Jovial (31 Dec 2011)
"KJV Debate"

Mario asked me what I was trynig to accomplish .  Basically to get more of you to learn to read the Scriptures from the original language.

In re Alan's post at , The Hebrew version of Matt 4:4 passed down by Messianic Jews matches the Hebrew Scriptures perfectly.  It is only in translations of the New Testament from Greek that this is a problem.

Matthew says "Kingdom of Heaven" in MANY places where parallel Mark says "kingdom of God" because Matthew wrote to a Jewish audience.  Jews use euphemisms to avoid saying the Name of God, such as saying "HaShem" instead of "YHWH" and "Heaven" instead of "God" and in our more modern tiems, "G-d" instead of "God".  That a case where Mark was drawing from the original Gospel of Matthew using Matthew as his source.

In re how Paul quoted Hab 2:4, You're using an example of the issue I mentioned earlier.  Your'e quoting from a translation of Greek Galatians and comparing it to Hebrew Hab 2:4.  How much do we expect a quote to be word-for-word when it is translated from one language to another?  We don't.  It is as close as the translators got it.  The problem is translating from Hebrew to Greek to English.  Is the possessive nature really important here that a translator would feel like he missed it if he didn't include it?  I don't think so.

My point is this; There are those alleging that the KJV is so word-for-word inspired we don't need to study the original language.  If that's the case, why doesn't it quote itself correctly?  Wouldn't that 'inspiration' handed down to ONLY the English have fixed that problem?  The fact that the KJV has the same problems as any other translation in regard to how the Greek NT quotes the Hebrew tanach proves it is not some sort of spceial translation we can trust more than any other.

The Scriptures in their original language is what is important.  If you need a translation, read from a different one each year.  Compare them.  Don't get stuck on the idea that one translation is above all others.