 and the Catholic New Jerusalem Bible of 1985 often reject the same Hebrew texts in the same places and ALL these versions have virtually the SAME New Testament “interconfessional” text created by a joint effort of the Vatican and the infallibility denying, apostate ‘Evangelicals” called the UBS (United Bible Society) or Nestle-Aland critical Greek text.  

 

See Undeniable Proof the ESV, NIV, NASBs are the new “Catholic” bible versions here –

 

This article will not list all the examples from the NIV, ESV,  NASB, but enough to allow you to see what is happening to the Book we should all hold in reverence and treasure above any earthly possession.

 

 

Most Evangelical Christians today do not believe that any Bible in any language IS the inerrant words of God.  In spite of the lame, signifying nothing, recent Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy, they did get one thing right. It’s found in Article XII – “We deny that Biblical infallibility and inerrancy are limited to spiritual, religious, or redemptive themes, exclusive of assertions in the fields of history and science.” 

 

Every true Bible believer should agree with this statement.  IF the Bible is not 100% historically true, then at what point does God start to tell us the truth?  If we cannot trust God’s Book when it comes to specific numbers and names when it comes to past history, then how can we be sure He got the other parts right?

 

 It is devastating for the modern version promoter to see where the New Jerusalem Catholic bible lands on these verses. Also notice how the previous Catholic Douay-Rheims read. It was a whole lot closer to the historical truth than are these more modern translations.   

 

The following short list is just a sampling of the divergent and confusing readings found among the contradictory modern bible versions. There are numerous other examples, but these are just a few to make you aware of what is going on here with “the late$t in $cholar$hip Finding$.”  

 

The Bible Agnostic Test  

 

I hear from many unbelievers in the existence of a complete and infallible Bible when they say: “I’m not a bible agnostic! You don’t know my heart. How can you say I am a bible agnostic and an unbeliever in the inerrancy of the Bible?  How dare you? You are being judgmental.”   

 

So I ask them if they are willing to take The Bible Agnostic Test. A bible agnostic is someone who does not know (a = not + gnostic = to know) for sure what God said in many instances.  Just go through this first part where you will find about 20 examples of completely different names and numbers in todays Bible Babble Buffet Versions and tell us if you know which readings are the ones God inspired in His Book. Just pick one example if you like and let us know. OK?  Most bible agnostic simply dodge the whole test and refuse to answer it.  What about you?  Willing to take the Test?  

 

The Bible Babble Buffet Versions

 

Among these “historic details” are whether Jeremiah 27:1 reads Jehoiakim (Hebrew texts, RV, ASV, NKJV, KJB, ISV, Douay-Rheims, St. Joseph New American Bible 1970) or Zedekiah (RSV, NIV, NASB, ESV, NET, Holman, Catholic New Jerusalem 1985)

 

Judges 18:30 Manasseh or Moses?

 

KJB – “And the children of Dan set up the graven image: and Jonathan, the son of Gershom, the son of MANASSEH, he and his sons were priests to the tribe of Dan until the day of the captivity of the land.”

 

ESV (NIV, NET, Holman Standard, Catholic versions, Jehovah Witness NWT) – “And the people of Dan set up the carved image for themselves, and Jonathan the son of Gershom, son of MOSES, and his sons were priests to the tribe of the Danites until the day of the captivity of the land.”

 

 

 

 

 

1 Samuel 6:19 – 50,070 men slain (KJB, Douay-Rheims, RV, ASV, NASB, NET) or only 70 (ESV, NIV, RSV, St. Joseph NAB, New Jerusalem bible) or 75 (The Voice) or 70 men, 50 chief men (Youngs) or 70 men and 50 oxen (NKJV, NLT footnote)?

 

1 Samuel 6:19 King James Bible (NASB, NET, RV, ASV) – “And he smote the men of Bethshemesh, because they had looked INTO the ark of the LORD, even he smote OF THE PEOPLE FIFTY THOUSAND AND THREESCORE AND TEN MEN: and the people lamented, because the LORD had smitten many of the people with a great slaughter.”  

 

ESV 2016 (NIV 2011, Catholic St. Joseph New American bible 1970, Catholic New Jerusalem 1985, New Catholic Bible 2019) – “He struck SEVENTY men of them, and the people mourned because the LORD had struck the people with a great blow.”

 

 

Young’s “literal” (Hah!)  translation reads: “He smiteth among the people SEVENTY MEN – FIFTY CHIEF MEN”.  

 

While The Voice 2012 tells us that “God struck down 75 men”

 

See why the Hebrew text and the KJB are right and the phony “bibles” are not.

 

 

 

 

1 Samuel 13:1  Here we read: “Saul reigned ONE year; and when he had reigned TWO years over Israel, Saul chose him three thousand men of Israel.”  reading – ONE/TWO years (NKJV, KJB, Geneva, Judaica Press Tanach, Orthodox Jewish Bible), or 40/32 (NASB 1972-77) or 30/42 (NASB 1995, NIV),  OR 30 years/ 40 years (NET) or _____years and______and two years (RSV, NRSV, ESV 2001 edition, St. Joseph New American Bible 1970, Catholic New Jerusalem 1985), or “was 40 years old…and when he had reigned 2 years” (ASV 1901, Amplified bible 1987) or “____years old and reigned 2 years” (Complete Jewish bible, Knox bible, , Jehovah Witness New World Translation) or “was 30 years old…ruled for 42 years” (ISV, Common English Bible) or “32 years old…reigned for 22 years” in the 1989 Revised English Bible, or as the Jehovah Witness New World Translation has it – I Samuel 13:1 – “Saul was . . .* years old when he became king, and for two years he reigned over Israel. “  Footnote: The number is missing in the Hebrew text.” or even “was 50 years old and reigned 22 years.” in the New English Bible of 1970! 

 

But wait.  There’s even more. The ESV 2001 edition had “Saul was________years old when he began to reign, and he reigned____and two years over Israel.”  But now the 2011 edition of the ESV has come out (I have a hard copy right here in front of me) and it now has the perhaps even more ridiculous reading of “Saul LIVED FOR ONE YEAR AND THEN BECAME KING, and when he had reigned FOR TWO YEARS over Israel, Saul chose 3000 men of Israel…”.  Think about it. “Saul lived for one year and then became king”.  They just get loopier and loopier, don’t they?

 

Can you guess which other version reads this way?  You got it; the Catholic Douay-Rheims 1610 and the Douay Version 1950 which read: “Saul was A CHILD OF ONE YEAR WHEN HE BEGAN TO REIGN, and he reigned two years over Israel.”

 

Or 1 Samuel 13:5 we read: “And the Philistines gathered themselves together to fight with Israel, THIRTY thousand chariots…” (Hebrew text, Geneva, RV, ASV, NKJV, ESV, NASB, Douay-Rheims) or “THREE thousand chariots.” (Syriac text, NET, NIV, Holman, St. Joseph NAB, New Jerusalem bible)

 

 

 

1 Samuel 17:4 How Tall Was Goliath?

 

In 1 Samuel 17:4 the Hebrew texts tell us that the height of Goliath was SIX cubits and a span, which would make him about 9 feet 6 inches tall.  That indeed is a giant.  However the LXX tells us that Goliath was a mere FOUR cubits and a span – “ὕψος αὐτοῦ τεσσάρων πήχεων καὶ σπιθαμῆς” – which would make him only 6 feet 6 inches tall, which would hardly be much among NBA players today.  King Saul himself was head and shoulders taller than the other Israelites, and yet he was afraid of this giant. If he were only 6ft. 6 inches, this would not make much sense.

 

Agreeing with the Hebrew text the he was 6 cubits and a span tall are the RSV, ESV, NASB, NIV, NKJV and all Jewish translations.

 

However there are a few loonies out there like Daniel Wallace and gang’s NET version that says: “His name was Goliath; he was from Gath. He was CLOSE TO SEVEN FEET TALL.”  

 

Dan Wallace’s group chose the reading found in SOME LXX copies of FOUR and a half cubits tall.  Other LXX copies have FIVE and others still have SIX cubits and a span. Also reading this way are the new ISV (International Standard Version) and the Catholic St. Josepeh New American bible 1970. So, which one is right? Was he 4 or 5 or 6 cubits and a span tall?  

 

For more information on this see Scatterbrained Septuagint Silliness – 

 

 

 

In 1 Samuel 17:4 the Hebrew texts tell us that the height of Goliath was SIX cubits and a span, which would make him about 9 feet 6 inches tall.  That indeed is a giant.  However the LXX tells us that Goliath was a mere FOUR cubits and a span – “ὕψος αὐτοῦ τεσσάρων πήχεων καὶ σπιθαμῆς” – which would make him only 6 feet 6 inches tall, which would hardly be much among NBA players today.  

 

King Saul himself was head and shoulders taller than the other Israelites, and yet he was afraid of this giant. If he were only 6ft. 6 inches, this would not make much sense.

 

 

“after forty years” or “four years”? Has the Hebrew text been corrupted?

 

2 Samuel 15:7 forty years or four years?

 

King James Bible – “And it came to pass AFTER FORTY YEARS, that Absalom said unto the king…”  

 

ESV, NIV, NET, Holman Standard, Catholic St. Joseph NAB, Catholic New Jerusalem, Jehovah Witness NWT 2013 revision – “And at THE END OF FOUR YEARS Absolom said to the king…” 

 

 

 

In 2 Samuel we read of Absalom’s rebellion against his father, king David. Verses 7-8 say: “And it came to pass after FORTY years, that Absalom said unto the king, I pray thee, let me go a pay my vow, which I have vowed unto the LORD, in Hebron. For thy servant vowed a vow while I abode at Geshur in Syria, saying, If the LORD shall bring me again indeed to Jerusalem, then I will serve the LORD.”

 

Here ALL Hebrew texts read FORTY years.

 

See why the KJB and the Hebrew text is right, here –

 

 

 

Or whether 2 Samuel 21:8 reads Michal (Hebrew texts, KJB, NKJV, RV 1881, ASV 1901, Douay-Rheims) or Merab (RSV, NIV, NASB, ESV, NET, Holman, ISV, St. Joseph NAB, Catholic New Jerusalem)

 

2 Samuel 21:8 KJB – “and the five sons of MICHAL the daughter of Saul, whom she BROUGHT UP FOR Adriel…”

 

2 Samuel 21:8 – ESV, NIV, NASB – “and the five sons of MERAB, the daughter of Saul, whom she BORE TO Adriel…”

 

There is no error in the Hebrew text nor in the King James Bible. Here is why the KJB is right, as always –

 

 

 

 

Three or Thirty?

 

2 Samuel 23:18-19 KJB (Hebrew texts, Geneva, NKJV, NIV, NET, Holman) – “And Abishai, the brother of Joab, the son of Zeruiah, was chief among THREE. And he lifted up his spear against three hundred, and slew them, and had the name among three. Was he not most honourable of THREE? therefore he was their captain: howbeit he attained not unto the first three.

 

2 Samuel 23:18-19 – “…was chief of THE THIRTY…most renowned of THE THIRTY” (RSV, NRSV, ESV, NASB)

 

 

 

1 Kings 5:11 “TWENTY measures” (Hebrew text, KJB, NASB, ASV, ISV) or “TWENTY THOUSAND baths” (NIV, LXX) “20,000 cors” (RSV, ESV, NET)?

 

King James Bible – “And Solomon gave Hiram twenty thousand measures of wheat for food TO HIS HOUSEHOLD, and TWENTY MEASURES of pure oil: thus gave Solomon to Hiram year by year.

 

ESV (RSV, NRSV, NIV, NET) – “while Solomon gave Hiram 20,000 core of wheat as food for his household, and 20,000 cors of beaten oil. Solomon gave this to Hiram year by year.” ESV Footnote 20,000 = Septuagint; 20 = Hebrew.  

 

 

 

“one hundred and twenty” or “twenty cubits”?

 

2 Chronicles 3:4  Measurements of the house of the LORD built by king Solomon — “the height ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY” or “TWENTY CUBITS HIGH” (NIV)?

 

2 Chronicles 3:4 – KJB – “And the porch that was in front of the house, the length of it was according to the breadth of the house, twenty cubits, and the height was AN HUNDRED AND TWENTY; and he overlaid it within with pure gold.”

 

NIV (NET- 2 Chronicles 3:4 – “The portico at the front of the temple was twenty cubits long, across the width of the building and TWENTY CUBITS HIGH. He overlaid the inside with pure gold.”

 

NIV Footnote: “SOME Septuagint and Syriac manuscripts; Hebrew A HUNDRED AND TWENTY.” 

 

1 Chronicles 20:3 “he CUT THEM with saws” or “he PUT THEM TO WORK with saws”?

 

 

KJB – 1 Chronicles 20:3 – KJB (NASB) – “And he brought out the people that were in it, AND CUT THEM WITH SAWS, AND WITH HARROWS OF IRON, AND WITH AXES. Even so dealt David with all the cities of the children of Ammon. And David and all the people returned to Jerusalem.”

 

 

NKJV, NIV, ESV, Holman Standard, Jehovah Witness NWT – 1 Chronicles 20:3 – “And he brought out the people who were in it, and PUT THEM TO WORK WITH SAWS, WITH IRON PICKS, AND WITH AXES. So David did to all the cities of the people of Ammon.”

 

See why the KJB (and NASB) is right but the NKJV, NIV, ESV, NET, Holman Standard, modern Catholic versions and Jehovah Witness NWT rejected the Hebrew text.

 

 

 

or 70 (NASB, NKJV, RV, ASV, RSV, NRSV, Holman, ISV, KJB) being sent out by the Lord Jesus in Luke 10:1 and 17 or 72 (NIV, ESV, NET, St. Joseph NAB, Catholic New Jerusalem) 

 

or in Matthew 18:22 does the Lord say to forgive your brother not “until 7 times, but unto 70 times 7 times” (= 490 times – KJB, RV, ASV, NASB, NKJV, RSV, ESV 2001, 2007 editions, ISV, Douay-Rheims, St. Joseph NAB, ALL Greek texts) or 77 times (NRSV, NIV, ESV 2011 edition, Catholic New Jerusalem, Jehovah Witness New World Translation)

 

See “Wrong Numbers in the Fake Bibles” to see why the KJB is right.  Scroll about half way down.

 

 

 

or the 7th day in Judges 14:15 (KJB, NKJV, RV, ASV, Douay-Rheims) or the 4th day (RSV, ESV, NASB, NIV, NET, St. Joseph NAB, Catholic New Jerusalem, Jehovah Witness NWT) or “the NEXT day” ISV (they just made this up!)

 

Or Hannah taking young Samuel to the house of the LORD with THREE bullocks  in 1 Samuel 1:24 (KJB, Hebrew texts, RV, ASV, JPS 1917, NKJV, Youngs, NET, Douay-Rheims) or “A THREE YEAR OLD BULL: (LXX, Syriac RSV, ESV, NIV, NASB, ISV, Holman, St. Joseph NAB, Catholic New Jerusalem, Jehovah Witness NWT)  

 

See why the KJB and the Hebrew texts are right – 

 

 

or there being 30,000 chariots in 1 Samuel 13:5 (KJB, NKJV, RV, ASV, NASB, RSV, NRSV, ESV, ISV, Douay-Rheims) or only 3000 (NIV, NET,  Holman, St. Joseph NAB, Catholic New Jerusalem)

 

 

or 2 Samuel 24:13 reading SEVEN years (KJB, Hebrew, ASV, NASB, NKJV, NET, ISV, Douay-Rheims) or THREE years (LXX, NIV, RSV, NRSV, ESV, Holman, St. Joseph NAB, Catholic New Jerusalem)

 

See why the KJB and the Hebrew texts are right, here –

 

 

or whether 1 Kings 4:26 reads 40,000 stalls of horses (Hebrew, KJB, RV, ASV, RSV,  NRSV, NASB, ESV, NKJV, ISV, Douay-Rheims, Jehovah Witness NWT 1961 edition) or 4,000 stalls (SOME LXX copies, NIV, NET, St. Joseph NAB, Catholic New Jerusalem, Jehovah Witness NWT 2013 edition)

 

Jehovah Witness NWT 2013 edition – “And Sol′o·mon had 4,000 stalls of horses for his chariots and 12,000 horses.”  This is one of the places where the new Revised NWT changes the Hebrew reading of 40,000 for the reading found in SOME Greek LXX copies of 4,000.  

 

  

 

 

or whether 1 Kings 5:11 reads 20 measures of pure oil (Hebrew texts, Geneva, KJB, ASV, RV, NASB, NRSV, ISV, Douay-Rheims) or 20,000 (Jehovah Witness New World Translation 1961 and 2013 editions, RSV, NIV, ESV, NET, LXX and Syriac, St. Joseph NAB, Catholic New Jerusalem)

 

or in 2 Chronicles 31:16 we read “males from THREE years old” (Hebrew texts, KJB, Geneva Bible, Wycliffe, LXX, Syriac, RV, ASV, RSV, NRSV, ESV, NIV, NKJV, Holman, NET, Douay-Rheims) or “males from THIRTY years old” (NASB – ft. Hebrew “three”,  ISV  -“every male 30 years old and older”, St. Joseph New American Bible 1970, Catholic New Jerusalem 1985)

 

or where 2 Chronicles 36:9 reads that Jehoiachin was 8 years old when he began to reign (Hebrew texts, KJB, NASB, NKJV, RV, ASV, KJB, RSV, NRSV, ESV 2001 edition, ISV, Douay-Rheims) or he was 18 years old (NIV, Holman, NET, ESV 2007 edition!!! and once again the Catholic St. Joseph NAB and the New Jerusalem and the Jehovah Witness NWT 1961 and 2013 editions)

 

See why the KJB and the Hebrew texts are right, here –

 

 

or that when God raised the Lord Jesus from the dead it is stated in Acts 13:33 “this day have I begotten thee” (KJB, NASB, NKJV, RV, RSV, NRSV, ESV, Douay-Rheims, St. Joseph NAB) or “today I have become your Father” (NIV, Holman, NET, ISV, Catholic New Jerusalem, Jehovah Witness NWT).  

 

 

 

If you go back and read through this list of just some of the numerous very real differences that exist among these Bible of the Month Club versions, ask yourself which (if any) are the 100% historically true words of God.  IF “the Bible” is not 100% historically true in the events it narrates, then when does God start to tell us the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?

As for the ESV, you can see a lot more examples of how this revamped RSV version often rejects the clear Hebrew readings and has changed over 300 verses from the 2001 to the 2007 editions – 

Remember, God said that no man should add to or take away from His words.

 

 

 

Genesis 1:26 KJB – “And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, AND OVER ALL THE EARTH, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.”  

 

NIV 1978 and 1984 editions – “Then God said, let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea, and the birds of the air, over the livestock, *OVER ALL THE EARTH, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.” Footnote: “Hebrew; Syriac – all the wild animals”

 

NIV 2011 edition – “Then God said, Let us make MANKIND in our image, in our likeness, sot that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over livestock and *ALL THE WILD ANIMALS, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.”  Footnote: “probable reading of the original Hebrew text (see Syriac); Masoretic Text – the earth”.  

 

In other words the new NIV arbitrarily rejected the clear Hebrew reading of “over all the earth” and decided to follow the Syriac text that says “all the wild animals”. Is this a case of “updating the archaic Hebrew or English”? Of course not. They just decided to reject the Hebrew reading that they previously followed and is still followed by other modern versions like the RV, ASV, RSV, NASB 1995, NET, NKJV, ESV 2011, Holman 2009 and the Common English Bible 2011.  

 

But just a minute. There is more to this story – the Catholic versions.  The previous Catholic Douay-Rheims of 1610 and the Douay of 1950 both followed the Hebrew text here and said “OVER ALL THE EARTH”, but the Jerusalem bible 1968, the St. Joseph New American Bible 1970 and the New Jerusalem bible 1985 likewise rejected the Hebrew text and went with the Syriac reading of “over ALL THE WILD ANIMALS”. But now the 2009 Catholic Public Domain Version has come out and it went back to the Hebrew text of “and the beasts, AND THE ENTIRE EARTH, and every animal that moves on the earth.” The NRSV 1989 also went with the Syriac reading, but then the revision of the revision of the revision – the ESV – went back to the Hebrew reading again of “over all the earth”.

 

 

Genesis 4:8 KJB “And Cain talked with Abel his brother: AND IT CAME TO PASS, when they were in the field, that Cain rose up against Abel his brother, and slew him.”

 

NIV – “Now Cain said to his brother Abel, LET’S GO OUT TO THE FIELD. And while they were in the field, Cain attacked his brother Abel and killed him.” 

 

Jehovah Witness New World Translation 1961, 2013 editions “After that Cain said to his brother Abel, “LET’S GO OVER INTO THE FIELD.”

