KJV Tampering as a precursor to Sinaiaticus Fraud

[ebion]

The KJV was not a fresh translation, but a reedit of the Bishop's bible, which was itself was a reedit of Tyndale's bibles. I'm not sure if it meets the usual definition of tampering, but their decision not to consult the PeshittA tampered with the result. See for example:

1. Aramaic: Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers (Romans 13:1)
2. KJV Howler: the bowels of the saints (Philemon 1:7 [KJV])
3. KJV Howler: mine own bowels: (Philemon 1:12 [KJV])
4. KJV Howler: refresh my bowels in the Lord. (Philemon 1:20 [KJV])
5. KJV Howler: I long after you all in the bowels of Jesus Christ. (Philippians 1:8 [KJV])
6. KJV Howler: if any fellowship of the Spirit, if any bowels and mercies, (Philippians 2:1 [KJV])
7. KJV Howler: holy and beloved, bowels of mercies (Colossians 3:12 [KJV])
8. KJV Howler: his bowels of compassion from him (I John 3:17 [KJV])
9. KJV Howler: ye are straitened in your own bowels. (II Corinthians 6:12 [KJV])
10. KJV Howler: have made themselves eunuchs (Matthew 19:12 [KJV])
11. KJV Howler: an eunuch of great authority (Acts 8:27 [KJV])
12. KJV Howler: in the house of Simon the leper Matthew 26:6
13. KJV Howler: in the house of Simon the leper (Mark 14:3 [KJV])
14. KJV Blooper: Their feet are swift to shed blood: (Romans 3:15 [KJV])
15. KJV Blooper: having loosed the pains of death Acts 2:24 KJV
16. (more coming)

[ebion]

It's only one verse but it's hugely famous, as it's the only verse the Vatican could get into the "TR" to pretend there is support for the Trinitarians, over Erasmus' explicit opposition.

The catholic agent Stunica had a hand in providimg Erasmus with an offer he couldn't refuse; his letters back to Pope Leo X in 1520 at the Vatican, which were forbidden for publication by the Pope and his successor, have now been published. There's a good YouTube video that pulls the fraud all together.

I'll just mention it and list any good posts that summarize it, as:

• Johannine Comma is not in the PeshittA Syriac NT Manuscripts.

Which is just as well: the Roman church teaches you can only understand it "by a kind of darkness":

The Vatican Council has explained ... we are not merely incapable of discovering apart from Divine Revelation, but which, even when revealed, remains “hidden by the veil of faith and enveloped, so to speak, by a kind of darkness” (Const., "De fide. cath.", iv). (Joyce G.H. The Blessed Trinity. The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume 15)

[StephenGoranson]

The Authorized Version/King James Version is a translation with limitations.
Any Syriac version is a translation with limitations.

[Charles Wilson]

Matt. 1:11

Josias begat Jechonias and his brethren - some read, Josias begat Jakim, and Jakim begat Jechonias

Josephus, Antiquities..., 14, 1, 3:

“But there was a certain friend of Hyrcanus, an Idumean, called Antipater, who was very rich, and in his nature an active and a seditious man; who was at enmity with Aristobulus, and had differences with him on account of his good-will to Hyrcanus. It is true that Nicolatls [sic: "Nicholas"] of Damascus says, that Antipater was of the stock of the principal Jews who came out of Babylon into Judea; but that assertion of his was to gratify Herod, who was his son, and who, by certain revolutions of fortune, came afterward to be king of the Jews, whose history we shall give you in its proper place hereafter.”

The "Genealogy" in Matthew is a Fake, taken from Nicholas of Damascus' Construction for Herod.

Matthew 1: 11 (RSV):

[11] and Josi'ah the father of Jechoniah and his brothers, at the time of the deportation to Babylon.
***
Someone has to look at Nicholas of Damascus and his brother Ptolemy and their actions at the death of Herod.

CW

[ebion]

This is valuable information that I've been seeking. What you have offered here, with such brevity and focus, is hard to find!

Thanks; I want to keep it focussed an on topic so I can use it in the fight against KJOnlyism, along with my KJV Howlers.

What about 1) NKJV and 2) NKJV Study Bible?

I wouldn't know - I never read English bibles after Whiston (1745?).

Any "New" bible translated after Codex Simonides a.k.a. Sinaiticus (~1860) is likely to be an anti-Bible fraud, and reveals the rampant corruption in what the media refers to as "scholarship".

[StephenGoranson]

ebion, above, in part:
"I wouldn't know - I never read English bibles after Whiston (1745?)."

