/lit/ - Literature

>>23335868
Anon, I've noticed that the modern versions (not Received text, but instead translated from the modern Critical text) sometimes make the parables and other statements of Jesus harder to understand. Sometimes it's because they're deliberately missing things due to their choice of source, and other times because of translation choice.

I'm going to post a few examples of what I mean. Most of these have no parallel passage in the other Gospels except where mentioned.

"But go ye and learn what that meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice: for I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance."
- Matthew 9:13 KJV

"But go and learn what this means: ‘I desire mercy, not sacrifice.’ For I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners.”
- Matthew 9:13 NIV
("to repentance" is omitted or removed in modern versions, as you can see in the above example. The same phrase is also removed in the parallel passage Mark 2:17 as well. The third parallel passage in Luke 5:32 still has these words, except for the newest 2020 edition of the NASB which omits all three instances)

"Take heed that ye despise not one of these little ones; for I say unto you, That in heaven their angels do always behold the face of my Father which is in heaven.
For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost."
- Matthew 18:10-11 (verse 11 is entirely removed in modern versions)

"So the last shall be first, and the first last: for many be called, but few chosen."
- Matthew 20:16 ("for many be called, but few chosen" removed in modern versions)

"But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren."
- Matthew 23:8 ("even Christ" is removed in modern versions here)

"And at midnight there was a cry made, Behold, the bridegroom cometh; go ye out to meet him."
- Matthew 25:6 ("cometh" removed)

"Watch therefore, for ye know neither the day nor the hour wherein the Son of man cometh."
- Matthew 25:13 ("wherein the Son of man cometh" removed)

"But Jesus answereth again, and saith unto them, Children, how hard is it for them that trust in riches to enter into the kingdom of God!"
- Mark 10:24 ("for them that trust in riches" removed)

"Therefore I say unto you, What things soever ye desire, when ye pray, believe that ye receive them, and ye shall have them."
- Mark 11:24
("receive" present tense changed to "have received" past tense - the verb "λαμβάνετέ" is changed to "ἐλάβετε" in the modern critical text)

"In the resurrection therefore, when they shall rise, whose wife shall she be of them? for the seven had her to wife."
- Mark 12:23 ("when they shall rise" is removed)

"Take ye heed, watch and pray: for ye know not when the time is."
- Mark 13:33 ("and pray" is removed)

"And Jesus saith unto them, All ye shall be offended because of me this night: for it is written, I will smite the shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered."
- Mark 14:27 ("because of me this night" is removed)

>>22315707
>Jesus thought the apocalypse would happen before his generation died.
Then it would say "my generation." If so then I would agree with you it would be contradictory. That's not what it says, however.

>>22315750
>If you think γενεά (generation) and γένος (genus) are the same word
Obviously the connection is that "this generation" is a subset of the entire thing, which is exactly the relationship that exists between these two words. See https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/γενεά . So you see I've transposed now into the other main explanation for this prophecy, because I believe they are both concurrently true. The antecedent for this generation in Matthew 24:34 comes from Matthew 24:33. Similar language to 1 Thess. 4:17 if one wants to make a comparison. I thought you would have known all this, anon.

>>22315736
>Have you considered the possibility that the first Christians had their own little Second Coming,
That's not possible according to the biblical account - consider for example 1 Cor. 15:23, Hebrews 11:40 and Rev. 20:4-6. And it's explicitly denied by Paul in 2 Timothy 2:18 (semi-explicitly denied again in 2 Thess. 2:2 as well). It's part of the same reason Preterism isn't biblical.

"But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness.
And their word will eat as doth a canker: of whom is Hymenaeus and Philetus;
Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already; and overthrow the faith of some."
- 2 Tim. 2:16-18

>>21880783
>How is this interpreted to mean his confession, and not his person,
It doesn't say "upon thee I will build my church," but "upon this rock." And as Jesus Christ refers to Peter's confession in Matthew 16:17, so He refers to it again in Matthew 16:18. It means that "this rock" is the Christ, the Son of the living God, which is what Peter had confessed.

"For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ."
(1 Corinthians 3:11).

"And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ."
(1 Corinthians 10:4)

"Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God;
20 And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;"
(Ephesians 2:19-20)

"Jesus saith unto them, Did ye never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord's doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes?"
(Matthew 21:42)

>>21879380
There is literally no reason to use the NKJV. In Genesis 22:17, it changes the singular "seed" and "his enemies" to the plural "descendants" and "their enemies," even though the whole point of this passage according to Paul rests on the fact that the "seed" mentioned here is singular (see Galatians 3:16).