 

The NIV omits the verb “and it came to pass”. In fact, the NIV complete concordance will tell you that they have “not translated” this verb a whopping 887 times. Not only does the NIV not translate this verb here but they also added “Let’s go out to the field.”

 

 

The Holman Christian Standard also adds “Let’s go out to the field” as does Dan Wallace’s NET version.  Wallace footnotes – “The MT has simply “and Cain said to Abel his brother,” omitting Cain’s words to Abel. It is possible that the elliptical text is original. ”  

 

 

Their own footnotes say this reading comes from the Samaritan Pentateuch, the Septuagint (LXX – Greek), the Vulgate (Latin) and the Syriac but that the phrase is not found in the Hebrew Masoretic text.  Guess which other bible versions also include these added words.  That’s right, the Catholic Douay, St. Joseph NAB and the New Jerusalem bible all have these extra words in them that are not found in the Hebrew Scriptures.

 

 

This additional phrase is not found in the NASB, NKJV, RV, ASV, ESV or any Hebrew translation.

 

Other places in Genesis where the NIV departs from the Hebrew are Genesis 4:15; 10:23; 36:24; and 47:31 where instead of “bowed himself upon the bed’s head” (KJB, NASB, NKJV, Holman, ESV, NET), the NIV says “he leaned on the top of his staff.” This reading comes from the LXX and not the Hebrew, and Jacob didn’t lean on the top of his staff until after the events of the next chapter. See Hebrews 11:21.

 

 

Genesis 47:21- KJB “And as for the people, HE REMOVED THEM TO CITIES from one end of the borders of Egypt even to the other end thereof.”

 

ESV – “As for the people, HE MADE SERVANTS OF THEM, from one end of Egypt to the other.”  Footnote: “Samaritan, Septuagint, Vulgate; Hebrew – he removed them to the cities.

 

Following the Hebrew texts and agreeing with the reading “HE REMOVED THEM TO CITIES” are Tyndale 1534, the Great Bible  1540, Matthew’s Bible 1549, the Bishops’ Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1587, Lesser Bible 1853, Darby 1890, Young’s 1898, the Revised Version 1881, ASV 1901, NKJV 1982, Holman Standard 2003, Hebrew Names Version, the Jewish JPS 1917, New Life Version 1969, Sacred Scriptures Family of Yah, the NASB 1995, The Complete Tanach, International Standard Version, Jubilee Bible 2010, Common English Bible 2011 (a critical text version), Orthodox Jewish Bible 2011, Names of God Bible 2011 (critical text), Lexham English Bible 2012, the 2012 Natural Israelite Bible – “he removed them to cities”, and the Modern Greek Bible – “τον δε λαον μετετοπισεν αυτον εις πολεις” = “he removed the people to the cities” and the Modern Hebrew Bible – ואת העם העביר אתו לערים מקצה גבול מצרים ועד קצהו׃

 

 

NIV – “And JOSEPH REDUCED THE PEOPLE TO SERVITUDE from one end of Egypt…” The NIV footnote says this comes from the Samaritan and the LXX, but that the Hebrew says: “he removed them to the cities”. 

 

 

This false reading taken from the so called LXX is also that of the liberal RSV, the NRSV, ESV, New Living Translation 2013, Message 2002, The Voice 2012 and the NET version 2006 put out by Daniel Wallace and company.

 

 

The Catholic Connection

 

 

It is also the reading found in the modern Catholic versions like the St. Joseph New American bible 1970 and the New Jerusalem 1985, though the earlier Catholic bibles like the Douay-Rheims 1610 and the Douay of 1950 read like the KJB and followed the Hebrew texts.

 

 

Dan Wallace footnotes that he thinks the Hebrew reading of “he removed them to cities” makes no sense in the context.  Well, bible agnostics like Daniel Wallace are entitled to their humble opinions, but I and millions of other Bible believers maintain that God did not make a mistake and the Hebrew Scriptures are right.

 

 

John Gill comments on this verse:  “And as for the people, he removed them…From the places where they dwelt, that it might appear they had no more property there, and might forget it, and be more willing to pay rent elsewhere; and their posterity hereafter could have no notion of its being theirs, or plead prescription; and besides, by such a removal and separation of the inhabitants of cities, some to one place, and some to another, sedition and mutiny might be prevented: he had them to cities, from one end of the borders of Egypt, even unto the other end thereof;  according to the Targums of Jonathan and Jerusalem, those that dwelt in provinces, or in country towns and villages, he removed to cities, and those that dwelt in cities he removed into provinces, and placed them at the utmost distance from their former habitations, for the reasons before given.”

 

 

Adam Clarke also agrees with the Hebrew and KJB reading and says it would be easier to feed the people where the corn was being stored, that is, in the cities, and to then have some others out working the fields.  The KJB is right and the fake bible versions are wrong for rejecting the Hebrew texts and following some fanciful Samaritan Pentateuch or the alleged Septuagint.

 

 

Pulpit Commentary – “Verse 21. – And as for the people, HE REMOVED THEM TO CITIES – -NOT enslaved them, converted them into serfs and bondmen to Pharaoh (LXX., Vulgate), but simply transferred them…that throughout the land they were moved into the nearest cities, as a considerate and even merciful arrangement for the more efficiently supplying them with food (Calvin, Keil, Lange, Wordsworth, Speaker’s Commentary).”

 

 

Jamieson, Faussett and Brown – “as for the people, he removed them to cities — obviously for the convenience of the country people, who were doing nothing, to the cities where the corn stores were situated.”  

 

 

The King James Bible is always right. Don’t settle for an inferior substitute.

 

 

The NIV also departs from the Hebrew in the following verses, though the NASB does not. Lev. 14:31; Numbers 24:17; 26:40; Deut. 23:18; 28:20; Joshua 15:4; 16:2; 18:18; 19:28, 34; Judges 8:8; and 9:29.

 

Genesis 49:10 KJB (NASB, NKJV)- “The sceptre shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet, UNTIL SHILOH COME: and unto him shall the gathering of the people be.”

 

ESV – “The scepter shall not depart from Judah, nor the ruler’s staff from between his feet, UNTIL TRIBUTE COMES TO HIM, and to him shall be the obedience of the peoples.”

Footnote: “Hebrew – until Shiloh comes, or until he comes to Shiloh”

 

NIV – “The scepter will not  depart from Judah, nor the ruler’s staff from between his feet, until HE TO WHOM IT BELINGS SHALL COME and the obedience of the nations shall be his.”

Footnote: “the meaning of the Hebrew phrase is uncertain” 

 

The word SHILOH means “tranquil” or “peaceful” and has been seen for centuries as a name for the coming Messiah.  See the Bible commentators at the end of this study.

 

Also reading “UNTIL SHILOH COME” are Tyndale 1534, The Great Bible 1540, Matthew’s Bible 1549, the Bishops’ Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1587, New Life Version 1969, The Living Bible 1971, The Revised Version 1885, Darby 1890, the ASV 1901, Rotherham’s Emphasized bible 1902, The NKJV 1982, The Amplified Bible 1987 has: “until SHILOH [the Messiah, The Peaceful One] comes”, God’s Word Translation 1995 – “until SHILOH comes”, the NASB 1995, New Century Version 2005, The Jubilee Bible 2010, The Orthodox Jewish Bible 2011, Lexham English Bible 2012, and The Modern English Version 2014 – “until SHILOH comes”.

The Judaica Press Complete Tanach 2004 – “until SHILOH comes” –  Rashi’s Commentary – “until SHILOH COMES: This refers to the King Messiah, to whom the kingdom belongs.”

 

Foreign Language Bibles  

 

Foreign language Bibles that also read SHILOH are the German Schlachter Bible 2000 – “bis der SCHILO kommt”, The Spanish Sagradas Escrituras 1569, Cipriano de Valera 1602 and the Spanish Reina Valera 1995 – “hasta que llegue SILOH”, the French Martin Bible 1744, French Ostervald 1996 and the French Louis Second 2007 – “jusqu’à ce que vienne le SHILO”, the Portuguese O Livro 2000 and the Almeida Corrigida 2009 – “até que venha SILO”, The Hungarian Karoli Bible – “míg eljõ SILO”,  the Italian La Nuova Diodati 1991 – “finché venga SCILOH”, the Dutch Staten Vertaling Bible – “totdat SILO komt”, The Netherlands Det Boek 2007 – “tot SILO komt”, the Romanian Cornilescu 2014 – “Până va veni ŞILO”, the Tagalog Ang Dating Biblia 1905 – “SHILOH ay dumating”, the Czech BKR Bible – “dokudž nepřijde SILO”, the Afrikaans Bible 1953 – “uit totdat SILO kom”,

and The Modern Greek Bible – “εωσου ελθη ο Σηλω”. = “until SHILOH come”

 

However the ESV reads: “The scepter shall not depart from Judah, nor the ruler’s staff from between his feet, UNTIL TRIBUTE COMES TO HIM, and to him shall be the obedience of the peoples.” Footnote tells us to compare the Syriac, and Septuagint, but that the Hebrew reads: “until Shiloh comes”.

 

Why would we want to look at the Syriac translation? Does it say “until tribute comes to him”?  No, not at all. Lamsa’s translation of the Syriac says: “The scepter shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet, until THE COMING OF THE ONE TO THE SCEPTRE BELONGS, TO WHOM THE GENTILES SHALL LOOK FORWARD.”  

 

 

And how about the so called Septuagint? Does it read like the ESV? No, not at all. It reads: “A ruler shall not fail from Judah, nor a prince from his loins, until THERE COME THINGS STORED UP FOR HIM; AND HE IS THE EXPECTATION OF NATIONS.”

The NIV also omits the word SHILOH and reads as the old RSV and Daniel Wallace’s NET version: “UNTIL HE COMES TO WHOM IT BELONGS”. 

 

Daniel Wallace then footnotes “Some prefer to leave the text as it is, reading “Shiloh”.  

 

Note – What a novel idea! Leave the text as it is! Can we give Dan Wallace a big “Duh”?

 

 

The Holman Standard is much like the NIV, saying: “until HE WHOSE RIGHT IT IS COMES.”

 

Likewise the Catholic St. Joseph NAB 1970 and the New Jerusalem bible of 1985 also read like the ESV with “UNTIL TRIBUTE BE BROUGHT TO HIM”.

 

Other Weird Versions

 

Young’s 1898 – “Till HIS SEED COMES”.

 

The Common English Bible 2011 (another Critical Text version) has: “GIFTS WILL BE BROUGHT TO HIM”

 

Easy To Read Version 2006 – “UNTIL THE REAL KING COMES”

The Voice 2012 – “until the One comes TO WHOM TRUE ROYALTY BELONGS.”

 

The ISV 2014 – “UNTIL THE ONE COMES, WHO OWNS THEM BOTH” – Footnote “Or, until Shiloh comes”

 

The Bible Commentators 

 

 

John Gill – “until Shiloh come; which all the three Targums interpret of the Messiah, as do many of the Jewish writers, ancient and modern; and is the name of the Messiah in their Talmud  and in other writings; and well agrees with him, coming from a root which signifies to be “quiet,” “peaceable,” and “prosperous”; as he was of a quiet and peaceable disposition, came to make peace between God and men, and made it by the blood of his cross”

 

Matthew Henry – “The sceptre shall not depart from Judah, till Shiloh come, v. 10. Jacob here foresees and foretells, (1.) That the sceptre should come into the tribe of Judah, which was fulfilled in David, on whose family the crown was entailed. (2.) That Shiloh should be of this tribe—his seed, that promised seed, in whom the earth should be blessed: that peaceable and prosperous one, or the Saviour shall come of Judah. Thus dying Jacob, at a great distance, saw Christ’s day, and it was his comfort and support on his death-bed.”

 

Jamieson, Faussett and Brown – “Shiloh…that is, the Messiah. The Jews have been for eighteen centuries without a ruler and without a judge since Shiloh came, and “to Him the gathering of the people has been.”  

 

Matthew Poole’s Annotations – “Until Shiloh come – Shiloh i.e. the Messias; which we need not stand to prove, because it is so expounded by all the three Chaldee Paraphrasts, and by the Jewish Talmud, and by divers of the latter Jews themselves.”

 

Coffman’s Commentary – “As for us we prefer unequivocally the rendition of  “Until Shiloh come.” We believe there is the very strongest Biblical support for this rendition, as outlined herewith. SHILOH. This word occurs (with slight variations) three times in the Bible, and in every one of them, the reference is to JESUS CHRIST. As far as this passage goes, Believing Shiloh to be the name of a person, the majority of commentators, both Jewish and Christian, the ancient as well as modern, agree that the Messiah is the person referred to, and Jacob here foretold that the appearance of that Messiah would not occur until the staff or regal power had dropped from his hands.”   

 

The King James Bible is right, as always.  Get used to it.

 

Exodus 3:19 “no, not by a mighty hand.”

 

NASB, NIV, RSV, NRSV, ESV all depart from the Hebrew and change the meaning of Exodus 3:19.

 

In Exodus chapter three the LORD tells Moses what He is going to do to Pharoah and his land. In 3:19-20 we read in the King James Bible: “And I am sure that the king of Egypt will not let you go, NO, NOT BY A MIGHTY HAND. And I will stretch out MY HAND, and smite Egypt with ALL MY WONDERS which I will do in the midst thereof: AND AFTER THAT he will let you go.”

 

 

The meaning is quite clear in the King James Bible for those who believe the Book and have eyes to see. God Himself is going to stretch out His mighty hand over Egypt and bring a series of 10 plagues upon the land, yet, in spite of the first nine plagues, God will harden the heart of Pharoah and he will refuse to let the people go. Only after the 10th and final plague of the death of the firsborn will God move upon Pharoah to let the people go. Even after that, God will again harden Pharoah’s heart that he pursues after the children to Israel to bring them back, but they will be drowned in the Red sea.

 

 

In Exodus 7:4 and again in 9:3 and 15 we read concerning the series of plagues: “But Pharoah shall not hearken unto you, THAT I MAY LAY MY HAND UPON EGYPT, and bring forth mine armies, and my people the children of Israel, out of the land of Egypt BY GREAT JUDGMENTS.”

 

Exodus 9:3 “Behold, THE HAND OF THE LORD is upon thy cattle which is in the field, upon the horses, upon the asses, upon the camels…there shall be a very grievous murrain.”

 

Exodus 9:15 “For now I will stretch out MY HAND, that I may smite thee and thy people with pestilence”

 

 

The “mighty hand” spoken of in Exodus 3:19 is the hand of God Himself in the first nine plagues. God had raised up Pharoah “for to show in thee my power; and that my name may be declared throughout all the earth.” (Exodus 9:16)

 

 

The Hebrew texts clearly say exactly what is written in the King James Bible. Not only does the KJB say: “And I am sure that the king of Egypt will not let you go, NO, NOT BY A MIGHTY HAND”, but so also do the Bishop’s Bible 1568, Webster’s 1833 translation, the Revised Version, American Standard Version, NKJV, Darby, 1936 Hebrew Publishing Company’s translation, Green’s interlinear, KJV 21, and the Third Millennium Bible.

 

 

However we find that the NIV, NASB, RSV, NRSV, ESV, Holman Standard, the Catholic St. Joseph NAB, the New Jerusalem bible and an host of other versions reject the Hebrew reading and follow the Greek LXX and the Vulgate. You won’t see this by consulting the NASB, NIV, but the RSV, NRSV, and ESV let us in on this little secret by saying so in their footnotes.

 

 

In the RSV, NRSV, New Jerusalem bible and ESV we read: “I know that the king of Egypt will not let you go UNLESS COMPELLED by a MIGHTY HAND”; then is a footnote these three versions tell us their reading comes from the LXX and the Vulgate, but that the Hebrew says “no, not by a mighty hand” – just as found in the King James Bible. 

 

The NIV has no footnotes here but it says: “UNLESS a mighty hand COMPELS HIM” – at least they kept the “mighty hand” part.

 

But the NASB, vaunted so much for being so literal (what a joke), says: “will not let you go EXCEPT UNDER COMPULSION.” – thus rejecting the Hebrew reading, following the Vulgate, and even paraphrasing this by omitting “mighty hand”. It is much like the St. Joseph New American bible of 1970 that says: “unless he is forced.”

 

The translators of these versions apparently could not make sense of the passage, thought the Hebrew text was in error, and so followed something else according to their own understanding. As a result, they have changed the meaning of the passage.

 

The King James Bible is ALWAYS right.

 

Exodus 14:25 –  “the LORD TOOK OFF their chariot wheels”

 

KJB – “And it came to pass that in the morning watch the LORD looked unto the host of the Egyptians…and troubled the host of the Egyptians, And TOOK OFF THEIR CHARIOT WHEELS, that they drave them heavily”  Exodus 14:24-25

 

ESV – “And in the morning watch the LORD looked down on the Egyptian forces…CLOGGING their chariot wheels so that they drove heavily.”  

 

NASB – “At the morning watch, the LORD looked down on the army of the Egyptians…He CAUSED their chariot wheels TO SWERVE and He made them drive with difficulty”

 

 

NIV 1978 and 1984 editions – “He MADE THE WHEELS OF THEIR CHARIOTS TO COME OFF so that they had difficulty driving.” 

 

NIV 2011 edition – “He JAMMED the wheels of their chariots so that they had difficulty driving.”  

Footnote – “See Samaritan Pentateuch, Septuagint and Syriac; Masoretic Text REMOVED.

 

Exodus chapter 14 relates the event of the children of Israel crossing the Red Sea when God divided the waters. The Egyptians pursued after them and were drowned in the sea.

 

 

In Exodus 14: 24-25 we read: “And it came to pass, that in the morning watch the LORD looked unto the host of the Egyptians through the pillar of fire and of the cloud, and troubled the host of the Egyptians, And TOOK OFF their chariot wheels, that they drave them heavily.”

 

“TOOK OFF their chariot wheels” is the reading of Tyndale 1530, Coverdale 1535 (smote the wheels from their chariots), Bishops’ Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1599, the King James Holy Bible 1611, Rotherham’s Emphasized bible 1902, the NKJV 1982, the Revised Version 1881, the ASV of 1901 “he TOOK OFF their chariot wheels” (the predecessor of the NASB),  New Life Version 1969, the KJV 21st Century 1994, Third Millennium Bible 1998,  the two Jewish translations of JPS 1917 and Hebrew Publishing Company 1936, Darby 1890, the Living Bible 1971 “the chariot wheels began coming off”, Green’s interlinear 1984, , the NIV 1978 and 1982 editions – “He made the wheels of their chariots COME OFF”, A Conservative Version 2005, the Jubilee Bible 2010, New Heart English Bible 2010 – “He TOOK OFF their chariot wheels”, Names of God Bible 2011, Lexham English Bible 2012, the 2012 Natural Israelite Bible – “He TOOK OFF their chariot wheels”, and The Hebrew Names Version 2014.  

 

Other Bibles that tell us that God “TOOK OFF the chariot wheels” are The Jewish Family Bible 1864, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, The Word of Yah 1993, The Koster Scriptures 1998, God’s First Truth 1999, The Sacred Scriptures Family of Yah 2001, the Bond Slave Version 2009, The Hebraic Transliteration Scripture 2010, The New European Version 2010, The Far Above All Translation 2011, The World English Bible 2012, The Interlinear Hebrew-Greek Scriptures 2012 (Mebust), The Biblos Bible 2013 – He TOOK OFF the chariot wheels”, and The Modern English Version 2014.

 

Likewise the modern Jewish translation called the Judaica Press Tanach 2004 follows the Hebrew and agrees with the King James Bible saying: ” And HE REMOVED THE WHEELS OF THEIR CHARIOTS, and He led them with heaviness, and the Egyptians said, Let me run away from the Israelites because the Lord is fighting for them against the Egyptians.”

 

 

The Modern Greek Bible also follows the Hebrew text and agrees with the King James Bible.  It says – “και εξεβαλε τους τροχους των αμαξων αυτων” = “and TOOK OFF the wheels of their chariots”.

 

Foreign Language Bibles

 

Among foreign language bible that follow the Hebrew text and tell us that God “TOOK OFF the wheels” are the Spanish Sagradas Escrituras 1569, Cipriano de Valera 1602, the Reina Valeras 1909 – 2011 – “quitó las ruedas” = “TOOK OFF the wheels”, the French Martin 1744 and French Ostervald 1996 – “Il ôta les roues de ses chariots, et fit qu’on les menait bien pesamment. ” = “he TOOK OFF the wheels”, and the Italian Nuova Riveduta 2006 – ” Tolse le ruote dei loro carri e ne rese l’avanzata peasant” = “He TOOK OFF the wheels”

The Modern Greek Bible – “εξεβαλε τους τροχους των αμαξων αυτων” = “He TOOK OFF the wheels of their chariots”

 

However the “scholarly” NASB tells us: “He CAUSED their chariot wheels TO SWERVE”. This is also the reading of the Holman Christian Standard version 2009.

