Intentional omissions or intentional insertions?

Chat about anything you like here that doesn't fit under Bible Doctrines. Keep the subjects clean and refreshing to all.
Forum rules
Matt 18:6; Eccl 7:9; 1 Pet 4:8 (If you're not sure what they say then please hover over them with your mouse or look them up in your own Bible before posting)
Message
Author
Stranger
Posts: 2417
Joined: 4 years ago

Re: Intentional omissions or intentional insertions?

#71 Post by Stranger » 1 month ago

goghtherefore wrote: 1 month ago Hi stranger

a tune for you:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rSqcxFGFVas

"...Sitting in a corner of a crowded chat* room
people all around me and I still feel alone,
just when I know I'm gonna break down and cry
someone played a tune that dried the tear from my eye..."

Thanks gogh, much appreciated!

From a band from my home town and era: www.youtube.com/watch?v=G5ptavYnUBM


Stranger, (Isa 26:4 KJV)

Stranger
Posts: 2417
Joined: 4 years ago

Re: Intentional omissions or intentional insertions? - Rom 1:4

#72 Post by Stranger » 1 month ago

So, most modern versions insert "Jesus Christ our Lord" at (Rom 1:4), where as the KJV omits it. (Ro 1:4 KJV).

That's kind of interesting, but I have not had time to investigate the reasoning behind this. Maybe someone knows the reasoning behind it. Bobcat probably knows, and if he don't I'm sure he will find out. (That's what he does and does it well.)


Stranger

Bobcat
Posts: 4134
Joined: 7 years ago

Re: Intentional omissions or intentional insertions? - Rom 1:4

#73 Post by Bobcat » 1 month ago

Hi Stranger,

You find some good ones, that's for sure.

This is interesting. The KJV and the HCSB leave the final phrase ("Jesus Christ our Lord"; Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ τοῦ Κυρίου ἡμῶν) out. But all the master texts include the phrase, even the 1550 & 1894 versions of the Textus Receptus (from which the KJV was made).

(See also The Comparative Critical Greek New Testament here. Look at the bottom half of the page where it has 1:4. The last five words are the ones of interest. The document shows that there are no known variations of Rom 1:4.)

I suspect, but not sure yet, that this was an editing error in the KJV. But my better reference works are at home and I am at work. So I'll get back to this a little later.


Incidentally, but not directly related to the question above, here was a recent thread on Reddit AcademicBiblical discussing ὁρισθέντος (rendered "declared" in Rom 1:4 ESV.)


Bobcat

PS: This thread is now well past 10,000 views!

Stranger
Posts: 2417
Joined: 4 years ago

Re: Intentional omissions or intentional insertions? - Rom 1:4

#74 Post by Stranger » 1 month ago

Bobcat wrote: 1 month ago (See also The Comparative Critical Greek New Testament here. Look at the bottom half of the page where it has 1:4. The last five words are the ones of interest. The document shows that there are no known variations of Rom 1:4.)
Hi Bobcat, and to all who may be reading along.

Lol, I'm not that advanced* in recognizing those Greek words, koine Greek I assume? I do seem to pick up on differences in the English translations pretty well, which would also indicate to me the many differences that are used when translating from the Greek and Hebrew languages also the Aramaic.

One more thing about (Ro 1:4) modern versions, versus (Ro 1:4 KJV) is the description of the resurrection. I did look at the footnote in the NET. and basically found the same type of flip a coin junction that we usually run into going up this narrow dusty road.
Bobcat wrote: 1 month ago I suspect, but not sure yet, that this was an editing error in the KJV. But my better reference works are at home and I am at work. So I'll get back to this a little later.
If you can, I would love to hear about what you find.
Bobcat wrote: 1 month ago PS: This thread is now well past 10,000 views!

That's great to see the flow of Holy Spirit that continues to increase in values indefinable. (Eph 1:13)


I got a good one for your thread coming soon from the book of Acts. For a preview: "Paul spoke boldly in Acts and the WT translates boldly in Acts."