The New King James (NKJV) changes 2 Kings 23:29 from saying "went up against" to the opposite "went to the aid." This contradicts what it says in 2 Chronicles 35:20 about the same event, where all versions say, "went up against." This is in addition to changing 2 Kings 23:29 to say the opposite of what it says in the KJV and other accurate translations of the verse.

The NKJV is also guilty of interpretive changes. For example in 1 Chronicles 5:26, the phrase, "the spirit of Pul king of Assyria, and the spirit of Tilgathpilneser king of Assyria," is changed in the NKJV to "the spirit of Pul king of Assyria, that is, Tiglath-Pileser king of Assyria."

So the NKJV makes Pul the same as Tiglath-Pileser, instead of treating them as two separate individuals based on their own interpretation of Assyriology.

Several other changes in the NKJV Old Testament exist due to using the Biblia Hebraica of Rudolf Kittel in the 20th century instead of the received Hebrew text, used by the 16th and 17th century translators. For instance, the NKJV reads "bandage" instead of "ashes" in 1 Kings 20:38,41 due to this. It reads "will restore" instead of "hath turned away" in Nahum 2:2 for the same reasons.

In the New Testament, the NKJV has many more problems.

For instance, in Colossians 2:2, the phrase "and of the Father" is changed to "both of the Father" in the NKJV. This means that there are no longer three Persons listed in this Trinitarian verse by Paul, but only two. Also, the very specific phrase "in a place where two ways met" is changed to "the street" in the NKJV at Mark 11:4. And the word "narrow" is changed to "difficult" in Matthew 7:14 of the NKJV, which changes the meaning of the verse and the teaching by Jesus substantially. Also, the imperative statement (command) by Jesus in John 5:39 is changed to indicative in the NKJV, which also clearly affects the meaning of the doctrine.

In Hebrews 10:14 the NKJV reads, "are being sanctified," instead of "are sanctified," as the KJV does. This participle is supposed to be present passive according to the Greek original, in other words an ongoing passive action. But the NKJV represents it as a progressive or continuous passive, meaning incomplete, even though this is not obtained from the Greek conjugation of the word. The same happens for how the NKJV translates the word σωζομενοις (are saved) as, "are being saved," in passages such as Acts 2:47, 1 Corinthians 1:18, and 2 Corinthians 2:15 (but strangely not in Luke 13:23, 1 Corinthians 15:2 or Revelation 21:24).

Also Acts 3:13,26 in the KJV reads, "his Son Jesus," as in other accurate versions, but the NKJV instead says, "his Servant Jesus."

>>21654388
>Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor...
That's not the KJV, it's an inaccurate translation of Paul. It doesn't say "sexually immoral," it says "fornication."

>and he didn't say "only some" of these Christians but all of them.
Like I said, nobody holds that Paul was saying every person in the church of Corinth had done every single one of those things. Not all of them were prostitutes, not all of them were thieves, but some might have been some of those things. Nevertheless, they were cleansed when they became saved, like Paul mentions in verse 11.

>That is, anyway, the implication as I said.
What? That all of them were guilty of every single thing listed? That's ridiculous, anon.

>>21606629
The answer is simply because that's what happened. Sometimes it doesn't have to be complicated.

>>21061838
https://textusreceptusbibles.com/Parallel/19091001/KJV1611/BSP/GNV

>>21061776
>Makes me remember how the 1881 RV was accused of being a "papist" revision of the KJV, despite literally no evidence.
The English Revised Version of 1881 was based on the Westcott-Hort text (mentioned here >>21057588). It has several of the same omissions as papal translations that have been made, such as where the words "without a cause" are removed from Matthew 5:22.

"But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment:" (Matthew 5:22)
The words "without a cause" are removed from the RV on the basis of W&H removing the word "εἰκῆ" from the Greek text.

Also, the words, "For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen." is removed from Matthew 6:13 of the 1881 ERV for the same reason.

>And of course the KJV took from the Douay-Rheims even as the preface lambasted the Douay-Rheims.
There's not a single actual example of this, and the Douay-Rheims bible came out in 1610 while the KJV translation commission was going on from 1604 to 1611. By the time of 1610 they were already in the final stages of doing their cross-check between the different groups' work, so there wouldn't have been time to take anything from the DRB.

>>20986174
I have become fully aware of this context, anon. What about you?

"For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call." (Acts 2:39)

"For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren. Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified." (Rom. 8:29-30)

See also Psalm 102:16-22.

>>20899262
We have the original words, God preserved them.

"Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away." (Matthew 24:35)

>>20855564
Neither the English nor the Greek says that. The Greek says "Λόγος" and the English, Word.

Thanks be to God for the Word of life, who shall judge the quick and the dead at His appearing and kingdom.