 

 

Now I’ve had the unpleasant experience of having my car wheels swerve on ice or snow, but thankfully I have never had them come off yet. You have to admit there is a difference between the Lord taking off their wheels and the Lord causing them to swerve.

 

 

The word used here is # 5493 soor and it means to remove or take away. It is used in Exodus 8:8 “TAKE AWAY the frogs”; in 8:31 “he REMOVED the swarms of flies”, in 34:34 Moses TOOK OFF the vail”, Genesis 41:42 “Pharoah TOOK OFF his ring” and in Genesis 8:13 “Noah REMOVED the covering of the ark”.

 

 

Besides the confusion of the NASB, Holman Standard, ESV, NIV 2011 edition, let’s see what some of the other modern versions have done with the passage.

 

The Catholic Connection

 

The Douay-Rheims 1610 and the 1950 Catholic Douay version say God “OVERTHREW the wheels”; but the more recent Catholic versions like the St. Joseph NAB 1970 and the New Jerusalem bible 1985 say God “CLOGGED the chariot wheels.”  

 

The New Jerusalem then footnotes that “clogged” comes from “versions”, but that the Hebrew reads TOOK OFF!

 

And now the 2009 Catholic Public Domain Version has come out and it says: “He OVERTURNED the wheels of their chariots”. (whatever that means!)

 

 

The RSV 1952, NRSV, ESV 2001-2011, New English Bible 1970 and The Message 2002 all say God was “CLOGGING the wheels”, with a footnote that tells us this reading (clogging) comes from the Septuagint, Samaritan Pentateuch and Syriac; but that the Hebrew text reads “TOOK OFF” or “removed”.

 

 

Actually, the Greek version called the Septuagint doesn’t say “clogging” at all, as we shall soon see.

 

The NIV 2011 edition has now come out and it changed the text of the old NIV 1978 and 1984 editions. The old NIVs say God “MADE THE WHEELS COME OFF”

 

But now the new New International Version of 2011 says God “JAMMED the wheels” (And so does Dan Wallace and company’s NET version 2006) and then the NIV footnotes that we should consult the Samaritan Pentateuch, the Septuagint and the Syriac, all of which not only differ from the Hebrew but also from each other!  AND it even tells us in their own footnote that the Hebrew reads REMOVED!

 

 

The Bible in Basic English of 1965 says God “made the wheels STIFF”

 

ISV (International Standard Version) 2014 – “He made the wheels of their chariots WOBBLE so that they drove them with difficulty.”

 

 

The New Century Version 2005 tells us God “KEPT THE WHEELS FROM TURNING.”

 

Young’s “literal” 1898 (hah) says: “and TURNETH ASIDE the wheels of their chariots.” This would mean they swerved, but not that they actually came off.

 

 

Lamsa’s 1936 translation of the Syriac Peshitta reads: “clogging the wheels” (from the Syriac we get the reading found in the Message, RSV, NRSV and ESV)

 

The Voice 2012 – ” He CAUSED the wheels of their chariots TO BREAK DOWN, so that it was nearly impossible for the drivers to control them.”

 

New Living Translation 2013 – “He TWISTED their chariot wheels, making their chariots difficult to drive.” Then it footnotes that this comes from “As in Greek version. Hebrew reads HE REMOVED.

 

 

Today’s English Version 1992 “He MADE THE WHEELS GET STUCK.”

 

 

Contemporary English Version – “Their chariot wheels GOT STUCK, and IT WAS HARD FORM THEM TO MOVE.”

 

And the famed Greek Septuagint says God “BOUND THE AXEL-TREES of their chariots”; it doesn’t say “clogging the wheels” as the false footnotes of the RSV, ESV, NIV tell us.

 

So when you read glowing recommendations about the next Bible of the Month Club version coming down the pike that is based on “better manuscripts”, “greater advances in scholarship”, “easier to read”, YADA, YADA, YADA, just realize it is a lot of pious sounding BALONEY.

 

 

None of these people believe any Bible or any text is the inspired words of God, and all their efforts are designed to overthrow the time tested, inerrant, God approved King James Holy Bible.  

 

“He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.”  Luke 8:8

 

“But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant.”  1 Corinthians 14:38

 

 Deuteronomy 11:14, and 15 the Hebrew texts have Moses speaking for God who says: “That “I” will give you the rain of your land in his due season…And “I” will send grass in thy fields…” This is the reading of even the NIV, TNIV, New English Bible 1970, as well as the Holman Standard, the NKJV, RV, ASV, and the Jewish translations of 1917, 1936, the Judaica Press Complete Tanach and the Complete Jewish Bible. It is also the reading found in the Geneva Bible, Bishops’ Bible, Coverdale, the Hebrew Names Version, World English Bible, New English Bible, the Spanish Reina Valera, French Louis Segond, the Portuguese Almeida, and the Modern Greek O.T. (not to be confused with the so called LXX). 

 

The NASB at least up until the 1972 edition also read “I” will give rain. “I” will send grass…But in the 1977, and again in the 1995 edition the NASB editors decided to reject the clear Hebrew reading and they now follow the RSV, NRSV, and the 2003 ESV which read: “HE will give rain…HE will send grass…” The RSV, ESV tell us that the reading of “He” comes from the Samaritan Pentateuch, LXX, and the Vulgate, but that the Hebrew reads “I”, and not “he”.

 

 

Deuteronomy 26:3 – “…I profess this day unto the LORD THY God, that I am come unto the country, which the LORD sware unto our fathers for to give us.” Here all Hebrew texts as well as the RV, ASV, NKJV, NIV, RSV, NRSV, ESV and Holman read either THY God, or YOUR God (which mean the same thing), but only the NASB follows the Greek Septuagint version and says: “unto the Lord MY God…” 

 

 

The footnotes in versions like Holman, ESV tell us this. Even the online NASB footnotes that the reading of “MY God” comes from the LXX, but that the Hebrew reads “your God”. 

 

 

Daniel Wallace’s ridiculous NET version goes with “your” God in his text, but then he gives us this silly footnote saying: “For the MT reading “your God,” certain LXX mss have “my God,” a contextually superior rendition followed by some English versions (e.g., NAB, NASB, TEV).” 

 

How can this be a “contextually superior rendition” when clearly the context of the verse itself is what the man bringing the offering says unto the priest? “…go unto the priest…and say unto him, I profess unto the LORD THY God….” And if it is a “contextually superior rendition” according to Dr. Wallace, then why didn’t he himself follow it? Scholars are a funny bunch, No? Wait till you see what Dr. Wallace says about the next one.

 

 

In Deuteronomy 28:20 we read: “The LORD shall send upon thee cursing, vexation, and rebuke …because of the wickedness of thy doings, whereby thou hast forsaken ME.” 

 

The word “me” is the reading of the ASV, NASB, RSV, NRSV, ESV, NKJV, Holman and the Jewish translations. However the NIV and the TNIV say: “…because of the evil you have done in forsaking HIM.” Then in a footnote the NIV and TNIV tell us the Hebrew reads ME. 

 

Daniel Wallace’s NET version reads HIM but he footnotes: “For the MT first person common singular suffix (“me”), the LXX reads either “Lord” (Lucian) or third person masculine singular suffix (“him”; various codices). The MT’s more difficult reading probably represents the original text.” 

 

 

However the copy of the LXX I have in front of me actually says ME, just like the Hebrew. Apparently there are at least THREE different LXX readings, and the NIV editors went with one of the three LXX readings and rejected the Hebrew text.

 

 

Deuteronomy 32:8 – “the number of the children of ISRAEL” OR “the GODS” or “the SONS OF GOD”?

 

 

Deuteronomy 32:8 KJB (NIV!, NKJV, NASB) – “When the most High divided to the nations their inheritance, when he separated the sons of Adam, he set the bounds of the people according to the number of the CHILDREN OF ISRAEL.”

Deuteronomy 32:8 ESV – “When the Most High gave to the nations their inheritance, when he divided mankind, he fixed the borders of the peoples according to the number of the SONS OF GOD.”

Footnote: Compare Dead Sea Scroll, Septuagint; Masoretic Text – sons of Israel.”

 

  

NRSV 1989 – ” he fixed the boundaries of the peoples according to the number OF THE GODS.” 

 

Dan Wallace and company’s NET version actually says: “he set the boundaries of the peoples, according to the number of THE HEAVENLY ASSEMBLY.”

 

The New Brenton Translation 2012 (based on the so called Greek Septuagint) reads – “he separated the sons of Adam, he set the bounds of the nations according to the number of THE ANGELS OF GOD.”

 

But wait!  There’s more scholarly shenanigans afoot. Now the NEW English Septuagint Version of 2014 has come out and it reads: “according to the number of DIVINE SONS.” It doesn’t even read like the OLD Septuagints!

 

 

Other modern bible versions that reject the Hebrew Masoretic text here and say “the sons OF GOD” rather than “the children OF ISRAEL” are the liberal RSV (which was the first bible version to follow this erroneous reading), while the later NRSV of 1989 said “according to the number of THE GODS”.  Dan Wallace’s NET version (sort of), the critical text Common English bible 2011 “based on the number of THE GODS”, The Voice 2012 and the ISV 2014 – “the number of THE CHILDREN OF GOD.”

 

 

Likewise the Comic Book New Living Translation 2013 says: “according to the number of HIS HEAVENLY COURT.”  

 

And then it footnotes: “Dead Sea Scrolls, which read the number of the sons of God, and Greek version, which reads the number of the angels of God; Masoretic Text reads the number of the sons of Israel.”

 

So, in other words, they rejected what is the clear reading of the Hebrew text and badly paraphrased a wrong text. And then they pass this stuff off as “the latest in scholarship.”

 

The Catholic Connection

 

 Among the Catholic versions we see the usual confusion.  The older Douay-Rheims of 1610 and the Douay of 1950 both followed the Hebrew Masoretic texts and said “the CHILDREN OF ISRAEL.” but then the modern Catholic versions like the St. Joseph New American Bible of 1970 and the 1985 New Jerusalem bible both read – “the CHILDREN OF GOD”. 

 

Oh, but wait!  Now the 2009 Catholic Public Domain Version AND The Revised Douay-Rheims Bible 2012 and both of them have gone back to the Hebrew reading of “according to the number of the children OF ISRAEL.”!

 

The Jesuits behind the Counter-Reformation aren’t concerned about the true readings at all. They just want to sow confusion and disbelief in what they disparagingly refer to as ‘The Paper Pope of Protestantism’, or the Infallible Bible, so that folks will look somewhere else rather than The Bible for their “Final Authority”

 

 

Dan Wallace and company’s goofy NET version actually says: “he set the boundaries of the peoples, according to the number of THE HEAVENLY ASSEMBLY.”

 

This is similar to the equally ridiculous The Message of 2002 that says: “within boundaries under the care of DIVINE GUARDIANS.” And the New Living Translation says: “according to the number in HIS HEAVENLY COURT.”

 

 

The good Doktor Wallace then footnotes that the Masoretic text reads “sons of ISRAEL”, and the Greek LXX reads “ANGELS of God” but that the DSS “fragment” reads “sons of GOD”; but being the Every Man For Himself Bible Critic that he is, he decided to translate it as “the HEAVENLY ASSEMBLY”.  This is how these guys operate, folks.

 

 

First of all it should be noted that the so called Greek Septuagint does NOT read “sons of GOD” as these modern version footnotes imply, but rather it reads “according to the number of the ANGELS OF GOD” – ἀγγέλων θεοῦ 

 

 

Secondly, what was found in the Dead Sea Scrolls at this point is a very chopped up text with numerous missing words in just this verse alone. Even Dan Wallace refers to it as “a Qumran fragment”.  The copy of the Dead Sea Scrolls by Abegg, Flint & Ulrich shows in brackets what is missing.  The only parts found here would read: “When…their inherit…he separated…the children of GOD.”  That’s it!  And from this scrap of manuscript alone some modern versions have now rejected the time tested Hebrew Masoretic text and changed it. 

 

 

The reading of “according to the number of the CHILDREN OF ISRAEL” is the reading found in all Hebrew Masoretic texts as well as the Syriac Peshitta -“according to the number of the children OF ISRAEL”, ALL Jewish translations like the JPS 1917 (Jewish Publication Society), the 1936 Hebrew Publishing Company translation, the Hebrew Names Version 2014, the Complete Jewish Bible 1998, the Orthodox Jewish Bible 2011, The Natural Israelite Bible 2012,  and the Judaica Press Tanach 2004 – “according to the number of THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL.” 

 

 

Modern Greek Bible – “εστησε τα ορια των λαων κατα τον αριθμον των υιων Ισραηλ.” = “He set the boundaries of the people according to the number of the children OF ISRAEL.”

 

 

The Modern Hebrew Bible – בהנחל עליון גוים בהפרידו בני אדם יצב גבלת עמים למספר בני ישראל׃ = according to the number of the children of Israel

 

“according to the number of THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL”

 

 

Reading like the King James Bible are Wycliffe 1395, Tyndale 1534, the Great Bible 1540, Matthew’s Bible 1549, the Bishops’ Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1587, Darby 1890, Young’s 1898, the Revised Version 1885, ASV 1901, Amplified Bible 1987, God’s Word Translation 1995, the NASB 1995, NIV 1984, 2011 editions!, The Koster Scriptures 1998, The Context Group Version 2007, the Holman Standard 2009, the Jubilee Bible 2010, The Ancient Roots Bible 2010, The New European Version 2010 – “the number of THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL”, The Hebraic Transliteration Scriptues 2010 – “according to the number of benai Yisrael.”, The Online Interlinear 2010 (André de Mol),  the Names of God Bible 2011, the Orthodox Jewish Bible of 2011, The Work of God’s Children Illustrated Bible 2011, the Lexham English Bible 2012, The Interlinear Hebrew-Greek Scriptures 2012 (Mebust), The World English Bible 2012, The Biblos Bible 2013 and The Modern English Version 2014 – “the CHILDREN OF ISRAEL”.

 

The King James Bible is always right. Don’t settle for a bogus “bible” version.

 

Deuteronomy 32:43 KJB – “Rejoice, O YE NATIONS, WITH HIS PEOPLE; for he will avenge the blood of his SERVANTS, and will render vengeance to his adversaries, and will be merciful UNTO HIS LAND AND TO HIS PEOPLE.”

 

 

So read the RV 1881, ASV 1901, NKJV 1982, NASB 1995, NIV 1984 – 2011, the Holman Standard 2009, Orthodox Jewish Bible 2011, the Voice 2012, Knox Bible 2012, and even Dan Wallace’s NET version of 2006. 

 

The NIV, which frequently rejects the Hebrew readings or adds things to it, this time stays with the Hebrew text and reads like the King James Bible.  The NIV 2011 says: “Rejoice, you nations, with his people,  for he will avenge the blood of his servants; he will take vengeance on his enemies and make atonement for his land and people.”

 

 

The NASB 1995 also follows the Hebrew text and reads like the KJB, with: “Rejoice, O nations, with His people; For He will avenge the blood of His servants, And will render vengeance on His adversaries, And will atone for His land and His people.”

 

 

Not even Dan Wallace and company’s NET version 2006 goes along with the ESV, NRSV, RSVs conflicting readings (even among themselves) here. The NET version reads basically like the KJB with: “Cry out, O nations, with his people, for he will avenge his servants’ blood; he will take vengeance against his enemies, and make atonement for his land and people.”

 

However the ESV is really messed up. Keep in mind that the ESV is a revision of the older liberal RSV. The RSV 1952-1971 says: “PRAISE HIS PEOPLE, O YOU NATIONS; for he avenges the blood of his SERVANTS, and takes vengeance on his adversaries, and makes expiation FOR the land OF his people.” Footnote “Hebrew – his land his people”

 

 

Then the NEW RSV came out in 1989 and it says: “PRAISE, O HEAVENS, HIS PEOPLE, WORSHIP HIM ALL YOU GODS. For he will avenge the blood of his CHILDREN, and take vengeance on his adversaries, HE WILL REPAY THOSE WHO HATE HIM, and cleanse the land for his people.”  

 

Then the NRSV Footnotes that the Hebrew Masoretic text lacks “HE WILL REPAY THOSE WHO HATE HIM.” Then they tell us this phrase comes from the Greek and one Qumran manuscript.  And it also Footnotes that “CHILDREN” comes from the Greek but the Hebrew reads SERVANTS, and “cleanse the land FOR his people” comes from the Greek and the Vulgate, but the Hebrew reads “his land his people”.

 

And finally the ESV comes out in 2001-2011 and it says: “REJOICE WITH HIM, O HEAVENS; BOW DOWN TO HIM ALL GODS, for he avenges the blood of his CHILDREN and takes vengeance on his adversaries, HE REPAYS THOSE WHO HATE HIM AND CLEANSES HIS PEOPLE’S LAND.”  

 

Then the ESV informs us in their Footnotes that “REJOICE WITH HIM, O HEAVENS” comes from the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Septuagint, but the Hebrew Masoretic text reads like the KJB has it. And that the phrase “HE REPAYS THOSE WHO HATE HIM” comes from the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Septuagint, but it is not found in the Hebrew Masoretic text, and lastly that “HIS CHILDREN” comes from the Septuagint and the Vulgate but the Hebrew reads “SERVANTS”

 

 

As you can see, neither the RSV 1952 – 1971, the NRSV 1989 nor ESV 2001-2011 agree even among themselves, let alone with the King James Bible and all the others that follow the Hebrew texts.  About the only other version to agree with the ESV 2011 is the critical text Common English Bible of 2012. 

 

Also the 2007 New Living Bible rejects the Hebrew text, like the ESV does, but it even goes further than the ESV. The New Living Translation 2007 says: “REJOICE WITH HIM, YOU HEAVENS (= ESV), AND LET ALL OF GOD’S ANGELS (ESV – all gods) WORSHIP HIM. [a] REJOICE WITH HIS PEOPLE, YOU NATIONS, AND LET ALL THE ANGELS BE STRENGTHENED IN HIM. (Not in ESV at all) [b] For he will avenge the blood of his servants; he will take revenge against his enemies. HE WILL REPAY THOSE WHO HATE HIM [c] and cleanse the land FOR his people.” (= ESV)

 

Footnotes:

 

NIV – “David and all Israel were celebrating WITH ALL THEIR MIGHT before the Lord, with castanets, harps, lyres, timbrels, sistrums and cymbals.”

 

The NIV 1984 edition notes in its Footnote that the Hebrew text does not contain the words “WITH ALL THEIR MIGHT” (or mightily) and that it reads like the KJB has it.

 

Yet you will notice that the ESV mentions WITH SONGS, while the NIV does not, but the NIV has “WITH ALL THEIR MIGHT” but the ESV does not include these words.

 

What is happening here is that both the ESV and the NIV are picking out PARTS of the LXX reading in the same verse, as they both reject the Hebrew reading, and they go with DIFFERENT PARTS and NOT ALL that the so called Greek Septuagint has in this one verse.

 

What the LXX actually has is this – It reads: “And David and THE CHILDREN OF (Not in ESV or NIV) of Israel were playing before the Lord ON WELL TUNED INSTRUMENTS (Not in ESV or NIV) MIGHTILY (In NIV but not in ESV or Hebrew) AND WITH SONGS (In the ESV but not in the NIV or in the Hebrew) and with harps, and with flutes, and with drums, and with cymbals and with pipes.”

 

You can see the Septuagint translation here –

 

http://www.ecmarsh.com/lxx/Kings%20II/index.htm

 

 

So what we see here is that both the ESV and NIV (along with Dan Wallace’s NET version) have rejected the Hebrew text, and then each has picked up just PART of what the so called LXX says, and not the same parts!

 

The Catholic Connection

 

The earlier Catholic Douay-Rheims 1610 and the Douay Version 1950 followed the Hebrew text and read like the KJB.

 

“But David and all Israel played before the Lord on all manner of instruments made of wood, on harps and lutes and timbrels and cornets and cymbals.”

 

BUT the newer Catholic versions like the St. Joseph New American bible 1970 and the New Jerusalem bible 1985 have likewise rejected the Hebrew text and followed the so called Greek Septuagint and even included BOTH readings found in it saying: 

 

2 Samuel 6:6 “David and the whole House of Israel danced before Yahweh WITH ALL THEIR MIGHT SINGING to the accompaniment of harps, lyres, tambourines, sistrums and cymbals.”  New Jerusalem bible 1985.

