|The Free Site | Hug.me - Get a dinner date this weekend | Cheap Web Hosting - starting at $5|
The following two Bible verses are useful for testing whether or not a considered "Bible" translation is - in fact - a bonafide, legitimate, fairly-faithful, and at-least mostly-accurate translation of the Sacred-66-books Judeo-Christian Old-and-New-Testaments Holy Bible:
One of the reasons that islam is so popular among muslims, and
why they are so high-powered politically, is the
weird-to-pervertess-westerners, extreme-to-adulterous-amero-europeans, hijab and burka modesty of
fundamentalist islamic women and girls.
Such genuine ladies (not whore-or-slut-lookalikes) automatically find it a relief to not have to compete against each other by quasi-indecently displaying and comparing bared body parts to the general public (of the type described in RSV's II Samuel 13:18, Isaiah 47:1-4, and Jeremiah 2:25) . . . and a legitimate way to righteously express godly contempt against anti-KJV/RSV/NASV/ESV godlessly-immodest apostates and infidels.
They, in humble self-control, have not disobediently bitten into the feminist-sexist Forbidden Fruit of self-aggrandizing depraved lust by means of selfishly committing non-glamorous and non-sexy lascivious-licentious body-parts display to try to get demonic admiration and devilish power.
Strangely to deviant western mindlessness, such islamic are in fact cool and comfortable enough in shade and air conditioning without being shamefully mis-attired in public view.
Moreover, the modest-in-public fully-robed muslim females experience much greater sexual satisfaction with their compliant-modesty-ideology muslim men, who have not been short-circuited and dissipated by warm-weather female-exhibitionist immodesty which would have incited them to resort to public-immodesty-based porn and other-women masseuse-or-escort prostitution.
By natural default, islamic men stay more erect longer, have stiffer protuberations, the duration of such being adequate enough for islamic women (probably in a state of clotheslessness described in Genesis chapter 2 privately and frequently with their own spouses) to ride them to complete, full, and satisfying orgasm. As an added benefit, recovery rate is much faster for islamic-intercourse-repetitious males.
Added to that, there is understandably far less frustrating, disappointing, and unfulfilled erectile dysfunctioning and impotence because of that lack of warm-weather-displayed mopheadedness, naked-armed sleeveslessness, nude-legged slackslessness, and soxlessness as parts of bared feet are advertised with noisy-flipflopping sandals flapping along.
This author had previously read about a
discrepancy involving two supposedly different
Old-Testament Hebrew texts of the Bible:
I thus typed in both of them (one at a time)
into major internet search engines to investigate.
One KJV-only diehard wrote on the subject, failing to declare that there was once a need for the creation of the at-that-time new King James Version itself, and that "the KJV" has undergone many revision and edition changes. He spoke of "THE Masoretic Text" without defining if THAT meant the ben Chayyim or the ben Asher text (purportedly discrepant against each other). He condemned Rudolf Kittel and his editor Kahle for putting footnotes in the text of their Stuttgart-edition Hebrew Bible based on a Leningrad Manuscript - with the presumption that Kittel wanted to confuse readers by insinuating that they randomly replace the main text with footnote alterations or substitutions. He went on to state that the American Bible Society offers an 1866-incepted Letteris (ben Chayyim) Hebrew Old-Testament text for sale, but this author has never seen any such advertisement from ABS at any time ever. Mr. KJV-only also failed to state WHY the ben Asher Hebrew Text was THE (recognized) Received Text in authority until the 1500s, but somehow lost that authenticity until Kittel's 1937 edition of ben Asher's Text - which Text the RSV and NASV are thankfully based upon. Seventh, KJV-only gave credence to a certain "Daniel Bomberg" (whoever HE was) and who (according to the preface of the NKJV Bible) concocted and printed a so-called "first rabbinic bible" in 1516 (whatever THAT was)......followed by [oh oh!]: a SECOND edition (the FIRST was NOT GOOD ENOUGH)? One internet source stated that Jacob ben Chayyim was apparently "some jewish refugee" who the source alleged to have become a Christian (sounds suspicious)! So WHO WAS ben Chayyim, and what were his motives for trashing the traditional ben Asher Text?
With all this in mind, I synthesized two internet pieces from one Jewish author giving further info about ben Asher:
Aaron ben Moses ben Asher lived in Tiberius during the first
half of the 10th century. His family had been involved in
creating and maintaining the MASORAH for either five or six
generations. Ben Asher rapidly gained fame as the most
authoritative of the Tiberian masoretes, and even after his
death, his name continued to hold respect. His vocalization
of the Bible is still - for all intents and purposes - THE
Text Jews continue to use.
Moreover, Aaron ben Moses ben Asher was the first to take Hebrew grammar seriously. His SEFER DIKDUKEI HA-TE'AMIM (Grammar of the Vocalizations) was an original collection of grammatical rules and masoretic information. Grammatical principles were not at that time considered worthy of independent study.
Ben Asher had a tremendous influence on the world of Biblical grammar and scholarship. From documents found in the CAIRO GENIZA, it appears that this most famous masorete (and possibly his family for generations) were also - incidently - KARAITES.
