- Joined
- Jan 25, 2012
- Messages
- 11,393
- Reaction score
- 2,407
- Points
- 113
- Location
- Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
On a thread in the fighting forum, Biblebeliever asked this:
Castor's thread about the LXX reminded me of one significant reading in the New Testament:
"And again, when he bringeth in the firstbegotten into the world, he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him" (Heb. 1:6, emphasis added)
(You'll notice I have cited the KJV - I have removed that particular stumblingblock so that Biblebeliever, whose integrity is obviously beyond reproach, can deal with the text instead of dealing out excuses. Right, Biblebeliever?)
"He saith" is synonymous with "the Scriptures" saith; Hebrews is steeped in Scripture, probably quoting the Old Testament more frequently than any other book of the New. The author proves that Jesus is greater than the angels, to the patriarchs, and to the priests, citing the Scriptures over and over again.
Except: where does the emphasized phrase come from? It is obvious that the author is appealing to Scripture, but nothing similar to that phrase is to be found in the Old Testament of the KJV (or the ESV, NIV, or NASB for that matter).
Answer: It comes from Deut. 32:43:
Huh?
The KJV Old Testament is translated from Hebrew, from the Masoretic Text of 1525, which was the standard Hebrew text of the day. However, the author of Hebrews closely paraphrases the Septuagint, which has a phrase in it that the Masoretic does not (though the Dead Sea Scrolls do): "Rejoice, O ye nations, and let all the angels [lit. sons of God] worship him."
Here's the catch: the author of Hebrews cites this as Scripture. As authoritative. If this were a difference between the KJV and another version - in fact, the ESV follows the LXX/DSS reading at Deut. 32:43 - the KJVers would be all over it. Certainly it counts as "conflicting and contradicting" by their usual arguments. Yet here we have the author of Hebrews citing, authoritatively as Scripture, something that "conflicts and contradicts" with the OT as reliably translated in the KJV from the Masoretic Text.
Were the apostles unaware of this? Highly doubtful: Paul, for example, was a trained rabbi who moved in both Hebrew and Gentile circles, and likely would have known about it. But obviously the apostles did not hold to the same overly strict view of translations of the Scripture as the KJV-onlyists do. As Miles Smith quite rightly points out in his preface to the Authorized Version:
I can follow the good example of the Apostles, or the bad example of the KJV-onlyists. But that choice is really a no-brainer.
Biblebeliever said:
Castor's thread about the LXX reminded me of one significant reading in the New Testament:
"And again, when he bringeth in the firstbegotten into the world, he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him" (Heb. 1:6, emphasis added)
(You'll notice I have cited the KJV - I have removed that particular stumblingblock so that Biblebeliever, whose integrity is obviously beyond reproach, can deal with the text instead of dealing out excuses. Right, Biblebeliever?)
"He saith" is synonymous with "the Scriptures" saith; Hebrews is steeped in Scripture, probably quoting the Old Testament more frequently than any other book of the New. The author proves that Jesus is greater than the angels, to the patriarchs, and to the priests, citing the Scriptures over and over again.
Except: where does the emphasized phrase come from? It is obvious that the author is appealing to Scripture, but nothing similar to that phrase is to be found in the Old Testament of the KJV (or the ESV, NIV, or NASB for that matter).
Answer: It comes from Deut. 32:43:
Deut. 32:43 Blessed Virgin KJV said:
Huh?
The KJV Old Testament is translated from Hebrew, from the Masoretic Text of 1525, which was the standard Hebrew text of the day. However, the author of Hebrews closely paraphrases the Septuagint, which has a phrase in it that the Masoretic does not (though the Dead Sea Scrolls do): "Rejoice, O ye nations, and let all the angels [lit. sons of God] worship him."
Here's the catch: the author of Hebrews cites this as Scripture. As authoritative. If this were a difference between the KJV and another version - in fact, the ESV follows the LXX/DSS reading at Deut. 32:43 - the KJVers would be all over it. Certainly it counts as "conflicting and contradicting" by their usual arguments. Yet here we have the author of Hebrews citing, authoritatively as Scripture, something that "conflicts and contradicts" with the OT as reliably translated in the KJV from the Masoretic Text.
Were the apostles unaware of this? Highly doubtful: Paul, for example, was a trained rabbi who moved in both Hebrew and Gentile circles, and likely would have known about it. But obviously the apostles did not hold to the same overly strict view of translations of the Scripture as the KJV-onlyists do. As Miles Smith quite rightly points out in his preface to the Authorized Version:
Miles Smith said:
I can follow the good example of the Apostles, or the bad example of the KJV-onlyists. But that choice is really a no-brainer.