 

Then it footnotes telling us that “WITH ALL THEIR MIGHT SINGING” comes from the Greek Septuagint, but is not found in the Hebrew text.

 

 

And they call these shenanigans the “science” of textual criticism.

 

I think God has a different term for it. He calls it PERVERTING the words of God. 

 

“For ye have perverted the words of the living God”. Jeremiah 23:36

 

 

 

2 Samuel 6:21-22 – Consistently Inconsistent Modern Versions and the so called Greek Septuagint.  

 

In 2 Samuel 6:21 we read: “And David said unto Michal, (***) It was before the Lord, which chose me before thy father, and before all his house, to appoint me ruler over the people of the Lord, over Israel: therefore will I play before the Lord.”

 

This is the reading of the Hebrew texts, Lamsa’s translation of the Syriac Peshitta,  and even that of the RV 1885, ASV 1901, NASB 1995, NIV 2011 and ESV 2011.

 

However the Holman Standard 2009 ADDS words taken from the LXX that not even the RV, ASV, RSV, NRSV, NIV, ESV, NET, Tree of Life Version 2015, ISV 2014 or NASB do, and says: 

 

“David replied to Michal, “I WAS DANCING [a] before the Lord who chose me over your father and his whole family to appoint me ruler over the Lord’s people Israel. I will celebrate before the Lord”  

 

Then it footnotes that “I was dancing” comes from the LXX but that the Hebrew Masoretic Text omits these words.

 

Also following the LXX here and adding the words “I WAS DANCING” are the Living Bible 1971, The Message 2002, The Voice 2012 and New Living Translation 2015.

 

Consistently Inconsistent

 

 

And in 2 Samuel 6:22 we read: “And I will yet be more vile than thus, and will be base IN MINE OWN SIGHT: and of the maidservants which thou hast spoken of, of them shall I be had in honour.”

 

So reads the Hebrew text, the Syriac Peshitta as well as the RV, ASV, NRSV 1989, NASB, NIV 2011, Holman, Tree of Life Version 2015, ISV 2014 and the Modern English Version 2014.

 

HOWEVER, this time the ESV rejects the Hebrew text and instead of saying “I will be base IN MY OWN SIGHT”, it says: “I will be abased in YOUR [a] eyes.”

 

Then it tells us in a footnote that this reading comes from the Septuagint, but that the Hebrew text reads MY.

 

The total inconsistencies are seen in that the ESV rejects many different LXX readings, but adopts  others. The RSV 1946-1971 also read “I will be abased in YOUR eyes”, but then the NRSV 1989 went back to the Hebrew and said “I will be abased IN MY OWN EYES”.

 

And then the ESV once again rejected the Hebrew reading in this verse and went back to the old RSV/Septuagint reading, BUT none of them followed the LXX reading of “I WAS DANCING” in the previous verse!

 

BUT the Holman DID follow the LXX’s “I WAS DANCING” in 2 Samuel 6:21 but NOT the LXX in the very next verse like the ESV did.  

 

Likewise the Message, The Voice and The New Living Translation previously chose to follow the LXX’s “I WAS DANCING” in verse 21 but they did NOT follow the LXX’s “in YOUR sight” in the very next verse.

 

While versions like the NIV, NASB, ISV stuck with the Hebrew in both these verses, though they do not in others.

 

The Catholic Connection

 

The previous Catholic bibles like the Douay-Rheims 1610 and Douay 1950 both followed the Hebrew texts and read like the KJB.  

 

BUT now the St. Joseph New American bible 1970 and the New Jerusalem bible 1985 BOTH read “I WAS DANCING” in v. 21, taken from the Septuagint, AND reject the Hebrew reading of “in MY OWN sight” in v. 22 and go instead with the LXX reading of “in YOUR sight”.

 

And they call these shenanigans the “science” of textual criticism!

 

 

 

 

In 2 Samuel 7:16 the NIV, Holman CSB, ESV and NASB change the Hebrew “before THEE” (RV, ASV, NKJV) to “before ME”, according to the LXX, but the Hebrew says “thee”. So too do the modern Catholic bible versions, though the older Douay-Rheims followed the Hebrew text like the KJB does.

2 Samuel 7:16 Many modern versions reject the Hebrew text.

 

In 2 Samuel 7:16 God Himself speaks through the prophet Nathan to king David telling him: “And thine house and thy kingdom shall be established for ever before THEE: thy throne shall be established for ever.”

 

King David then marvels at the grace of God and rehearses what He had promised him.  In v. 19 David says “Thou hast spoken of THY SERVANT’S HOUSE for a great while to come.” 

 

 

In 2 Samuel 7:16 the Hebrew Masoretic text says “thine house and thy kingdom shall be established for ever before THEE: thy throne shall be established for ever.”

 

However such modern versions as the liberal RSV 1952 (the first major bible translation to do so), the ESV, NIV, NASB, Holman, NET, ISV, Common English bible 2011 and The Voice 2012 changed the text based primarily on the so called Greek Septuagint and say “your house and your kingdom shall be made sure forever before ME. Your throne shall be established forever.”  

 

 

Then the ESV 2011 footnotes “Septuagint;  Hebrew – you.  

 

The 2011 Common English bible (another Critical text version) footnotes that this reading comes from the LXX but that the Hebrew reads “YOU”.

 

The NIV also reads “before ME” and then footnotes: “Some Hebrew manuscripts and Septuagint; most Hebrew manuscripts (read) YOU.”

 

Dan Wallace’s NET version also reads “your house and your kingdom will stand before ME” and then footnotes – Hebrew “before you”  

 

The Catholic Connection 

 

The previous Douay-Rheims 1610 and the 1950 Douay versions both read “And thy house shall be faithful, and thy kingdom for ever before THY FACE, and thy throne shall be firm for ever.”  

 

But the St. Joseph NAB 1970 and the New Jerusalem bible 1985 have now changed this to “Your house and your kingdom shall endure forever before ME; your throne shall stand firm forever.”

 

If these new versions want to follow the so called Greek Septuagint so badly, then why didn’t they also change verse 11 where God says to David “Also the LORD telleth thee that HE WILL MAKE THEE AN HOUSE.” ?

 

Here the LXX actually says “And the Lord will tell thee that THOU SHALT BUILD A HOUSE TO HIM.” – The exact opposite meaning.

 

Or in verse 15 where the Hebrew text says “But my mercy shall not depart from him, as I TOOK IT FROM SAUL, WHOM I PUT AWAY BEFORE THEE.”  

 

Here the LXX reads – “But my mercy I will not take from him, AS I TOOK IT FROM THOSE WHOM I REMOVED FROM MY PRESENCE.”

 

2 Samuel 7:16 itself!  Or why not follow this same LXX in the same verse 16 where instead of reading with the Hebrew text – “And THINE house and THY kingdom shall be established for ever before THEE; THY throne shall be established for ever.”? 

 

Here the LXX reads: “And HIS house shall be made sure, and HIS kingdom for ever before ME, and HIS throne shall be set up forever.”

 

Do you see what these bogus Vatican Versions did? There are FOUR pronouns changed  in the LXX from what the Hebrew text says, and they chose to reject the other three LXX readings and picked just one of them to put into their “bibles”!  And they call this nonsense “the science of textual criticism”!

 

Or in Verse 18 where the Hebrew text has David asking God – “Who am I, O Lord God? and what is my house THAT THOU HAST BROUGHT ME HITHERTO?”

 

 The LXX reads – “Who am I, O Lord, my Lord, and what is my house THAT THOU HAST LOVED ME hitherto?” 

 

 Or why didn’t they follow Benton’s LXX copy in verse 26 where it completely omits all these words  from the verse – “The LORD of hosts is the God over Israel: and let the house of thy servant David be established before thee.”?

 

Benton’s LXX then footnotes that all these omitted words ARE found in the Alexandrian copy (Remember, there are different “Septuagint” versions out there) and in the Hebrew texts.

 

2 Samuel 7:16 “shall be established before THEE”

 

Agreeing with the King James Bible in 2 Samuel 7:16 where God says to David “And THINE house and THY kingdom shall be established for ever before THEE (Not “ME”); THY throne shall be established for ever.” are the following Bible translations – 

 

Coverdale 1535, the Great Bible 1540, Matthew’s Bible 1549, the Bishops’ Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1587, the Revised Version 1881, the ASV 1901, Darby 1890, Young’s 1898, the 1917 JPS (Jewish Publication Society), the NKJV 1984, Third Millennium Bible 1998, the Judaica Press Complete Tanach 2004, Hebraic Transliteration Scripture 2010, Orthodox Jewish Bible 2011 and the Natural Israelite Bible 2014.

 

It is also the reading of the Modern Greek Bible – και θελει στερεωθη ο οικος σου και η βασιλεια σου εμπροσθεν σου εως αιωνος· ο θρονος σου θελει εισθαι εστερεωμενος εις τον αιωνα. = “your house and your kingdom shall be established before YOU for ever” and the Modern Hebrew Bible – ונאמן ביתך וממלכתך עד עולם לפניך כסאך יהיה נכון עד עולם

 

Don’t settle for one of the bogus Vatican Versions that nobody believes are the infallible words of God. Get yourself the King James Bible and stick with it.  It is God’s Book and it is always right.

 

All of grace, believing the Book.

 

 

2 Samuel 13:34 again the NIV adds 21 extra words to the text which come from the so called Greek LXX, and rejects some of the Hebrew text. These added words are not included in the Revised Version 1881, the ASV of 1901, the  2003 Holman,  the NASB, Dan Wallace’s NET version, nor even in the  RSV, NRSV or the ESV (English Standard Version 2001).

In the King James Bible and the Hebrew texts we read: “But Absalom fled. And the young man that kept the watch lifted up his eyes, and looked, and, behold, there came much people by the way of the hill side behind him. “
 
The NIV omits the Hebrew words “behind him” and then adds this sentence which is not found in any Hebrew manuscript. “THE WATCHMAN WENT AND TOLD THE KING, I SEE MEN IN THE DIRECTION OF HORONAIM, ON THE SIDE OF THE HILL.”

The NIV then informs us that this whole sentence is not found in the Hebrew text, but that it comes from the Septuagint.  At this point I would like to point out the totally fickle nature of this so called “science” of textual criticism.  If the NIV editors thought that the so called Greek Septuagint supplied a whole sentence of “inspired Scripture” that apparently has been LOST in ALL Hebrew manuscripts, then why did the NIV editors NOT include the whole sentence found in this same Greek Septuagint right here in this same chapter in verse 21?

The Hebrew text, as well as the NIV, NASB, ESV, RSV, NET, Holman Standard, NKJV, and all Jewish translations say: “But when king David heard of all these things, he was very wroth.”

However the so called Greek Septuagint ADDS the following words to this verse – “BUT HE DID NOT GRIEVE THE SPIRIT OF AMNON HIS SON, BECAUSE HE LOVED HIM, SINCE HE WAS HIS FIRSTBORN.”

Oh, but wait. Some versions DO add these extra 20 words to the inspired text. The RSV did NOT add these extra 20 words, but the New RSV did.  But then the revision of the revision of the revision – the ESV – took them out again!  Guess which other versions add these extra words too?  The Catholic versions like the Douay-Rheims, St. Joseph NAB and the New Jerusalem bible of 1985.  The Catholic Versions also add all those extra words to verse 34 just like the NIV does.

A really interesting case of the modern Bible Babble Buffet versions is found in one of the latest UBS critical text versions to come on the scene. It is called the Common English Bible of 2011. This latest “advancement in scholarly research” has ADDED all the extra words to verse 21 – “ When King David heard about all this he got very angry, BUT HE REFUSED TO PUNISH HIS SON AMNON BECAUSE HE LOVED HIM AS HIS OLDEST CHILD.” – BUT it DOESN’T add all the extra words to verse 34 like the NIV, NRSV do!  And they call this confusion the “science” of textual criticism!

 

 

In 2 Samuel 21:8 the NIV, Holman, ESV and NASB change “MICHAL the daughter of Saul”, which is the Hebrew reading, to MERAB, which comes from 2 manuscripts and SOME LXX. My copy of the LXX, as well as the Jewish translations, the RV, ASV, Spanish, Geneva and NKJV all correctly read “Michal”. Likewise the previous Catholic Douay version had MICHAL but the newer Catholic versions like St. Joseph and New Jerusalem have changed this to MERAB, and the New Jerusalem even footnotes that the Hebrew reads MICHAL!

 

 

In 2 Samuel 23:18 and 19 the NASB follows the RSV and the Syriac in changing “Adriel…was chief among THREE” to “chief among THIRTY”, but here even the NIV and Holman stick with the Hebrew and the RV, ASV and NKJV.  Here again, the previous Catholic Douay-Rheims had “THREE” but the more modern Catholic versions like St. Joseph NAB and the New Jerusalem go with “the THIRTY”.

 In 2 Samuel 24:2 we read: “For the king said to Joab THE CAPTAIN OF THE HOST, which was with him, Go now through all the tribes of Israel, from Dan even to Beersheba, and number ye the people, that I may know the number of the people.”

 

 

So read the Hebrew texts, the RV, ASV, NASB, NKJV, NET, Darby, Youngs, the Holman Standard, Lamsa and even the ESV.  However the NIV adds words taken from the LXX and rejects the Hebrew reading.  The NIV, along with the RSV, NRSV and the Message, says: “So the king said to Joab AND THE ARMY COMMANDERS WITH HIM (F89), “Go throughout the tribes of Israel from Dan to Beersheba and enroll the fighting men, so that I may know how many there are.”  Then it footnotes: “Septuagint; Hebrew – Joab the army commander”.  Once again, the previous Catholic Douay followed the Hebrew like the KJB, but the St. Joseph and New Jerusalem go with the LXX reading and read “and the senior officers who were with him”.

 

Notice that the RSV and NRSV added these extra words from the LXX, but then the lastest revision of these three – the 2001 ESV – went back to the original Hebrew reading.  Such are the ever changing ways of the “science” of textual criticism.

 

Again, in 2 Samuel 24:13 we read: “So Gad came to David, and told him, and said unto him, Shall SEVEN years of famine come unto thee in thy land?”… So read the Hebrew texts as well as the Geneva Bible, the RV, ASV, NASB, NKJV, Darby, Youngs, the Jewish translations, Douay, the Spanish Reina Valera and the Italian Diodati.  However, versions like the NIV, RSV, NRSV and the ESV read: “THREE years of famine” and then tell us in a footnote that “three years” comes from the Greek Septuagint, but that the Hebrew texts read “seven years”.  Again, the previous Douay-Rheims followed the Hebrew text and reads “SEVEN years” but the more modern St. Joseph and New Jerusalem reject the Hebrew and go with the so called Greek Septuagint and read “THREE years”.

 

There is a very reasonable and biblical way of explaining this apparent contradiction once we read all that the true Bible says regarding the events recorded in Scripture.  You can see it here: 

 

In 1 Kings the NIV changes the Hebrew text in 5:11 from “20 measures of pure oil” to 20,000; and changes 6:8;(NASB too); 7:18 twice, though the NASB equals the KJB, and in 12:18. Likewise the previous Catholic Douay-Rheims read “20 measures of pure oil”, following the Hebrew text, but the more modern St. Joseph and New Jerusalem say “20,000 kor of pure oil” and then footnote that this reading comes from the Greek but that the Hebrew reads 20.

 

1 Kings 9:8 King James Holy Bible and the Hebrew texts say: “And at this house, WHICH IS HIGH, every one that passeth by it shall be astonished, and shall hiss; and they shall say, Why hath the LORD done thus unto this land, and to this house?

 

In 1 Kings 9:8 the NASB goes along with the NET, RSV, NRSV and ESV and follows the Syriac and Old Latin, while rejecting the Hebrew reading. In the Hebrew we read: “And this house WHICH IS HIGH, every one that passeth by it shall be astonished, and shall hiss…”

 

This is the reading of Coverdale 1535, Matthew’s Bible 1549 – “And hys house which is so hye”, the Geneva Bible 1599, KJB 1611, Darby, Young’s,  Holman CSB, NKJV 1982, Revised Version 1885 “is high”, ASV 1901 – “And though this house is so high, yet shall every one that passeth by it be astonished, and shall hiss”, 1917 and 1936 Jewish translations, Green’s literal translation 2000, the KJV 21st Century 1994 and the Third Millenium Bible 1998. It is also the reading found in the so called Greek Septuagint. 

 

 The NASB doesn’t tell you when they reject the Hebrew, but the RSV, which reads as the NASB, tells us “this house WILL BECOME A HEAP OF RUINS” comes from the Syriac and Old Latin, but the Hebrew reads “high”.  The 1973 NASB I have also reads “will become a heap of ruins” but then in the marginal notes says: “Hebrew – high”, though they do not tell you that they got this perverted reading from the Syriac.

 

 Even the NIVs of 1973 and 1984 basically followed the Hebrew text reading  “AND THOUGH THIS TEMPLE IS NOW IMPOSING” but in tne NIV 2010 they have now rejected the Hebrew reading and  chose to follow the Syriac instead.  The NIV 2010 now reads: “This temple WILL BECOME A HEAP OF RUBBLE. All who pass by will be appalled and will scoff and say, ‘Why has the LORD done such a thing to this land and to this temple?”  Then it footnotes: “See some Septuagint manuscripts, Old Latin, Syriac, Arabic and Targum; Hebrew And though this temple is now imposing.”  Well, my copy of the Septuagint clearly says “and this house which is high”.

 

Daniel Wallace and company’s “anything but the KJB” NET version also says: “This temple will become a heap of ruins;14 “ and then footnotes: Heb “and this house will be high [or elevated].” The statement makes little sense in this context, which predicts the desolation that judgment will bring. Some treat the clause as concessive, “Even though this temple is lofty [now].” Others, following the lead of several ancient versions, emend the text to, “this temple will become a heap of ruins.”

 

Uh, Daniel, “and this house WHICH IS HIGH” makes perfect sense.  Before it was destroyed it was exalted among the people and held in very high esteem, and it was also very high physically.  God did not make a mistake when He inspired His words in the Hebrew language.

 

Jamieson, Fausset and Brown (as well as John Gill) comment: “this house, which is high–“high,” either in point of situation, for it was built on a hill, and therefore conspicuous to every beholder; or “high” in respect to privilege, honor, and renown.”

 

Matthew Henry likewise comments: “This house which is high. Those that now pass by it are astonished at the bulk and beauty of it; the richness, contrivance, and workmanship, are admired by all spectators, and it is called a stupendous fabric; but, if you forsake God, its height will make its fall the more amazing, and those that pass by will be as much astonished at its ruins.”

 

Among foreign language Bibles that follow the Hebrew text and read like the King James Bible are the following: The Portuguese Almeida – “E desta casa, que é tão exaltada”, the Spanish Sagradas Escrituras 1569, the Spanish Reina Valera’s 1909, 1960, 1995, the Spanish Nueva Traducción Viviente of 2010, the Italian Diodati 1649, the Riveduta 1927 and the La Nuova Diodati 1991 – “E questa casa, per quanto sia così in alto “, the Modern Greek translation, and the French Martin 1744 and  French Ostervald 1996. 

 

2 Kings 17:27 – Here is an interesting verse in that so many Bible versions actually depart from the Hebrew text and yet I have seen some modern version promoters actually trying to tell us on the forums that the King James Bible is wrong and their modern versions that reject the Hebrew text are right! If they would just think things through, they would realize that the KJB and the Hebrew text are right. But NO. Rather than accepting a very reasonable explanation as to why the KJB and Hebrew are correct, they prefer to accuse them of error. Such are the ways of those who have no Final Written Authority -The Inspired Holy Bible – and instead place their own minds and understanding as their final authority.

 

 

In 2 Kings the Lord Himself sent lions among the people who now lived in Samaria because they continued to worship idols and feared not the Lord God of Israel. So the king of Assyria came up with a plan to teach the people about the God of Israel. In 2 Kings 17:27 we read: “Then the king of Assyria commanded, saying, Carry thither one of the priests whom ye brought from thence; and let THEM go and dwell there, and let HIM teach them the manner of the God of the land.”

 

 

Agreeing with the Hebrew text in reading the plural as “let THEM go and dwell there” are the Jewish translations of JPS 1917, the 1936 Hebrew Publishing Company version, the Judaica Press Tanach, the Revised Version 1881, American Standard Version 1901, Darby, Young’s, the Spanish Reina Valera 1909, Rotherham’s Emphasized Bible 1902, World English Bible, Hebrew Names Version, and the KJV 21st Century version 1994.

 

 

There are many versions like the RSV, NRSV, ESV which change the Hebrew text here and tell us so in their own footnotes. These versions read: “Carry thither one of the priests whom ye brought from thence; and let HIM go and dwell there…” Then in a footnote they all tell us that the reading of HIM comes from the Syriac and the Vulgate, but the Hebrew reads THEM.