Is this Forum well served by invitations to ignore contemporary scholarship?

[ebion]

Well, I'm glad you have it all worked out.

Do you mean: did I get myself injected by a DoD countermeasure?

[StephenGoranson]

An argument between a proponent of KJV/AV as a perfect translation
and a proponent of a Syriac translation (presented as if were the original NT text) as perfect
imo excludes scholarship that regards neither as original nor perfect.

[ebion]

We come not to condem the KJVOnlyist for the error of his KJV ways, but to lead him to the light of informed textual criticism on the WayOfGodInTruth. That being said, we recognize the role that he plays in the fight against the pestillent "New" "Revised" corruptions based on the Codex Simonides fraud, and the role it plays in the upcoming OneWorldOnlyism.

The Orthodox wiki has a pained section on the new Orthodox Study Bible (OSB):

Despite positive endorsements, ... most scholars and commentators have criticized both the translation (not so much a LXX translation as a Masoretic / LXX hybrid) and quality of the study notes of the OSB. Representative of most reviews are the following excerpts:

"If my comments seem harsh it is because the OSB could have been better, and should have been better. As I've mentioned before, if the OSB had managed to package an Orthodox approach to Scripture within the limits of a Protestant-style study bible, I'd be much more gentle in my criticism. That the OSB should prove to be so deeply foreign not only to the ethos of Orthodox Christianity, but to its doctrine and teaching as well is simply unforgivable." [1]

”The notes to the New Testament are on the whole straightforward and some readers will find them a help in understanding many of the words and ideas in the text. Most of them though are dull and many of them jejune in the extreme. ... Critical questions are avoided by simply not being discussed at all. This is unsatisfactory, since many readers will be seeking help on just these questions. What should have been provided is an article setting out clearly how an Orthodox reader of the Bible should approach these problems. The solution adopted here is a further instance of what I call the attitude of the double-headed Byzantine ostrich." [2]

"The tragedy of the OSB is that, as Kevin Edgecomb once put it privately to me, it should have been better, and in fact was once better. Kevin has recently sent me a number of early drafts of the OSB that were once available online for all to see; these show that the OSB was once an honest-to-goodness translation of the Septuagint, and a rather satisfactory one, at that. However, somewhere along the line (and in all likelihood on account of Thomas Nelson's–the same company headed by an Orthodox deacon, I might add–overriding pressure to market the NKJV by making this an 'Orthodox NKJV' or some such beast),

(There's a long riotous history of translations of the Greek Orthodox texts, TR and Byzantine, into the vernacular. I think the best currently may be the 1904 Patriarchal Edition.)

The Greek Orthodox bibles were famous for basing their OTs on the Septuagint (LLX) - now we're getting some kind of 'Orthodox NKJV' hybrid in the drive for a globalizt bible that supports the upcoming OneWorldOnlyism.

[ebion]

There's a good video up on YouTube by del Tondo called KJV Corruptions - Example of Hebrews 12:14 KJV vs. Tyndale's Version which analyzes the differences between the Tyndale bibles, and the KJV. As >90% of the KJV NT s directly Tyndale's it's relatvely easy to focus on where the Tyndale text was changed, and to detect a pattern to the differences, and to see if the pattern amounts to tampering.

It's vital to remember that the definition of "Authorized version" of the bible in England meant not only authorized to be read in the churches, but meant authorized to be sold; any non-authorized bible could be suppressed. So if you can tamper with the verses in the KJV, then you could suppress any bibles that said otherwise.

Let's start with the Tyndale:

Embrace peace with all men, and wholiness: without the which, no man shall see the Lord. (Hebrews 12:14 [TyNT])

Embracing is active, it's a thing of work a Christian has to do to see the Lord.

Follow peace with all men, and holiness, without which no man shall see the Lord: (Hebrews 12:14 [KJV])

Following is passive - like following along with the crowd.

Doug in the video goes through the relevant notes from John Bois, the only notes from one of the 54 King James "translators" that have survived, now published in the book "Translating for King James". The book demonstrates how the Tyndale text was massaged to get it to say what the "translator" thought it should say, to be properly Calvinist, and to align with the theology of who he assumed had authored Hebrews, Paul. That's what is at the root here: the theology of Hebrews in Tyndale is very anti-Fauline.

For the record, out preferred translation of the PeshittA sides with Tyndale:
and it very active:

Run after Peace with every man, and after Holiness, without which, a man can't see Our Lord. (Hebrews 12:14 [HAS])