Stranger, (1Thes 1:8)

Bobcat
Posts: 4134
Joined: 7 years ago

Re: Intentional omissions or intentional insertions? - Rom 1:4

#75 Post by Bobcat » 1 month ago

Hi Stranger,

Below is the only thing I could find on the missing phrase in Rom 1:4. It comes from the Pulpit Commentary:
The force of the passage is weakened in the Authorized Version by the transposition of Ιησοῦ Ξριστοῦ Κυρίου ἡμῶν to the beginning of ver. 3, as also by the inclusion of ver. 2 in a parenthesis, so as to separate it from περὶ τοῦ υἱοῦ which follows.
The phrase has been relocated in the KJV to Rom 1:3. (Compare Rom 1:3 KJV with Rom 1:3 ESV.) As for why it was relocated, I haven't found anything yet. It is possible that it was all accidental, a translator reading a phrase from one line to another. Tired eyes working late with just candle light.

But I'm still looking.


Bobcat

User avatar
FriendlyDoggo
Posts: 263
Joined: 4 months ago

Re: Intentional omissions or intentional insertions? - Dan 11:37

#76 Post by FriendlyDoggo » 1 month ago

Was reading this interesting commentary on revelation yesterday and noticed that Daniel 11:37 is rendered very different from usual:

He will show no regard for the gods of his ancestors or for the one desired by women, nor will he regard any god, but will exalt himself above them all. (NIV)

https://biblehub.com/daniel/11-37.htm

He shall not know the lust of women, although before he was most impure, and he shall know no God of his fathers: for he will not be able to seduce the people of the circumcision, unless he is a judge of the law. (Victorinus Commentary)

https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0712.htm

Any idea?
My english isn't very good, sorry any inconvenience.

Bobcat
Posts: 4134
Joined: 7 years ago

Re: Intentional omissions or intentional insertions? - Dan 11:37

#77 Post by Bobcat » 1 month ago

I have a couple of posts (here and here) regarding Dan 11:37 and Nero. (I understand that this may or may not be an application that you agree with.) But there is some about the difficulty in the rendering of the verse.


Bobcat

User avatar
FriendlyDoggo
Posts: 263
Joined: 4 months ago

Re: Intentional omissions or intentional insertions?

#78 Post by FriendlyDoggo » 2 weeks ago

Thanks Bobcat, sorry the late to reply.

Why Luke 12:20-21 in the NWT have "God" instead of "Jehovah"?
My english isn't very good, sorry any inconvenience.

Bobcat
Posts: 4134
Joined: 7 years ago

Re: Intentional omissions or intentional insertions? - Lu 12:20, 21

#79 Post by Bobcat » 2 weeks ago

Hi Doggo,

Regarding Lu 12:20, 21, the Name doesn't appear there in the NWT probably because it doesn't fit their own criteria for inserting it.

In the A5 appendix section of the NWT it lists reasons why they use the Divine Name in the NT. I don't think Lu 12:20-21 fits their criteria. Both verses use theos (Θεός / Θεὸν) in the Greek text.

Incidentally, I'm not sanctioning their use of the Name in the NT. I would prefer that they put it in double brackets as a notice to the reader that it is an interpolation. That would at least be fair notice. But, they would probably say like the song says, "It's my party, and I'll cry if I want to."

But regarding your specific question, the insertion of the Name does not fit the WT's own criteria for inserting it. That's most likely why it wasn't inserted in those verses.


Bobcat

goghtherefore
Posts: 208
Joined: 2 years ago

Re: Intentional omissions or intentional insertions?

#80 Post by goghtherefore » 2 weeks ago

Romans 14:11

New World Translation
"11 For it is written: “‘As surely as I live,’p says Jehovah, ‘to me every knee will bend, and every tongue will make open acknowledgment to God.’”

Berean Literal Bible (and every other translation):

For it has been written: "I live, says the Lord, that every knee will bow to Me, and every tongue will confess to God."

Bow is a form of worship whereas bend...imo, not so much.


.02,

goghtherefore
“This is My Son, My Chosen One; listen to Him!”
Luke 9:35

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Ahrefs [Bot] and 2 guests