 

 

Not surprisingly, Daniel “scribal error” Wallace’s NET version also adopts this bogus reading and he defends it by telling us in his footnote: “Hebrew “and let THEM go and let THEM live there, and let HIM teach them the requirements of the God of the land.” The two plural verbs seem inconsistent with the preceding and following contexts, where only one priest is sent back to Samaria. The singular has the support of Greek, Syriac, and Latin witnesses.”

 

Did it ever occur to “scholars” like Daniel Wallace et.al. that the priests themselves were married men with wives and children and that they would take their family members with them when they went to live in another country, and so the priest and his family went to Samaria and he would teach the people about the God of the land, and thus we have “let THEM go and dwell there, and let HIM teach them…”???

 

Not only do the RSV, NRSV and ESV wrongly read HIM instead of THEM, but so do the NKJV, NASB, the Geneva Bible, Bishops’, Coverdale, and the Holman Standard. And not surprisingly, so too do the Catholic versions like the Douay and the New Jerusalem bibles. St. Joseph just omits the word altogether. 

 

The NIV gets around the “problem” by just omitting the Hebrew word altogether and says: “Have one of the priests you took captive from Samaria go back to live there and teach the people what the god of the land requires.” The Catholic St. Joseph NAB also does it this way.

 

The King James Bible is right, as always.

 

In 1 Chronicles the NIV rejects the Hebrew in 1:4, 17; 4:3 changes “father” to “son” along with the NKJV, NASB though the Hebrew translations, RV, ASV, Young, Darby and others read as does the KJB with “were of the father of Etam”. 4:33; 6:25, 27, 28, 59, 77; 8:29, 30; 16:15; 25:9; 26:20 (NASB too), 2 Chronicles 15:8 both NIV and NASB add “Azariah son of” from the Syriac and the Vulgate; 20: 1,2, and in 20:25 both the NIV, NASB change “dead bodies” to “clothing”; 22:2 both NIV, NASB change 42 to 22 on basis of some LXX, but the Hebrew says 42; and in 36:9 the NIV changes 8 to 18 but the NASB retains “eight” years old, according to the Hebrew.

 

One example of many:

 

1 Chronicles 16:15 and 19. “BE YE MINDFUL always of his covenant; the word which he commanded to a thousand generations (v. 15)….when YE were but a few, even a few, and strangers in it.”

 

The modern versions present us with their typical array of confusion and mutual disagreement in these two places – “BE YE MINDFUL” (v. 15) and “when YE were but a few” (v. 19.)

 

The Hebrew texts clearly read as does the King James Bible, but the NIV has chosen to reject the Hebrew texts and instead follow SOME Greek Septuagint versions in these two places.

 

Agreeing with “BE YE MINDFUL” or, as some modern versions have it “Remember” (which means the same thing) and “when YE were but a few” are the Hebrew versions of JPS 1917, the 1936 Hebrew Publishing Company version, the Judaica Press Tanach, the Complete Jewish Bible and the Hebrew Names Version.

Also agreeing with both Hebrew texts – “Be ye mindful” and “when YE were but a few” are the Geneva Bible 1599, the Revised Version 1881, the ASV 1901, Youngs, Darby, Webster’s, Rotherham’s Emphasized Bible 1902, Lamsa’s 1936 translation of the Syriac Peshitta, the NKJV 1982, Green’s interlinear, the KJV 21st Century Version 1994, Third Millennium Bible 1998, and the 2001 revision of the revision of the revision called the ESV (English Standard Version.) The RSV has it one way, the NRSV another and the ESV yet another. These guys are nothing if not consistently inconsistent.

 

Also agreeing with the Hebrew reading of “BE YE MINDFUL” (or Remember) are the NRSV 1989, NASB 1963-1995, Douay, Wycliffe, Coverdale, Bishops’ Bible, Holman Standard 2003 and Daniel Wallace’s NET version.

 

However all of these versions, both old and new – Wycliffe, Coverdale, Bishops’ bible, the NASB, Holman, NRSV and Wallace’s NET version – then proceed to reject the Hebrew text in verse 19, where instead of reading “When YE were but few”, all these versions incorrectly read “when THEY were but few in number.”

The NIV, RSV and TNIV reject both Hebrew readings and in verse 15 instead of saying “Be ye mindful always of his covenant” they say: “HE REMEMBERS his covenant forever”. Then they tell us in their footnotes that these readings comes from “SOME Septuagint manuscripts, but the Hebrew reads ‘Remember’.” and “when you were few”. Not all ‘Septuagint’ versions are the same. The copy of the Septuagint that is the most common says “LET US REMEMBER forever his covenant” and not “He remembers his covenant”.

 

 

Likewise the foreign language bible versions are a hodgepodge of conflicting readings. Agreeing with the Hebrew texts and the King James Bible are the Spanish Reina Valera of 1902 and the Sagradas Escrituras 1569 – “Haced memoria de su alianza perpetuamente” and “Cuando erais pocos en número, Pocos y peregrinos en ella.” However the newer Reina Valera versions have rejected the Hebrew texts, and both the 1960 and 1995 versions read like the NIV with: “El hace memoria de su pacto perpetuamente” and “Cuando ellos eran pocos en número”.

 

The Italian Diodati 1649 and the Italian Nuova Diodate 1991 agree with the Hebrew and the KJB saying – “Ricordatevi sempre del suo patto” and “quando non eravate che un piccolo numero”

The French Martin 1744 and the 1996 French Ostervald both read the same as the Hebrew and the King James Bible. The 1999 French version called La Bible du Semeur, put of by the same people who gave us the NIV, the International Bible Society, does follow the Hebrew texts and agrees with the King James Bible. It says “Souvenez-vous pour toujours de son alliance” and “Vous n’étiez alors qu’un très petit…” So the French NIV differs from the English NIV.

 

The Modern Greek translation (not to be confused with the so called Greek Septuagints) also reads “Remember his covenant always” and “when you were but a few”.

 

The King James Bible is right – as always.  

 

Has the Hebrew Text been corrupted?

 

2 Chronicles 15:8 “And when Asa heard these words, AND the prophecy OF OBED the prophet, he took courage and put away the abominable idols…”

 

So read the Hebrew texts and the Jewish translations of the 1917 Jewish Publication Society, The Complete Jewish Bible 1998, the Judaica Press Tanach 2004, The Hebrew Transliteration Bible 2010, The Orthodox Jewish Bible 2011, the Hebrew Names Bible 2014, The Hebrew Roots Bible 2015, the Geneva Bible 1599, Revised Version 1885, American Standard Version 1901, Darby 1890, Young’s 1898, Rotherham’s Emphasized Bible 1902, the NKJV 1982, The Koster Scriptures 1998, The World English Bible 2000, The Apostolic Polyglot Bible 2003, Green’s Literal 2005, The Mebust Bible 2007, the New European Version 2010, the New Heart English Bible 2010, The Biblos Bible 2013, The Tree of Life Version 2015 and even Wallace’s NET version 2006.

 

The Jewish Virtual Library Complete Tanach 2994 – “And when Asa heard these words, and the prophesy of Obed th prophet, he took courage” 

 

https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/divrei-hayamim-ii-chronicles-2-chapter-15

 

The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907 – “And when Asa heard these words, AND the prophecy OF OBED the prophet, he took courage”

 

https://archive.org/stream/ancienthebrewlit02yyy5uoft#page/310/mode/2up

 

 

However in modern times beginning with the liberal RSV, many bible versions add words to the Hebrew text on the belief that the Hebrew text has been corrupted. These include the NRSV, ESV, NASB, NIV, Holman Standar and the Message. These versions add the words “Azariah the son” to the inspired text.

 

Jamieson, Faucett and Brown give this faith destroying comment: “when Asa heard . . . the prophecy of Oded the prophet–The insertion of these words, “of Oded the prophet,” is generally regarded as a corruption of the text. “The sole remedy is to erase them. They are, probably, the remains of a note, which crept in from the margin into the text” [BERTHEAU].”

 

 

This is an interesting comment from these men who do not believe that any Bible or any text is free from corruption. They suggest that we merely “erase” these words from the divine text, but yet none of the other multiple bible version translators have followed their advice. 

 

Instead the versions like the NASB, RSV, ESV, NIV and Holman have ADDED the words “WHICH AZARAIAH THE SON” of Obed to the text, allegedly from the Syriac and Latin Vulgate.

 

The NIV says “the prophecy of AZARIAH SON of Obed the prophet” and then tells us in a footnote: “Vulgate and Syriac; Hebrew does not have ‘Azariah son of’.

 

Furthermore, the Syriac translation done by Lamsa reads: “the prophecy of Azariah the son of AZOR” and not Obed. Then the conflicting Septuagint versions are again in disarray. The LXX copy I have does not add the name of Azariah to the text but says: “the prophecy of AZAD the prophet”, but then footnotes that the Alexandrian Septuagint reads: “the prophecy of Azariah” and both omit the name Obed altogether. 

So we see that these other “ancient versions” are in disagreement among themselves and the footnotes in versions like the NIV are misleading.  

 

The Catholic Versions 

 

The Roman Catholic versions have come up with THREE different ways of dealing with this one verse.  

The previous Douay-Rheims bible 1610 and the Douay Version 1950 both follow the Latin Vulgate and read: “And when Asa had heard the words and the prophesy of AZARIAS THE SON OF OBED the prophet, he took courage”

 

But then the St. Joseph New American bible 1970 read basically like the KJB with [brackets] saying: “When Asa heard these words AND the prophesy [Obed the prophet] he was encouraged”

 

But now they changed it once more and the Catholic New Jerusalem bible 1985 reads: “When Asa heard these words and the prophecy, * he took courage”.

 

Then they footnote: “Hebrew adds ‘of the prophet Obed'”. So the latest Catholic version doesn’t follow either the so called Greek Septuagint (which has “Azariah the son of”) OR the Hebrew text!

 

Another note of interest as to why it is the King James Bible and not the previous English versions that is the perfect words of God is that Wycliffe 1395, Coverdale 1535, The Great Bible 1540, Matthew’s Bible 1549 and the Bishops’s Bible of 1568 all contain this added false reading of “the prophecy OF AZARIAH THE SON of Obed” to the Hebrew text.  

 

The Geneva Bible was the first English Bible to strictly follow the Hebrew text and read like the KJB does.

Rather than assume that the Hebrew text has been corrupted and that God failed to preserve his words, the explanation that makes to most sense to me is that not only did king Asa hear the words of Azariah but that he ALSO was told at this time about a previous prophecy given by Azariah’s father Obed.

 

Notice carefully the words recorded in the King James Bible in 2 Chronicles 15:8: “And when Asa heard these words, AND THE PROPHECY OF OBED the prophet, he took courage and put away the abominable idols…”

 

Some Bible Commentators –

 

John Gill comments on 2 Chronicles 15:8 – “And when Asa heard these words, and the prophecy of Oded the prophet,…. Some think that besides the above words of Azariah the son of Oded, a prophecy of Oded his father was related by him, though not recorded”

Gill also mentions that the added words “which Azariah the son of” (found in the NASB, NIV, ESV) come from the Vulgate Latin and Syriac versions and one copy of the Alexandrian Septuagint.

 

The Pulpit Commentaries also mention this reference to a previous prophesy of Obed, saying: “the “prophecy” may have in view some quotation more or less well known from Oded.”  

 

This reference to other prophets or writers of books that we do not have is actually quite common.  Just in 2 Chronicles alone some three times we have similar references to such things as: “Now the rest of the acts of Solomon, first and last, are they not written in the book of Nathan the prophet, and in the prophecy of Ahijah the Shilonite, and in the visions of Iddo the seer against Jeroboam the son of Nebat?” 2 Chronicles 9:29. See also 2 Chronicles 12:15 and 13:22.

 

The King James Bible is correct and translators who put together versions like the NASB, NIV, ESV, and Holman are guilty of adding to or taking away from the words of God and not believing in an infallible Bible.

Modern Bible translators do not believe in the preservation of the inspired Scriptures. There are many examples of where modern versions like the NASB, NIV, RSV, ESV and Holman often reject the clear Hebrew readings and either follow some other source, or just INVENT and make up a reading on a whim. Yet they continually disagree among themselves as to when they do this.

 

 2  Chronicles 20:1 the Ammonites or the Meunites?

 

KJB -” It came to pass after this also, that the children of Moab, and the children of Ammon, and with them other beside the AMMONITES, came against Jehoshaphat to battle.”

 

NIV, NASB – “Now it came about after this that the sons of Moab and the sons of Ammon, together with some of the MEUNITES, [1] came to make war against Jehoshaphat.”

 

NASB Footnote – “ So with Gr; Heb Ammonites”

 

NIV  Footnote – SOME Septuagint manuscripts; Hebrew Ammonites 

 

Not only do the NASB and NIV reject the clear Hebrew reading here and substitute it with the errant reading from the so called Greek Septuagint, but so also do the liberal RSV, the NRSV, ESV, Holman Standard, Darby, the Amplified bible 1987, Dan Wallace and company’s NET version (surprise;-) with a footnote that says: “The Hebrew text has “Ammonites,” but they are mentioned just before this. (Duh!) Most translations, following some mss of the LXX, read “Meunites” 

 

 

Young’s is a little strange here in that it says: “…the sons of Moab have come in, and the sons of Ammon, AND WITH THEM OF THE PEOPLES, against Jehoshaphat to battle.”

 

The Syriac is of no help here because Lamsa’s translation of the Syriac Peshitta reads: “AND it came to pass after this, the children of Moab and the children of Ammon, WITH THE MIGHTY MEN OF WAR, came against Jehoshaphat to battle.”

 

It should be abundantly clear who the others besides the Ammonites were who came to the battle against king Jehoshaphat because the rest of the chapter tells us who they were. In verse 10 and again in verse 22 and 23 an we read of “the children of Ammon and Moab AND MOUNT SEIR which were come against Judah.”  And when the LORD Himself intervened He made it so that “the children of Ammon and Moab stood up against THE INHABITANTS OF MOUNT SEIR, utterly to slay and destroy them; and when they made an end of THE INHABITANTS OF SEIR, every one helped to destroy another.”  

 

The Coffman Commentary on the Bible notes that the change made in the RSV to “the Meunites” is unnecessary and that  “Later in the chapter, it is revealed that the Edomites (those of Mount Seir) were also a part of this coalition against Israel.” And the Geneva Bible notes tell us of those besides the Ammonite  “they were the Idumeans of mount Seir.”

 

The Hebrew texts clearly say the AMMONITES and so do the Bishops’ Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1587, the Revised Version 1881, ASV of 1901, the JPS (Jewish Publication Society ) 1917, the Hebrew Publishing Company version of 1936 and the Judaica Press Tanach 2004, the Interlinear Hebrew Old Testament, Webster’s translation 1833, the NKJV 1982, the Berkeley in Modern English 1969, the World English Bible, and the Third Millennium Bible 1998. 

 

Foreign language translations that follow the Hebrew texts here and correctly read “THE AMMONITES” are the Spanish Sagradas Escrituras of 1569, Spanish Reina Valera 1909, 1960 and 1995 – “Pasadas estas cosas, aconteció que los hijos de Moab y de Amón, y con ellos otros a más de LOS AMONITAS, vinieron contra Josafat a la guerra.”, the French Martin 1744 and the French Ostervald of 1996 -”les enfants de Moab et les enfants d’Ammon (car avec eux il y avait des Ammonites)”, the Italian Diodati 1649 – “e i figliuoli di Ammon, e con loro altri d’infra gli Ammoniti”, Luther’s German bible 1545 and the German Schlachter of 2000 – “da kamen die Moabiter und die Ammoniter und mit ihnen andere neben den Ammonitern”,  the Dutch Staten Vertaling Bible – “en het hen anderen benevens de Ammonieten”, the Portuguese A Biblia em Portugués, the 2009 Romanian Fideli Bible – “Moab si copiii lui Amon si cu ei altii in afara de amoniti” and the Modern Greek – “ οι υιοι Μωαβ και οι υιοι Αμμων και μετ’ αυτων αλλοι εκτος των Αμμωνιτων” = “and others besides the Ammonites”

 

The Catholic versions are in their usual disarray with the earlier Douay Rheims of 1610 and the 1950 Douay correctly reading “the AMMONITES” while the more modern Catholic versions like the St. Joseph New American Bible 1970 and the New Jerusalem bible of 1985 siding with the other new Vatican Versions like the NIV, NASB, ESV and now reading “the MENUITES”.

 

 

In the very next verse, 2 Chronicles 20:2 we read in the KJB – “There cometh a great multitude against thee from beyond the sea on this side SYRIA ; and behold, they be in Hazazontamar, which is Engedi.”

 

SYRIA (or Aram, which is the same) is the reading found in the Jewish translations of JPS 1917, 1936 Hebrew Pub. Com., the Judaica Press Tanach, Wycliffe 1395, Bishops’ Bible, Rotherham’s Emphasized bible 1902, the Douay-Rheims, the Revised Version, the American Standard Version, the NKJV, Third Millenium Bible, Green’s literal, Darby, and even the Greek Septuagint – Siria.

 

However beginning with the liberal RSV and followed by the NRSV, ESV, NIV, NASB, NET, Holman Standard and the Message, these modern versions have rejected the Hebrew reading of Syria (or Aram) and read EDOM instead.  Again, the older Catholic Douay version read “SYRIA” but the more modern Catholic versions like St. Joesph and New Jerusalem have “EDOM”.  Then versions like the NIV, NRSV, New Jerusalem and NET footnote that EDOM comes from ONE Hebrew manuscript, but that the Hebrew Masoretic texts read Syria or Aram.  Even the LXX agrees with the KJB here.  Once again the Syriac is corrupt and has a completely different reading than either the Hebrew or the LXX.  Instead of “on this side Syria” it actually says: “and behold, they are encamping in Jericho”!!! 

 

2 Chronicles 20:25 “Dead bodies” or “clothing”?

 

Here we read: “And when Jehoshaphat and his people came to take away the spoil of them, they found among them in abundance both riches WITH THE DEAD BODIES, and precious jewels, which they stripped off for themselves, more than they could carry away: and they were three days in gathering of the spoil, it was so much.”

 

The context is really quite simple. When the children of Israel cried out to the Lord, God Himself set these enemies against one another and they killed each other. Verse 24 reads: “And when Judah came toward the watch tower in the wilderness, they looked unto the multitude, and, behold, THEY WERE DEAD BODIES FALLEN TO THE EARTH, and none escaped.”

 

Not only does the King James Bible read “with the DEAD BODIES” (or corpses) but so also do the Jewish Scriptures (JPS 1917, 1936 Hebrew Publishing Company, New York, Judaica Press Tanach 2004, the Complete Jewish Bible 1998) the Revised Version 1885, ASV 1901, NKJV 1982, Green’s, Darby 1890, Youngs 1898, World English Bible 2000, the New Berkeley Version in Modern English 1969, the Geneva bible 1587, the Lesser Bible 1853, Rotherham’s Emphasized Bible 1902, the Third Millennium Bible 1998, The Koster Scriptures 1998, The New European Version 2010 and this time even the Holman Standard version of 2003. 

 

Also reading “they found among them in abundance both riches WITH THE DEAD BODIES” are The Jewish Family Bible 1864, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907 “riches WITH THE DEAD BODIES” – 

https://archive.org/stream/ancienthebrewlit02yyy5uoft#page/320/mode/2up

 

The Hebrew Transliteration Bible 2010 – “riches WITH THE DEAD BODIES”

https://www.messianic-torah-truth-seeker.org/Scriptures/Tenakh/Div-HaYamim-Bef/Dvri-HaYmm-Bet20.htm  

 

And The Jewish Virtual Library Complete Tanach 1994 – “found among them in abundance both riches WITH THE DEAD BODIES”

https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/divrei-hayamim-ii-chronicles-2-chapter-20

 

 

The Geneva Bible says: “they founde among them in abundance both of substance and also OF BODIES laden with precious iewels, which they tooke for themselues.”  

 

Even Lamsa’s translation of the Syriac agrees with the Hebrew texts and the KJB saying “and behold they were DEAD BODIES fallen to the earth”.  

 

Foreign Language Bibles = KJB

 

Foreign language Bibles that follow the Hebrew Masoretic text and read “DEAD BODIES” are the Spanish Reina Valera, the French Martin 1744 – “grandes richesses parmi LES MORTS”, the French Louis Segond 1910 and 1996 French Ostervald – “LES CADAVRES d’abondantes richesses”, the Italian Diodati 1649, Riveduta 1927 – “e fra iLOR CORPI MORTI trovarono molte ricchezze” and the Nuova Diodati 1991, and Riveduta 2006 – “CADAVERI e di oggetti preziosi, the Portuguese A Biblia Sagrada em Portugués and the Portuguese Almeida Corrigida E Fiel 1681 – “e acharam neles fazenda eE CADAVERS  emabundância, como também objetos preciosos and the Modern Greek Bible – “ευρηκαν μεταξυ των νεκρων σωματων αυτων και πλουτη εν αφθονια και πολυτιμον αποσκευην”

 

The Hebrew word is found over 20 times in the Masoretic text.  It is # 6296 peh-ger and is variously translated as “dead bodies” in the previous verse of 2 Chron. 20:24, Jeremiah 31:40; 33:5; 41:6, and as “carcases” in Genesis 15:11; Lev. 26:30; Eze. 43:7 and as “corpses” in Isaiah 37:36.

 

As a side note, earlier English versions were still influenced by some Latin Vulgate readings and the earlier English translations from Wycliffe 1395 to Coverdale 1535, Matthew’s Bible 1549 and the Bishops’ Bible of 1568 contained the reading of “CLOTHING” instead of the Hebrew text of “DEAD BODIES”.

 

The 1568 Bishops’ Bible read: “And when Iehosaphat and his people came to take away the spoyle of them, they founde among them aboundaunce of goods, RAYMENT, & pleasaunt iewels, which they toke for them selues, more then they could cary away.” 

 

It wasn’t till the Geneva Bible that the Hebrew reading was followed instead of the Latin in this place.  This shows the purification process that was taking place, which finally was perfected in the King James Bible. 

 

The NKJV also reads “dead bodies” but then it casts doubt on the Hebrew reading by footnoting “A few Hebrew manuscripts, Old Latin, and Vulgate read GARMENTS; Septuagint reads ARMOR.” 

 

Well, for one thing they are lying about what the Septuagint reads.  Instead of “dead bodies” or even “armor”, the Brenton copy of the so called LXX reads: “they found much CATTLE and FURNITURE, and spoils and precious things.” It does NOT say “armor” at all.  The NKJV footnote is flat out WRONG.

 

And secondly, what the NKJV footnote fails to mention is that the Vulgate has BOTH “dead bodies” AND “garments”. The Latin Vulgate has both – “inter CADAVERA (dead bodies) variam supellectilem VESTES (clothing) quoque et vasa pretiosissim”

 

The NIV, NASB, RSV, NRSV, ESV, ISV 2014, Jehovah Witness New World Translation and NET versions all reject this Hebrew reading of “dead bodies” and instead say: “his people came to take their spoil, they found much among them, including goods, GARMENTS (NASB, ISV) CLOTHING (NIV, ESV) and valuable things.”

 

Then the NIV tells us that this reading comes from “Some Hebrew manuscripts and Vulgate; most Hebrew manuscripts corpses.”  The newer Catholic bibles (St. Joseph, New Jerusalem) also read “clothes” and then footnote that the Hebrew reads “dead bodies”.  

 

The Jehovah Witness NWT says: “they found among them both GOODS AND CLOTHING and desirable articles” with no footnotes.

 

Another Bible corrector, Daniel Wallace, also reads in his NET version “clothing” instead of “dead bodies”, and he footnotes: “The MT reads “corpses”, but this seems odd among a list of plunder. A few medieval Hebrew mss and the Vulgate read “clothing”, which fits the context much better.”

 

Sorry Dan, but the context is just fine as it stands in the traditional Hebrew texts and the KJB.

 

The JPS (Jewish Publication Society) translation of 1917 reads just like the King James Bible with – “And when Jehoshaphat and his people came to take the spoil of them, they found among them in abundance both riches and DEAD BODIES, and precious jewels, which they stripped off for themselves, more than they could carry away”

 

Likewise the 2004 Jewish translation called The Complete Tanach follows the Hebrew Masoretic text (as does the KJB) and says: “And Jehoshaphat and his people came to plunder the spoils, and they found among them plenty, and belongings and CORPSES and precious vessels, which they emptied out for themselves to the extent that they could not carry them away, and for three days they were plundering the spoil, because it was so much.”

 

Wycliffe 1395, which was translated from the Latin includes BOTH the words “dead bodies” and  “clothes”.  It reads: “Therfor Josaphat cam, and al the puple with hym, to drawe awey the spuylis of DEED MEN, and thei founden among THE DEED BODIES dyuerse purtenaunce of houshold, and CLOTHIS, and ful preciouse vessels”.

 

Most of the Spanish versions like the Reina Valera and Gómez RV have followed the same Latin readings and include both “dead bodies” AND “clothing”.

 

The Latin Vulgate – “spolia mortuorum inveneruntque inter CADAVERA variam supellectilem VESTES”

 

Catholic Douay-Rheims, like the Latin Vulgate and Wycliffe (which was translated from the Latin) also includes both the “dead bodies” and the garments – “and they found among THE DEAD BODIES, stuff of various kinds, andGARMENTS, and most precious vessels”.

 

So, even the footnotes found in the NIV are false and misleading.

 

The NIV reads: “So Jehoshaphat and his men went to carry off their plunder, and they found among them a great amount of equipment and CLOTHING [1] and also articles of value—more than they could take away. There was so much plunder that it took three days to collect it.”  Footnotes:  Some Hebrew manuscripts and Vulgate; most Hebrew manuscripts corpses

 

The King James Bible is right, as always, and these modern day Vatican Versions like the ESV, NIV, NASB, NET are not. Get the true words of God as found in the King James Bible and stick with it.  You will never go wrong.

 

2 Chronicles 21:2 “ISRAEL” or “JUDAH”?  Are all Hebrew texts wrong and have been corrupted?

 

RSV, NRSV, ESV 2001, most Catholic versions and several previous English versions and some commentators say Yes.

 

KJB and many others say No.

 

In the King James Bible, as well as in ALL Hebrew texts we read: “And he had brethren the sons of Jehoshaphat, Azariah, and Jehiel, and Zechariah, and Azariah, and Michael, and Shephatiah: all these were the sons of Jehoshaphat king of ISRAEL.” 

 

 

But the ESV 2001 edition (RSV, NRSV, Catholic Douay-Rheims 1610, Catholic Jerusalem bible 1968, the St. Joseph New American bible 1970, Wycliffe 1395, Coverdale 1535, Great Bible 1540, Matthew’s bible 1549, Bishops’ bible 1568 – thus we see the imperfections of the previous English bibles ) 

 

–  “He had brothers, the sons of Jehoshaphat: Azariah, Jehiel, Zechariah, Azariah, Michael, and Shephatiah; all these were the sons of Jehoshaphat king of JUDAH.”

 

Then in a footnote it tells us that the reading of JUDAH comes from the Greek Septuagint and the Syraic, but that the Hebrew texts read ISRAEL.

 

BUT the ESVs have come out with 4 different editions in just 16 years and they keep changing their texts.  The ESV 2007 and ESV 2011 (I have hard copies) and now also the ESV 2016 editions have come out and now gone back to the Hebrew and reads: 

 

“He had brothers, the sons of Jehoshaphat: Azariah, Jehiel, Zechariah, Azariah, Michael, and Shephatiah; all these were the sons of Jehoshaphat king of ISRAEL.”

 

 

Agreeing with the KJB and the Hebrew texts are the Geneva Bible 1587, the Catholic New Jerusalem bible 1985, the NASB, NIV, NET, NKJV, Young’s, Jewish Publication Society bible 1917, the Complete Tanach 2004, the Modern English Version 2014, Tree of Life Version 2015, and now the ESV 2016 edition.

 

The solution to this “problem” is easily solved by seeing how God uses the term ISRAEL many times in the book of 2 Chronicles to refer to the people of Judah and kings of Judah as the people of ISRAEL and kings of ISRAEL.

 

The term Israel is used in a generic sense of God’s people and many of those from the 10 tribes of Israel had indeed joined themselves to the house of Judah to serve the true God.

 

The term ISRAEL is used in this way in 2 Chronicles 12:6 “the princes of ISRAEL humbled themselves”; 15:17 “But the high places were not taken away out of ISRAEL; nevertheless the heart of Asa was perfect all his days.”; 23:2; 24:5 “Go out into the cities of Judah, and gather of all ISRAEL money to repair the house of your God” and 16; and in 2 Chronicles 28:19 “For the LORD brought Judah low because of Ahaz king of ISRAEL; and Hezekiah his son reigned in his stead.”

 

 

 

2 Chronicles 26:5 “VISIONS” or “FEAR” or “WORSHIP”?

 

KJB – “And he sought God in the days of Zechariah, who had understanding in THE VISIONS of God: and as long as he sought the LORD, God made him to prosper.”

 

The VISIONS of God is the reading found in the vast majority of Hebrew texts and is the reading of every Jewish translation I am aware of, including The Jewish Family Bible 1864, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907,  the 1917 Jewish Publication Society, the 1936 Hebrew Publishing Company, The New Jewish Version 1985, the Complete Jewish Bible 1998, the Judaica Press Tanach 2004, the Hebraic Transliteration Scripture 2010 and the Hebrew Names Version 2014.

 

It is also the reading found in the King James Bible, Latin Vulgate 425, Wycliffe 1395, Coverdale 1535, Bishops’ Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1599, Darby 1890, Youngs 1898, the Revised Version 1885, the American Standard Version 1901, the Spanish Reina Valera, French Martin 1744, Louis Segond 1910, French Ostervald 1996, Italian Diodati and the Rivudeta 1927, the NKJV, Modern Greek, the NASB 1972-1995, The Koster Scriptures 1998, World English Bible 2000, The Mebust Bible 2007, The New European Version 2010, the Jubilee Bible 2010, the Lexham English Bible 2012, the Biblos Bible 2013 and The Tree of Life Version 2015 to name but a few. 

 

The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907 – “who had understanding in THE VISIONS of God”

https://archive.org/stream/ancienthebrewlit02yyy5uoft#page/330/mode/2up

 

The Orthodox Jewish Bible 2011 – “who had understanding in THE VISIONS of HaElohim”

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Divrey+Hayamim+Bais+26&version=OJB

 

The Jewish Virtual Library Full Text Tanach 1994 – “who had understanding in THE VISIONS of God”

https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/divrei-hayamim-ii-chronicles-2-chapter-26

 

Hebrew Interlinear Old Testament – “who had understanding in the VISIONS of God”

https://studybible.info/IHOT/2%20Chronicles%2026:5

 

 

 

 

However the NIV along with the ESV and Holman Standard have chosen a different text and read: “He sought God during the days of Zechariah, who instructed him in THE FEAR of God. As long as he sought the LORD, God gave him success.” 

 

Likewise the newer Catholic versions like St. Joseph and New Jerusalem say “THE FEAR of God” and then the New Jerusalem footnotes that “fear” comes from the Greek, but that the Hebrew reads “vision of God”.  

 

The Jehovah Witness New World Translation also rejected the Standard Hebrew text and reads like the NIV with – “who taught him TO FEAR the true God”

https://www.jw.org/en/publications/bible/nwt/books/2-chronicles/26/

 

 

Then the NIV footnotes that the reading “fear” comes from ‘Many Hebrew manuscripts, Septuagint and Syriac; other Hebrew manuscripts vision ‘ This variant reading was first adopted by the liberal RSV in 1954 and now it is found in the NRSV, ESV, NIV, NEB and the Holman Standard Version. 

 

The Holman Christian Standard footnotes that the reading of “THE FEAR of God” comes from “Some Hebrew manuscripts, the LXX, Syriac (which is not true), and the Arabic, but other Hebrew manuscripts read VISIONS”

 

The LXX does read “fear of God” rather than “visions of God”, but Lamsa’s translation of the Syriac has “who taught him in THE WORSHIP of God” rather than either ‘fear’ or ‘visions’.

 

With the modern versionists’ Bible Agnostic mentality, I guess we can never be sure what God inspired in His precious words of truth and grace.

 

NET version – Daniel Wallace’s fickle NET version has an incredible 4 footnotes in this single verse and yet for the word in question he has nothing. He seems to have made up his own text which more or less leans towards the NIV reading. The NET says: “He followed God during the lifetime of Zechariah, who TAUGHT HIM HOW TO HONOR GOD. As long as he followed the Lord, God caused him to succeed.”

 

All these different textual readings obviously cannot be what God originally inspired. Who wants you to be unsure about what God really said? As the Rolling Stones sing in Sympathy for the Devil “Won’t you guess my name?”

 

2 Chronicles 31:16 – “from THREE years old and upward” or “from THIRTY years old and upward”?

 

In the King James Bible and in all Hebrew texts we read: “Beside their genealogy of males, from THREE YEARS OLD  and upward, even unto every one that entereth into the house of the LORD, his daily portion for their service in their charges according to their courses.”

 

Not only does the King James Bible correctly read “from THREE years old and upward” but so do the following Bible translations: Wycliffe 1395, Coverdale 1535, the Great Bible 1540, Matthew’s Bible 1549, the Bishops’ Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1587, the RV 1885, ASV 1901, RSV, NRSV 1989, ESV 2001, NIV 1984 and 2011, NKJV 1982, Holman Standard 2003, the Berkeley Version 1969, Lamsa’s translation of the Syriac, the Greek LXX, the New English Bible 1970, Daniel Wallace’s NET version and the Revised English Version of 1989.

 

Yet the NASBs read: “without regard to their genealogical enrollment, to the males from THIRTY YEARS OLD and upward–everyone who entered the house of the LORD for his daily obligations–for their work in their duties according to their divisions.”  Then in a footnote they tell us “the Hebrew reads three years old.” 

 

In  other words, they just made this number up out of thin air.  The only other version I could find that also reads “thirty years old” is Eugene Peterson’s The Message.  In like manner, the previous Douay-Rheims read “THREE” but the newer Catholic versions (St. Joseph, New Jerusalem) say “THIRTY years and upwards” and then the New Jerusalem footnotes that the Hebrew reads THREE, just like the KJB has it.

 

There is NO Hebrew text that reads this way; nor the so called Greek Septuagint nor the Syriac; they all read “from three years old and upward”.  The NASB seems to attempt some justification for this whimsical change in the text by cross referencing 1 Chron. 23:3 where it talks about the age of the priests, but that passage is talking about the age of the Levites and not the Aaronic priesthood, which originally was 30 years old and upward, but was later changed to 20 years old and upward as can be seen from looking at the very next verse in 2 Chronicles 31:17 “…and the Levites from twenty years old and upward, in their charges by their courses.”

 

John Gill comments: “Beside their genealogy of males, from three years old and upwards… Their office was not only to give to the priests, but to those of their males in their genealogy, who were three years old and upwards; for under that age, according to Kimchi, they were not fit to come into the temple; nor have they knowledge to keep what is put into their hands; nor fit to handle offerings, lest they should defile them; but at that age they might be taught how to hold them, and be used to it; but as for females, he says, they were not admitted at any age.”

 

Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown – “With the exception of children under three years of age–an exception made probably from their being considered too young to receive solid food–lists were kept of the number and age of every male; of priests according to their fathers’ house, and Levites from twenty years (see Nu 4:3; 28:24; 1Ch 23:24).”

 

The King James Bible is right, as always, and the NASB is clearly wrong.

 

Ezra 8:5 and 8:10 NASB 95, NIV, ESV, RSV, Holman all add to the Hebrew Scriptures.

 

In Ezra chapter eight we read of the genealogy of those who went up with Ezra from Babylon to Jerusalem to rebuild the temple. In Ezra 8:5 we read: “Of the sons of Shechaniah; the son of Jahaziel, and with him three hundred males.”

 

This is the reading of the Hebrew text, as well as the Geneva Bible, the RV, ASV, NKJV, Young’s, Darby, Douay, the Spanish Reina Valera, and the Jewish translations of 1917 JPS, 1936 Hebrew Publishing Company, 1998 JPS updated and the 2004 Complete Jewish Tanach. It WAS also the reading of the NASB in their 1972, 1973 and 1977 editions.

 

However, the new NASB of 1995 now reads as do the RSV, ESV, NIV, the newer Catholic versions like the Jerusalem Bible and the St. Joseph NAB (BUT the latest 2009 Catholic Public Domain Bible has now gone back to the Hebrew text and omits these two added names!) and the Holman Standard.

 

These versions say: “Of the descendants OF ZATTU, Shechaniah son of Jahaziel..” Then in a footnote the NIV, ESV and Holman tell us that the name ZATTU comes from SOME LXX copies, but that the Hebrew does not have this added name.

 

The same thing occurs in Ezra 8:10. Here the King James Bible as well as the Hebrew text and Jewish translations (1917 -1998), the 2004 Complete Jewish Tanach, and the RV, ASV, NKJV, Young’s, Darby, Douay of 1950, and Spanish versions all read: “And of the sons of Shelomith; the son of Josiphiah, and with him 160 males.” This WAS the reading too of the NASB of 1972, 1973 and 1977.

 

But once again, the 1995 NASB has changed its Old Testament text and it now reads along with the RSV, ESV, NIV, the newer Catholic versions (except the latest 2009 version), and the Holman Standard: “Of the descendants of BANI, Shelomith son of Josiphiah…” Then in the NIV, ESV and Holman footnote (the NASB doesn’t tell us that they changed the text), we read that the name of BANI comes from SOME LXX copies (they do not all read the same), but that the Hebrew does not have the name BANI in the text. Not surprisingly, Daniel Wallace and  company’s NET version does the same thing – adding these two names to the Hebrew texts – and then footnotes: 

 

 The MT lacks “of Zattu.” The translation adopted above follows the LXX in including the words. The MT lacks “Bani.” It is restored on the basis of certain LXX MSS.

 

Ezra 10:6 and 10:16

 

In Ezra 10:6 we read: “Then Ezra rose up from before the house of God, and went into the chamber of Johanan the son of Eliashib; AND WHEN HE WAS COME THITHER, he did eat no bread, nor drink water: for he mourned because of the transgression of them that had been carried away.”

 

“And when he was come thither” is the reading of the Hebrew translations of the Jewish Publication Society 1917, the Hebrew Publishing Company version 1936, the Revised Version 1881, the American Standard Version of 1901, Young’s, the Spanish Reina Valera, Green’s MKJV 1998 and the NKJV. Even the LXX reads this way.

 

The NASB is a bit different with: “Although he went there, he did not eat bread…” The NIV is basically the same with: “While he was there, he did not eat bread…”

 

However the Holman Standard, the RSV and the ESV say: “Then Ezra went from the house of God, walked to the chamber of Jehohanan son of Eliashib, WHERE HE SPENT THE NIGHT. He did not eat food or drink water.”  Likewise the older Douay Rheims followed the Hebrew reading, but the more modern Catholic versions (St. Joseph, New Jerusalem) go with the  reading “WHERE HE SPENT THE NIGHT”.

 

Then in a footnote the Holman tells us “where he spent the night” comes from the Syriac but that the Hebrew reads as does the KJB and many others. Actually, this is a false footnote. Lamsa’s translation of the Syriac says “And HE SAT THERE” instead of “where he spent the night”.

 

The RSV and the ESV also say “where he spent the night”, but they say nothing about any Syriac reading. Instead the ESV footnotes this reading in this manner: “PROBABLE reading”; Hebrew – he went there”. In other words, the Holman and the RSV, ESV and modern Catholic versions just made this reading up out of thin air.

 

Daniel Wallace’s NET bible says: “Then Ezra got up from before the temple of God and went to the room of Jehohanan son of Eliashib. WHILE HE STAYED THERE (footnote # 10) there, he did not eat food, nor did he drink water, for he was in mourning over the infidelity of the exiles.”

 

Then in his footnote he tells us: “The translation reads wayyalen (“and he stayed”) rather than the reading wayyelek (“and he went”) of the MT. Cf. the LXX.”

 

So Daniel Wallace has made up his own reading, and it doesn’t even agree with ANY of the other versions. And why does he refer us to the LXX? Who knows? The LXX reads the same way here as do the Hebrew texts and the King James Bible.

 

A similar example of confusion exists in Ezra 10:16. There we read: “And Ezra the priest, with certain chief of the fathers, after the house of their fathers, and all of them by their names, WERE SEPARATED, and sat down in the first day of the tenth month to examine the matter.”

 

“And Ezra the priest, with certain chief of the fathers….WERE SEPARATED” is the reading of the KJB, the Jewish translations of 1917, 1936, the RV, ASV, NKJV, Young’s, the Spanish Reina Valera, Green’s MKJV, and even the Greek Septuagint.

 

However this time the RSV, NRSV, ESV and Holman all say: “Ezra the priest SELECTED MEN who were family leaders…” Then in a footnote the RSV, ESV and Holman all tell us this reading comes from the Syiac. The NASB, NIV and the TNIV also read “Ezra the priest SELECTED MEN” but they don’t tell us that this reading is not what the Hebrew texts say; they just change the text with no footnotes telling us they have done so. The New Jerusalem also says “SELECTED”

 

Daniel Wallace’s NET bible says: “10:16 So the exiles proceeded accordingly. Ezra the priest SEPARATED OUT (ft. # 19) by name men who were leaders in their family groups.”

 

Then Mr. Wallace tells us in his footnote: “The translation reads the Hiphil singular wayyabdel lo (“separated for himself”) rather than the Niphal plural wayyibbadelu (“were separated”) of the MT.”

 

Again, Doktor Wallace has simply changed the text, (and he even put in his own Hebrew rendering!), but admitted that the Masorretic text reads as does the King James Bible.

 

Even those versions that tell us the reading “selected men” comes from the Syriac are not being totally honest. Lamsa’s translation of the Syriac actually says: “Ezra the priest selected TEN men”. So, in other words, the NASB, NIV, ESV and Holman have all rejected the Hebrew text and substituted instead PART OF the Syriac reading. Nice scholarly work, huh? These are the guys who are writing your modern bible versions.

 

Nehemiah 11:8 – Here the KJB as well as the Hebrew texts read: “AND AFTER HIM GABBAI, SALLAI nine hundred twenty and eight.”  So too do Wycliffe, Bishops’s bible, the Geneva Bible, the RV, ASV, NASB, RSV, NIV, NKJV, Rotherham’s Emphasized bible, Green, Darby, Youngs, and the Jewish translations.

 

However the ESV omits the names here, and changes “and after him” to “brothers”  saying: “and his brothers, men of valor, 928.”  They not only changed “and after him” to “HIS BROTHERS” but they omit the two names.  Then the ESV footnotes: “Compare Septuagint; Hebrew And after him Gabbai, Sallai, 928”.  Well, I compared the LXX and it reads “and after him Gebe, Seli nine hundred and twenty eight.” (kai opisoo autou Gebe, Seli)

 

The previous RSV read exactly like the KJB – “And after him Gabba’i, Salla’i, nine hundred and twenty-eight.”, then the NRSV changed it a bit with – “And his brothers F36 Gabbai, Sallai: nine hundred twenty-eight.” with a footnote that “brothers” comes from “F36 Gk Mss: Heb [And after him]”  They are lying.  The LXX I have says “and after him” not “his brothers”, AND it has two names listed.  So much for the ESV and its accuracy.

 

Nehemiah 11:14 – Here the KJB as well as the Hebrew texts read: “And THEIR BRETHREN, mighty men of valour, an hundred twenty and eight…”  Agreeing with the reading of THEIR BRETHREN are Coverdale, Bishops’ bible, the Geneva Bible, the 1917 Jewish translation, the RV, ASV, RSV, NRSV, ESV, NKJV, NASB, Young’s and Lamsa’s translation of the Syriac.  

 

However the NIV, TNIV, Message and Daniel Wallace & company’s NET version read: “And HIS ASSOCIATES”. Then the NIV footnotes that HIS comes from “Most Septuagint manuscripts” but that the Hebrew reads “their”. It should also be pointed out that “associates” is not the same thing as “brethren”.   The copy of the LXX I have reads “adelphoi autou” or “HIS brothers”.  Wallace’s NET version also reads like the NIV- HIS COLLEAGUES” –  and then he footnotes – “The translation reads with the LXX “and his brothers” rather than the MT reading “and their brothers”.   

 

Among the Catholic versions the older Douay read “THEIR BRETHREN”, but the New Jerusalem has “HIS kinsfolk” while the St. Joseph NAB has “HIS brethren”

 

In the Book of Job the NIV changes Job 7:20, and in 9:19 both the NASB, NIV change “me” to “him”. Here the NIV footnote says to see the LXX, though the Hebrew says “ME”, but even the LXX doesn’t read “him” – I checked it out. The Hebrew translations as well as the RV, ASV read “who shall set ME a time to plead?” as does the KJB.

 

 

Job 14:3 -“And doth thou open thine eyes upon such an one, and bringeth ME into judgment with thee?” So read the Hebrew texts as well as the 1917, 1936 Jewish translations, the Judaica Press Tanach, the Geneva Bible, Bishops’s bible, Coverdale, the RV, ASV, NRSV, ESV, NKJV, and the Holman Standard.

 

But the NASB, NIV 1984 edition, and RSV change the “me” to “him”. The NASB does not tell us where they got this reading from, but the NIV footnotes tell us it comes from the alleged LXX, the Vulgate and Syriac, but that the Hebrew says ME. Even Daniel Wallace, of the goofy NET version fame which often rejects the Hebrew readings, says in his footnotes: “The text clearly has “me” as the accusative; but many wish to emend it to say “him”.”  Likewise the Catholic Douay and St. Joseph change the Hebrew “me” to “him”, just like the NASB, NIV, RSV.

 

Now the new TNIV has come down the pike and it has even changed from the old NIV. The TNIV now reads: “will you bring THEM…” Then in a footnote it tells us this reading supposedly comes from the LXX, Syriac and the Vulgate, but the Hebrew reads ME.

 

By the way, the TNIV footnote is false. The LXX and Syriac do not read “them” but “him”. Oh, but wait! Now the New New International Version of 2011 is here, and guess what.  They have once again changed their text.The NIV 1984 read: “Do you fix your eye on SUCH A ONE? Will you bring HIM before you for judgment?” BUT the new NIV 2011 now says: “Do you fix your eye on THEM? Will you bring THEM before you for judgment?” Then it footnotes that this reading comes from the Septuagint, Vulgate and Syriac, but the Hebrew reads ME.

 

Job 15:23 “He wandereth abroad FOR BREAD, SAYING WHERE IS IT? he knoweth that the day of darkness is ready at his hand.”

 

This verse reads the same in the Jewish translations, based of course on the Hebrew texts. It is also the reading of the RV, ASV, NASB, NKJV, RSV, NRSV, and ESV.

 

The NIV, however, goes totally off the wall here and doesn’t even tell you in their footnotes how they came up with their unique reading. The NIV 1982 edition says: “He wanders about – FOOD FOR VULTURES.” You have to do a bit of research, but this corrupt reading comes from the Greek Septuagint; not the Hebrew texts. Oh, but wait! It’s happened again!  Now the new NIV of 2011 is here and it now reads: “He wanders about FOR FOOD LIKE A VULTURE.”  Tricky fellows, these NIV translators, huh?

 

Job 22:17 Again the NIV, RSV, and ESV depart from the Hebrew texts. The KJB, as well as the NKJV, NASB say: “Which said unto God, Depart from us: and what can the Almighty do for THEM.” The NKJV footnote says the Hebrew reads “them”, but the Syriac and LXX read “us”, and so read the NIV, ESV saying: “what can the Almighty do for (or, to) US?”  The Catholic St.Joseph and New Jerusalem likewise read “do to US?” with a footnote that says the Hebrew reads “do to THEM”.

 

Job 27:18 Here we have another blunder found in the NASB. All Hebrew texts as well as the RV, ASV, NKJV, 1917, 1936 Jewish translations, Young’s, Geneva, and the ESV (2001 English Standard Version) read: “He buildeth his house as a MOTH, and as a booth that the keeper maketh.”

 

The word is clearly “moth” (# 6211 gahsh) and is found 7 times in the Hebrew texts, as in Job 4:19 “are crushed before the moth”, and 13:28 “as a garment that is moth eaten”.

 

However the RSV and the NASB read: “He has built his house like A SPIDER’S WEB.” If you look in the NASB concordance you will see there is no number by their entry of “spider’s web”. That is because there is no such word in the Hebrew texts. The NASB does not tell you when they depart from the Hebrew texts, but the RSV has a footnote telling us to compare the Greek Septuagint and the Syriac, but the Hebrew reads “moth”.

Well, the LXX and the Syriac are interesting. The Greek LXX reads: “And his house is gone like moths, and like a spider’s web”, while Lamsa’s translation of the Syriac has: “The wicked has built his house upon a spider’s web.”

 

It is also of interest that the RSV has “spider’s web”, while the NRSV says: “he builds his house LIKE A NEST”, and then the ESV, which is a revision of the previous two, goes back to “MOTH”.

 

The NIV adds a word not found in any text but it still is similar to the KJB reading with: “The house he builds is like a moth’s cocoon.”  The Catholic New Jerusalem is like the NASB saying: “All he has built himself is A SPIDER’S WEB”. Then it footnotes that “SPIDER” comes from the Greek and Syriac, but that the Hebrew reads “MOTH”! – just like the KJB has it.

 

Psalm 18:13 “The LORD also thundered in the heavens, and the Highest gave his voice; HAIL STONES AND COALS OF FIRE.” Bible versions that include the phrase “hail stones and coals of fire” are the Wycliffe, Coverdale, Bishops’, the Geneva Bible, Youngs, Darby, the Jewish translations of 1917, 1936, the 2004 Judaica Press Tanach, the Complete Jewish Bible 1998, the RV, ASV, RSV 1954, the NASB 1995, the 2001 ESV, the Spanish Reina Valera 1602 – 1995, Lamsa’s 1936 translation of the Syriac Peshitta, the Modern Greek (not to be confused with the so called LXX) the KJV 21st Century version 1994, and the NKJV 1982.

 

However the NIV, NRSV 1989, NET version, and the 2003 Holman Standard omit these words, and then in a footnote tell us that some Hebrew mss. and the LXX omit these words, but they are found in most Hebrew manuscripts. Well, they are also found in the ancient Syriac versions too.  The previous Douay version included these words, but the more modern Catholic versions (St.Joseph and New Jerusalem) omit them like the NIV and NET versions.

 

As for the NIV, what is of interest is that the NIV Spanish edition, called Nueva Versión Internacional 1999, put out by the same people who give us the NIV English version (International Bible Society) has included the Hebrew words left out by the NIV English version.

 

It reads: “En el cielo, ENTRE GRANIZOS Y CARBONES ENCENDIDOS, se oyó el trueno del Señor, resonó la voz del Altísimo.” Likewise the NIV French edition, called La Bible du Semeur 1999 (IBS) also includes the Hebrew words omitted by the American NIV.

 

Notice also that the previous 1954 RSV included the words; then the NRSV 1989 omitted them, but then the revision of the revision of the revision “scientifically” put them back in again! This typifies what modern scholars call the “art and science of textual criticism” – mere guesswork and fickle change for change’s sake.

Though I certainly do not trust the Dead Sea Scrolls, since they have been found to contain conflicting texts of radically different readings, plus an additional “15 apocryphal Psalms or similar compositions distributed among four manuscripts”, yet the DSS copy of Psalm 18 does include these Hebrew words that the NIV omits.

 

Psalm 20:9 “Save, LORD: LET THE KING HEAR US when we call.” This verse reads the same in the NASB, NKJV, RV, ASV, Darby, Spanish, 1936 and 1917 Hebrew-English and other translations. The king can easily be seen as the anointed, or the Christ, who is the true king, whom God will hear, referred to in verse 6. Christ makes intercession for us, and God hears Him.

 

Or it could be referring to the earthly king, who if he is a godly and compassionate ruler, will attend to the needs of the people when they come before him with their needs. In any case the Hebrew clearly reads this way.

 

The NIV, and the ESV however, without a footnote, have this reading. “O LORD, SAVE THE KING! Answer us when we call!” It is of interest to note that the RSV also reads as does the NIV, but the RSV has a footnote telling us that the Greek LXX reads this way. I looked it up and it’s true. But the RSV also states that the Hebrew reads as does the KJB, and also the others like the NASB and NKJV.

 

So again, the NIV editors have forsaken the Hebrew masoretic text and followed the Greek LXX. The “old” NIV read: “O LORD, save the king”, but the “new” NIV now has “LORD, give victory to the king!”, but both readings are from the LXX, and not the Hebrew text.

 

Likewise the Catholic Douay and New Jerusalem have “save the king”, while the St. Joseph has “Lord, grant victory to the king”, thus following the LXX and not the Hebrew, as do the NIVs here.

 

Likewise the NIV has used the LXX, Syriac or Vulgate to alter Psalms 19:4; 22:31; 42:5; 44:4; 49:11; 109:10; 119:37; 145:5; but all of these verses read the same in the NASB and NKJV.

 

In Psalm 22:31 along with the Hebrew texts we read: “THEY SHALL COME, and shall declare his righteousness…”. So read the RV, ASV, NASB, NKJV, ESV, NET, and Holman.

 

However the previous RSV, NRSV and now the NIV and TNIV omit the words “they shall come”. The NRSV informs us in their footnote to consult the LXX for this omission, but also tells us that the Hebrew reads: “They shall come”.

 

Of course the NRSV also changes the Hebrew text in verse 29 where it says: “and none can keep alive his own soul” (RV, ASV, NASB, NIV, ESV, NKJV and Holman) for “AND I SHALL LIVE FOR HIM”. The NRSV then tells us to consult the LXX, Vulgate, and Syriac for this completely different reading, but that the Hebrew reads as the KJB and others, including the revised ESV, now have it.

 

So, at present, the NIV is the only newest version that continues to omit the words “THEY SHALL COME” from the Hebrew texts and follows the omission of the LXX here.

 

Psalm 49:11 KJB – “THEIR INWARD THOUGHT IS, THAT THEIR HOUSES SHALL CONTINUE FOR EVER, and their dwelling places to all generations; they call their lands after their own names.”

 

ESV – (NIV, NET, Catholic versions) – “THEIR GRAVES ARE THEIR HOMES FOREVER, their dwelling places to all generations, though they called lands by their own names.”

 

Psalm 49:11 is one of the numerous places where the NIV, New English Bible 1970, RSV, NRSV, ESV 2001 – 2011,  Holman Standard, NET and many other modern versions clearly depart from the Hebrew texts and they even tell you in their footnote that they do it.

Psalm 49:11 “THEIR INWARD THOUGHT IS, that their houses shall continue for ever”. 

 

So read the King James Bible, the Great Bible 1540, the Geneva Bible, Bishops’ Bible 1568, the Lesser Bible 1853, Noyes Translation 1869, Darby 1890, Youngs 1898, NASB 1995, The Jewish Family Bible 1864, the RV 1885 – “THEIR INWARD THOUGHT IS, that their houses shall continue for ever, and their dwelling places to all generations; they call their lands after their own names.”, The Revised English Bible 1877,  ASV 1901, Rotherham’s Emphasized bible 1902, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, The New Berkeley Version in Modern English 1969, the Jewish translations of 1917 (Jewish Publication Society), 1936 Hebrew Publishing Company,  NKJV 1982, Amplified Bible 1987, Green’s literal 2005, Complete Jewish Bible 1998, Third Millennium Bible 1998, A Conservative Version 2005, English Jubilee Bible 2010, the New Heart English Bible 2010, Orthodox Jewish Bible 2011, the Lexham English Bible 2012,  the International Standard Version 2014 – “Their inner thoughts are on their homes forever” and several others tell us: “THEIR INWARD THOUGHT IS, that there houses shall continue for ever, and their dwelling places to all generations.”  

 

Other English Bibles that follow the Hebrew text and read: “THEIR INWARD THOUGHT IS that there houses shall continue for ever” are The Word of Yah 1993, The World English Bible 2000, The Judaica Press Tanach 2004, the Hebraic Transliteration Scripture 2010, Online Interlinear 2010 (André de Mol), The New European Version 2010, the Biblos Interlinear Bible 2011, the Conservative Bible 2011, The Interlinear Hebrew-Greek Scriptures 2012 (Mebust), The Natural Israelite Bible 2012, the Hebraic Roots Bible 2012 – “THEIR INWARD THOUGHT IS that their houses will continue for ever.” and the Hebrew Names Version 2014.

 

 

Foreign language bibles that follow the Hebrew text and also say “THEIR INWARD THOUGHT IS that their houses shall continue for ever” are the Spanish Sagradas 1569, the Reina Valera 1909 – “En su interior piensan que sus casas son eternas”, Reina Valera 1995 and Biblia de las Américas 1997 – “Su íntimo pensamiento es que sus casas serán eternas  Luther’s German Bible 1545, the French Martin 1744 and French Ostervald 1996 – “Ils pensent que leurs maisons dureront éternellement”, the Italian Diodati 1649 the Nuova Diodati 1991 and the Nuova Riveduta of 2006 -“Il loro intimo pensiero è che le lor case dimoreranno in eterno”, the Portuguese Almeida Actualizada – “O pensamento íntimo deles é que as suas casas são perpétuas” and the Modern Greek Bible – “Ο εσωτερικος λογισμος αυτων ειναι οτι οι οικοι αυτων θελουσιν υπαρχει εις τον αιωνα

However, the NIV 1984-2011, along with the Holman Standard, RSV, NRSV, ESV 2001 -2011, New Living Translation, Names of God Bible 2011, Common English Bible 2012 all say the same thing and have the same footnotes. The NIV says: “THEIR TOMBS will remain their houses forever…”

 

The ESV and Holman say: “Their GRAVES are their homes forever.” Then in a footnote these perverted versions tell us that “THEIR TOMBS” or “graves” comes from the LXX and Syriac, while the Hebrew Masoretic text and even the Dead Sea Scrolls say “their inward thought was that their homes were forever.” (ESV footnote)

 

The Catholic Connection

 

Among the Catholic Bible versions, every one of them has rejected the Hebrew reading of “their inward thought is” and have followed the so called Greek Septuagint reading of “Their TOMBS” or “their SEPULCHRES WILL BE THEIR HOMES FOR EVER”., just like the ESV, NIV, Holman and NET versions. 

These include the Catholic Douay-Rheims 1610, the Douay 1950, the St. Joseph New American Bible of 1970, the New Jerusalem bible of 1985 and the 2009 Catholic Public Domain Version – “And their sepulchers will be their houses forever”.

Again, Wallace’s NET version says: “Their GRAVE BECOMES THEIR PERMANENT RESIDENCE, THEIR ETERNAL DWELLING PLACE”.

 

Then he footnotes: “Heb “their inward part is their houses are permanent…” If one follows the MT, then “inward part”) must refer to the seat of these people’s thoughts… In this case one might translate the first two lines, “they think that their houses are permanent and that their dwelling places will last forever” (NASB, KJB)…the present translation assumes an emendation of “their inward part” to “graves”. This assumes that the letters bet and resh were accidentally transposed in the MT.”

What gall! These “every man is his own authority” scholars assume they can “emend” or change the text whenever their fickle faculties take flight.  And do you think it is just a “coincidence” that many of these modern versions now match the modern Catholic versions, which are all based on the same, every changing United Bible Society critical text that has been set up to create with the Vatican an “interconfessional” text to unite them? I trow not.

 

Psalm 60:4 “Thou hast given a banner to them that fear thee, THAT IT MAY BE DISPLAYED BECAUSE OF THE TRUTH. Selah.”

So read the Hebrew texts as well as the following Bible translations: Coverdale 1535, Bishops’ Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1599, KJB, Youngs’, Darby, the Revised Version of 1885, American Standard Version 1901, NASB 1963-1995, NKJV 1982, the Jewish translation of 1917 – “Thou hast given a banner to them that fear thee, THAT IT MAY BE DISPLAYED BECAUSE OF THE TRUTH. Selah.”, the Complete Jewish Bible 1998, the Orthodox Jewish Bible 2011, the KJV 21st Century and the Third Millennium Bible 1998.

The Spanish Sagradas Escrituras of 1569 and the Reina Valera 1995, and La Biblia de las Américas are the same as the KJB with “Has dado a los que te temen bandera que alcen por causa de la verdad. Selah”. as does the French Martin 1744 and the Louis Segond of 1910 – “tu as donné une bannière à ceux qui te craignent, afin de l’élever en haut pour l’amour de ta vérité; Sélah.”, the Italian New Diodati of 1991 – “Ma ora tu hai dato a quelli che ti temono una bandiera, perch sia innalzata in favore della verit. (Sela)”, and the Portuguese A Biblia Sagrada and the Almeida Revista  E Corrigida -”Deste um estandarte aos que te temem, para o arvorarem no alto, por causa da verdade. (Sel.)” and the Modern Greek Bible – “Εδωκας εις τους φοβουμενους σε σημαιαν, δια να υψονηται υπερ της αληθειας.” = “You have given a sign (banner) to those who fear you to be lifted up because of the truth.”

However, the NIV reads: – “But for those who fear you, you have raised a banner TO BE UNFURLED AGAINST THE BOW.” The RSV, NRSV, ESV read much the same with: “Thou hast set up a banner for those who fear thee, TO RALLY TO IT FROM THE BOW.”, but then in the RSV, NRSV footnotes tell us this totally different reading comes from “the Greek LXX, the Syriac and Jerome, but the Hebrew says “because of the truth”.

Well, not even their footnote is totally accurate. The copy of the Greek LXX I have says “given a TOKEN…that they might FLEE FROM THE BOW”, while Lamsa’s translation of the Syriac says the opposite with: “Thou hast WROUGHT A MIRACLE to them that reverence thee, SO THAT THEY NEED NOT FLEE FROM THE BOW.”

Dan Wallace and Company’s NET version, as usual, has a totally messed up translation which says: “You have given your loyal followers a rallying flag, so that they might seek safety from the bow.”

The Holman Standard  perversion  says: “You have given a signal flag to those who fear You, so that THEY CAN FLEE BEFORE THE ARCHERS.” 

 

Likewise all the Catholic versions – Douay-Rheims, Douay, St. Joseph NAB and the New Jerusalem 1985 have rejected the clear Hebrew text and have adopted “part of” the so called Greek Septuagint. The New Jerusalem reads: “You gave a signal to those who fear you TO LET THEM ESCAPE OUT OF RANGE OF THE BOW.”

These bogus bibles versions are significant in that TRUTH has disappeared, and God’s people are now fleeing before the enemy!!

 

In Psalms 145:13 the NIV adds 15 words to the standard Hebrew text. These additional words are not found in the RV, ASV, NKJV, NASB, Hebrew Names Version or any Jewish translation. The NIV adds “The LORD is faithful to all his promises and loving toward all he has made.”  

 

 

Here are two examples from the Psalms that illustrate what the NIV is doing.

 

In Psalms 72:5 of the KJB we read: “THEY SHALL FEAR THEE as long as the sun and moon endure, throughout all generations.”

 

However, the NIV 1984 edition reads: “HE WILL ENDURE as long as the sun, as long as the moon, through all generations.”  

 

And the NIV 2011 edition now reads: “MAY HE ENDURE as long as the sun, as long as the moon, through all generations.”

 

Then the NIV footnotes that their different reading comes from the so called Greek Septuagint, but that the Hebrew text reads as the KJB has it – “You will be feared.”

 

“THEY SHALL FEAR THEE as long as the sun and moon endure, throughout all generations.”

 

is the reading of Coverdale 1535, The Great Bible 1540, Matthew’s Bible 1549, the Bishops’ Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1587, the Revised Version 1885, ASV 1901, NASB 1995, NKJV, The Jewish Family Bible 1864, the Jewish translations of 1917, 1936, the Spanish, Young’s 1898, Darby’s 1890, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, The New Jewish Version 1985, The Complete Jewish Bible 1998, World English Bible 2000, The Judaica Press Tanach 2004, Green’s Literal 2005, NET version 2006, New Heart English Bible 2010, Jubilee Bible 2010, The Hebraic Transliteration Scripture 2010, The English Standard Version 2011, New Simplified Bible 2011, The Orthodox Jewish Bible 2011 – “THEY SHALL FEAR THEE”, The Voice 2012, The Modern English Version 2014, the International Standard Version 2014 and the Tree of Life Version 2015.  

 

Even Lamsa’s 1933 translation of the Syriac reads like the KJB saying: “THEY SHALL REVERE THEE as long as the sun and moon endure, throughout all generations.”

 

The NIV, however reads: “HE WILL ENDURE as long as the sun…”

 

This is also the reading of the liberal RSV and NRSV, though the new ESV has gone back to read like the KJB and Hebrew reading.

 

But the footnotes found in the NIV, RSV, and NRSV all tell us that the reading of HE WILL ENDURE comes from the Greek Septuagint, but that the Hebrew reads “they shall fear thee”.  

 

Other “bibles” that also reject the clear Hebrew text that says “THEY SHALL FEAR THEE”

 

The Holman Standard 2009 rejects the Hebrew text and reads: “MAY HE CONTINUE while the sun endures and as long as the moon, throughout all generations.” 

 

And then it gives us the same footnote telling us this their reading comes from the LXX but that the Hebrew text reads like the KJB has it.

 

The Lexham English bible 2012 also rejects the Hebrew and says instead – “MAY HE LIVE LONG as the sun endures…”

 

Bible in Basic English 1961 – “MAY HIS LIFE GO ON as long as the sun and moon”

 

So why did the “good and godly” NIV translators reject the clear Hebrew reading? Doesn’t the Hebrew make sense?

 

Well, you have to change enough words in your new version in order to get a copyright and make money. This may be one of the motives behind so much that these new “bibles” have to offer us. The other one is to help create this new “inter confessional” text that nobody really believes are the inerrant words of God.

 

The Catholic Connection  

 

The Catholic versions have also rejected the Hebrew reading and follow the alleged Greek Septuagint version – just like the NIV.  The Catholic Douay-Rheims of 1610 says: “AND HE SHALL CONTINUE with the sun and before the moon, throughout all generations.”  

 

The Catholic St. Joseph New American bible 1970 has: “MAY HE ENDURE as long as the sun…”

 

And the Catholic New Jerusalem bible 1985 reads: “In the sight of the sun and the moon HE WILL ENDURE, age after age.”  

 

Then it has the same footnote in it that the NIV does, saying that the reading of “HE WILL ENDURE” comes from the Greek LXX, but that the Hebrew text reads “THEY WILL FEAR YOU.”

 

Psalms 73:7 – “THEIR EYES STAND OUT WITH FATNESS: they have more than heart could wish.”

 

Another clear instance where the NIV rejects the Hebrew text is found in Psalm 73:7. There the Psalmist is speaking of the foolish and the wicked who prosper in this world. He says of them: “THEIR EYES STAND OUT WITH FATNESS: they have more than heart could wish.”

 

This is the reading of not only the KJV, NKJV, NASB, RV, ASV, but also of the RSV, NRSV, ESV and Holman Standard version 2009. Other bibles that read like this too – “THEIR EYES STAND OUT WITH FATNESS” are the New Berkeley Version 1969, The Koster Scriptures 1998, The Judaica Press Tanach 2004, The Orthodox Jewish Bible 2011, The Lexham English Bible 2012, The Modern English Version 2014, The Tree of Life Version 2015.  

 

The Spanish Reina Valera 1995 also reads this way – “Los ojos se les saltan de girder.” = “Their eyes stand out with fatness.”

 

Dan Wallace’s NET version totally paraphrases this as: “Their prosperity causes them to do wrong”

 

However the NIV says: “FROM THEIR CALLOUS HEARTS COMES INIQUITY”. Then in a footnote the NIV tells us this reading comes from the SYRIAC, but that the Hebrew says “their eyes bulge with fat.”  

 

Not even the NIV footnote is correct. Lamsa’s 1933 translation of the Syriac does NOT say “FROM THEIR CALLOUS HEARTS COMES INIQUITY” as the NIV tells us, but rather it says: “THEIR INIQUITY COMES THROUGH LIKE GREASE.”  

 

Nothing about “callous” or “hearts” at all and they left out the word “grease”, but they did get the “iniquity” part right. I guess if you are a NIV translator, 1 out of 4 ain’t doing too bad, huh?

 

Why would the “good, godly, evangelical scholars” who worked on the NIV change the text, if the Hebrew clearly makes sense and there is no doubt about what it says?

 

 

 

Also of note is the totally changed meaning the NIV gives to Psalm 73 verse 9 where we read in the KJB: “THEY SET THEIR MOUTH AGAINST THE HEAVENS, and their tongue walketh through the earth.”

 

These wicked people speak against God and defy and blaspheme heavenly truths and they speak only of earthly interests.

 

 

Matthew Henry comments: “They set their mouth against the heavens, putting contempt upon God himself and his honour, bidding defiance to him and his power and justice..they show their ill-will by setting their mouth against the heavens.”

 

Adam Clarke comments: “Set their mouth against the heavens – They blaspheme God, ridicule religion, mock at Providence, and laugh at a future state.” 

 

Matthew Poole – “Against the heavens, i.e. against God, blaspheming his name, denying or deriding his providence, reviling his saints and servants.”

 

John Gill comments: “They set their mouth against the heavens,…. Against God in heaven, against his being, saying, there is no God; against his perfections, thinking him to be such an one as themselves; against his purposes and decrees, replying against him, and charging him with insincerity, cruelty, and unrighteousness; and against his providence, either denying it, or affirming it to be unequal; and against his doctrines, ordinances, and ministers.”

 

 

 

“They set their mouth against the heavens” is the reading or meaning of even the previous Douay version 1950 -“They have SET THEIR MOUTH AGAINST HEAVEN”, The New Berkeley Version 1969, the NASB, RSV, ASV, NRSV, RV, ESV, NKJV, The Complete Jewish Bible 1998, The Koster Scriptures 1998, The Judaica Press Tanach 2004, The Holman Standard 2009, The Orthodox Jewish Bible 2011, The Lexham English Bible 2012, The Modern English Version 2014, The Tree of Life Version 2015 – “They set their mouth against heaven.” 

 

The Spanish Reina Valera 1995 reads this way too – “Ponen su boca contra el cielo” = “They set their mouth against heaven.” 

 

Yet the NIV actually says: “Their mouths LAY CLAIM TO HEAVEN, and their tongues take possession of the earth.”

 

Can you guess what other version reads like this?  The Catholic New Jerusalem bible 1985 likewise says “THEIR MOUTH CLAIMS HEAVEN FOR THEMSELVES”

 

I believe the people who put out the NIV and those who continue to promote this abomination will have a lot to answer for at the judgment of God.

 

 

Psalm 105:21-22 “He made him lord of his house, and ruler of all his substance: TO BIND his princes at his pleasure; and to teach his senators wisdom.”

 

“to bind his princes” -So read the Hebrew texts, as well as the RV, ASV, the Jewish translations of 1917, 1936, the Geneva Bible, NKJV, ESV, Darby, Green’s MKJV, Holman Standard, and Young’s. The NASB says: “to imprison”, and even Wallace’s NET version reads: “giving him authority to IMPRISON his officials.” Then he footnotes: “Heb “to BIND his officials.”

 

However the NIV joins the liberal RSV, NRSV and says: “TO INSTRUCT his princes as he pleased.”

 

This time the NIV doesn’t tell us in their footnotes why they changed the text, but the RSV, NRSV and ESV tell us that “to instruct” comes from the so called LXX, the Syriac, and Jerome, but that the Hebrew reads “to bind”.

 

Again notice that the 2001 ESV has gone back to the Hebrew reading instead of the previous RSV rejection of the Hebrew text.  However the Catholic versions (Douay, St.Joseph NAB, New Jerusalem all unite in saying: “TO INSTRUCT HIS PRINCES AS HE SAW FIT”, and then the New Jerusalem footnotes that the Hebrew reads “to bind”!!!

 

There is a distinct pattern easily seen if one studies the different bible versions. The King James Old Testament is based on the Hebrew Masoretic text and the New Testament on the traditional Greek text. When the RV and ASV came out, they significantly changed the Greek text of the New Testament but kept the Masoretic text intact.

 

Then the liberal RSV appeared with the same corrupted Greek text of the apostates Westcott and Hort, but also with many of the same changes in the Hebrew text that now appear in the NASB, ESV, modern Catholic Versions and the ever worsening NIV.

 

118:13 “THOU HAST THRUST SORE AT ME that I might fall: but the LORD helped me.”

 

The Hebrew reading here is clearly THOU, or “you” as some modern versions have it. THOU is the reading of the Geneva Bible, Bishops’ bible, the KJB, RV, ASV, Young’s, the Jewish translations of 1917, 1936, and Hebrew Names Bible. The “thou hast thrust sore at me” is addressed to each of the many enemies who compassed Israel about like bees.

 

The NKJV, NASB, and Holman Standard read: “YOU pushed me violently…”

 

However the NIV, RSV and ESV all reject the Hebrew reading and follow the LXX and Syriac. The NIV reads: “I WAS PUSHED BACK…” Though the ESV also follows the LXX and Syriac, yet in their footnote the ESV informs us: “Hebrew You (that is, the enemy) pushed me hard.”

 

The NIV departs from the Hebrew Scriptures well over 100 times and follows the Syriac, LXX, Vulgate or some other source. They usually tell you this in their footnotes, but not this time. However if you consult either the RSV or the ESV, they tell you in a footnote that the Hebrew reads “You” but the reading of “I” comes from the LXX and the Syriac.

 

Psalm 119:37 KJB – “Turn away mine eyes from beholding vanity; and quicken thou me IN THY WAY.”

 

So read the Majority of all Hebrew manuscripts as well as Wycliffe 1395, Coverdale 1535, Bishops’ Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1599, the RV 1985, ASV 1901, Darby, Youngs, the NASB 1995, ESV 2001, Holman Standard 2003, NKJV, the so called Greek Septuagint, Lamsa’s translation of the Syriac Peshitta, Luther’s German 1545, the Spanish Reina Valera 1909, 1960, 1995, the Italian Diodati 1602, 1991, the French Martin 1744, Louis Segond 1910, Ostervald 1996 and the Portuguese Almeida.

 

However the NIV has: “Turn my eyes away from worthless things; preserve my life ACCORDING TO YOUR WORD.”  Then in a footnote it tells us that this variant reading comes from “Two manuscripts of the Masoretic Text and Dead Sea Scrolls; most manuscripts of the Masoretic Text life in your way”.  Here the previous Catholic versions like the Douay and even the St. Joseph have “quicken me IN THY WAY” (Douay) but the 1985 New Jerusalem says: “BY YOUR WORD give me life”, and then footnotes that the Masoretic text reads “in your WAY”.

 

Likewise Daniel Wallace and company’s NET version has rejected the Traditional Hebrew Masoretic texts and says: “Turn my eyes away from what is worthless! Revive me WITH YOUR WORD.” Then the NET version footnote is completely misleading in that it now says “Hebrew – by your word”, without informing us that the vast majority of the Hebrew texts do not say “by your word” but “in thy WAY”.

 

However IF the NIV, NET editors put so much reliance on the Dead Sea Scrolls, why didn’t they follow the DSS in this exact same verse where instead of “quicken thou me” (preserve my life – NIV; revive me – NET), the DSS reads “BE GRACIOUS TO ME”? [See The Dead Sea Scrolls Bible – Abegg, Flint & Ulrich] Why pick the DSS reading for part of the verse but not for the other part?  And why don’t all the other modern day “scholars” (read:Bible Agnostics) see it the same way?  Hey, it’s every man for himself bible versionism.  Nothing is sure! 

 

Psalm 145:5 – “I WILL speak of the glorious honour of thy majesty, and of thy wondrous works.“

 

The Hebrew Masoretic text clearly says “I” will speak, or it can be translated as “I” will mediitate, and so read all the Jewish translations like the JPS 1917 version, the Complete Jewish Bible and the Hebrew Names Bible, as well as Coverdale, Bishops’ bible, the Geneva Bible, the RV, ASV, NASB, RSV, NRSV, ESV, NKJV and Holman Standard.

 

However the NIV rejects the Hebrew reading of “I” and says: “THEY WILL SPEAK of the glorious splendor of your majesty, AND I WILL MEDITATE on your wonderful works.” Thus adding another subject and verb and changing the “I” will speak to “THEY will speak”. The Catholic St. Joseph and the New Jerusalem also follow the reading found in the NIV. Then they tell us in their footnotes that these changes come from the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Syriac. However I have a copy of Lamsa’s translation of the Syriac and it says: “I will speak” just like the King James Bible and the Hebrew texts.

 

Then in Psalm 145:12 the Hebrew and the King James Bible read: “To make known to the sons of men HIS mighty acts, and the glorious majesty of HIS kingdom.

 

So read the Hebrew texts as well as Bishops’ Bible, the Geneva Bible, the Jewish translations of JPS 1917, Hebrew Names Bible, the Reviised Version, American Standard Version, NKJV, Youngs and Darby.

 

However the NASB, NIV change the Hebrew texts, which read HIS mighty acts and HIS kingdom, to THY mighty acts and THY kindom (NASB 1977) or YOUR mighty acts and YOUR kingdom (NIV). Other versions that reject these two Hebrew readings of “HIS” and substitute either THY or YOUR are the RSV, NRSV, ESV, and the Holman Standard. Most of these versions, like the NASB, just footnote that the literal Hebrew is HIS. This time neither the NIV nor the NASB tell us why they made this change in the text, but we learn it from the NRSV. The NRSV footnotes that the literal Hebrew reads HIS, but the LXX and the Syriac read YOUR. That is where the NASB, RSV, ESV and NIV got it from.  The Catholic versions also read this way saying “YOUR kingship and YOUR might” instead of the Hebrew and KJBs “HIS mighty acts…HIS kingdom”

 

NIV – “so that all men may know of YOUR mighty acts and the glorious splendor of YOUR kingdom.”

To see Part Two of this study – The Vatican Versions like the ESV, NIV, NASB, NET reject the Hebrew text click here –

 

 

 May I also suggest you take a serious look at this article that shows numerous examples proving the modern versions like the ESV, NIV, NASB, NET etc are the new Vatican Versions.

It is called – Undeniable Proof the ESV, NIV, NASB, NET etc. are  the new “Catholic” bibles

“Mystery, Babylon the Great, The Mother of Harlots and Abominations of the Earth..is become the habitation of devils, and the hold of every foul spirit…Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins” Revelation 17:5; 18:2-4

 

 

Can you guess which other bible version reads like the ESV?  You got it; the Catholic Douay-Rheims 1610 and the Catholic Douay version 1950 which read: “Saul was A CHILD OF ONE YEAR WHEN HE BEGAN TO REIGN, and he reigned two years over Israel.”

 

Can you guess which other bible version reads like the ESV?  You got it; the Catholic Douay-Rheims 1610 and the Catholic Douay version 1950 which read: “Saul was A CHILD OF ONE YEAR WHEN HE BEGAN TO REIGN, and he reigned two years over Israel.”

 

In 1 Samuel 17:4 the Hebrew texts tell us that the height of Goliath was SIX cubits and a span, which would make him about 9 feet 6 inches tall.  That indeed is a giant.  However the LXX tells us that Goliath was a mere FOUR cubits and a span – “ὕψος αὐτοῦ τεσσάρων πήχεων καὶ σπιθαμῆς” – which would make him only 6 feet 6 inches tall, which would hardly be much among NBA players today.  

 

King Saul himself was head and shoulders taller than the other Israelites, and yet he was afraid of this giant. If he were only 6ft. 6 inches, this would not make much sense.

 

1 Samuel 14:41 –  The KJB, as well as the RV, ASV, Holman Standard 2009, NASB 1995, ISV 2014, NKJV, Lamsa’s 1933 translation of the Syriac Peshitta, Orthodox Jewish Bible 2011, Tree of Life Version 2015 and the NIVs 1978 and 1984 editions, say: “Therefore Saul said unto the LORD God of Israel, GIVE A PERFECT LOT. And Saul and Jonathan were taken: but the people escaped.”

  

However the RSV, NRSV, ESV, NET, NEB, REB, The Message, AND NOW THE NIV 2011 EDITION TOO read, adding all these words, “Therefore Saul said, O LORD God of Israel, WHY HAVE YOU NOT ANSWERED YOUR SERVANT THIS DAY? IF THIS GUILT IS IN ME OR IN JONATHAN MY SON, O LORD, GOD OF ISRAEL, GIVE URIM. BUT IF THIS GUILT IS IN YOUR PEOPLE ISRAEL, GIVE THUMMIN. And Jonathan and Saul were taken, but the people escaped.”  

 

Even though the English “new” New International Version added all these extra words (though it still didn’t at the extra 42 words to 1 Samuel 10:1 like the ESV does) yet the NIV Spanish version 1999 and the NIV Portuguese version of 2000 still retain the Hebrew reading like the KJB has it

.

Daniel Wallace’s NET version also adds all these extra words and then footnotes: “Heb “to the Lord God of Israel: ‘Give what is perfect.’” The Hebrew textual tradition has accidentally omitted several words here. The present translation follows the LXX.”  

 

The Catholic Connection

 

Well, guess what. So too do ALL the Catholic bible versions like the Douay-Rheims 1610, the Douay 1950, St. Joseph New American bible 1970 and New Jerusalem bible 1985 as well. Then the New Jerusalem bible footnotes that “the Hebrew is corrupt”.

 

In a footnote the ESV says these additional words come from the Septuagint. However my copy of the Septuagint does not read like the ESV says it does. It says instead “Lord God of Israel, give clear manifestations; and if the lot should declare this, give, I pray thee, to thy people Israel, give, I pray, holiness. And Jonathan and Saul are taken…” 

 

Quite different from them all, isn’t it?  Folks, don’t be deceived or taken in by the lies these bible agnostics refer to as their “science” of textual criticism. It has a lot more in common with witches brew than it does with any legitimate science known to God or man.