As early as the eighth century, Talmudic rabbis encountered
a major challenge. A group of Jews led by Anan ben David
declared that they did not accept the authority of the rabbis
to interpret Torah. This group, originally called the
Ananites, developed their own understanding of Jewish
law based only on the written Torah. The Ananites were
stricter and more rigid than the rabbis in their understanding
of Torah law. They simply did not accept the rabbis as
legitimate authorities of Jewish law. They denied the
authority of the Mishnah and the
It is difficult to determine Ananite doctrines because the Ananites relied on the Torah Text. Anan's famous adage was: "Search thoroughly the Torah and don't rely on my opinions."
In the ninth century, the major group of Ananites combined with other anti-rabbinic groups and became known as the Karaites (followers of the Kra, or Torah Text) in their Masoretic tradition of including VOWELS in the Torah Text. They believed that the Torah had originally been written with vowels, and they viewed such Text as the ONLY legitimate one.
It should not be surprising to discover that many masoretes, so involved in the Masorah, held Karaite beliefs. After all, it was the Karaites who placed such absolute reliance on the Torah Text. It would be natural that they would devote their lives to studying every aspect of it. The surprising element was that being a Karaite did not disqualify Aaron ben Moses ben Asher in the eyes of Rabbinic Jews.
If the Ten Commandments etched in stone did not exist
before God carved them out for Moses on the mountain,
certainly the KJV did not exist before then either. After
Noah and his kin descended down off the ark on a world
devoid of any lifeforms and whatever
hieroglyphics previously around (if any, whether
Phoenician, Egyptian, Chinese, whatever), God laid down
the Hebrew ALPHABET for Moses and the nations
on Mount Sinai (amidst all the then-existing Babel
languages and their written symbols occurring
after The Flood).
The spoken (or oral) Bible started out rather simply with God verbally, audibly or however (without printed mass media) telling humanity to reproduce and eat green stuff (Genesis chapter 1), and telling Adam in particular to not eat of "the forbidden tree." Apparently, that divine tidbit of as-yet-nonwritten Scripture was conveyed (by whoever) to the inferior gender, who soon became the first nude preacheress on record to discourse with a snake. Her sermonette to Satan had a few omissions and additions pertaining to the intended Original Text (e.g. the word "freely" was left out, along with "midst of the garden," and a brand-new addition of hers "neither shall you touch it" was added. Thus, that first weaker-sex woman (ancestral grandmother of us all) competed against the Devil on her own, without Adam, in power-hungry feminist-"equality" arrogance and female naiivity (precursor of maryolatrous catholics who presume a female and God alone can create kiddies without any guy around).....and so corrupted the earliest and simplest Scripture. Her usually-clothed-thereafter progenie have continued to screw things up ever since, as more and more sacred sayings were mangled by myriads mouthing mindless blatterings masquerading as gospel truth.
Again, the LORD Himself intervened to (thankfully) a male human, again. On the two tablets of stone in rock, He Himself (wrote down The Text, instructing Rabbi Moses in details enabling him to compose the Pentateuch (Torah) Old Testament according to creationist info supernaturally supplied.
God also talked to others verbally, like from between two cherubim above the mercy seat of the ark of the covenant after talking out of a burning bush which didn't really burn (i.e. DID burn but was constantly rejuvenated for more to burn (sort of like the future bodies of those who will forever continue to burn to the ages of the ages in the hellish Lake of Fire). He also spoke audibly out of a cloud, using the mouth of Jesus, out of a blinding light on some road to Damascus, and to a Peter, Paul, and John (original 12 apostles) and others in dreams and visions. Outside of what is recorded in the Bible, any dreams or visions having occurred or allegedly occurred, occurring or allegedly occurring, to occur or allegedly occur, can be questioned as to authenticity of whether or not being GOD'S actual revelation on a more or less take it or leave it basis.
Which brings us to what is TRULY canonical
bona-fide Bible, and what is FAKE
[pseudo]-"biblical" utterances. Jesus Himself
read from a copy of the book of Isaiah handed to Him in
a temple. Whatever Old-Testament books and writings He
and his New-Testament gospel and epistle authors
referred to can obviously be considered
Such historically happened, causing eyewitnesses to relate perfectly to next-generation faithful and honest copyists who non-carelessly read, recorded, and related ALL PERTINENT words written in common public alpha-to-omega Greek letters EVERYONE in their right mind could understand -- inerrant to the last iota jot and tittle. Dedicated printing of such on papyrus was inspired and infallible.
The Divine Copyright Enforcer had, has, and will have
His ways to insure that His
Word is clearly and obviously canonical......
First, He is the Jealous Executioner. To name a few examples of the disfavored in the Old Testament who bit the dust: the assaultive perverts of Sodom and Gomorrah, Er and Onan (Judah's son's of Genesis 38), pollutive harassing belligerant canaanites who Joshua and the Jews exterminated under orders from God, Haman the diabolical antisemite (Book of Esther), 100 state-trooper sheriff-deputy-type soldiers ganging up on Elijah (II Kings 1), 186,000 Assyrian commandos (Isaiah 37:36), Hananiah the false prophet (Jeremiah 28), lying Ananias and Sapphira (Acts 5), child-murderer saint-beheader Roman governor Herod (Acts 12), at least sixteen 9112001 megavandal genocidal Saudi-terrorist kamakazes who admirably murdered themselves with suicide, etc.
Second, the LORD preserved (and preserves!)
the lives of his elect, providentially provides for
and fills them with boundless phenomenal faith, joy,
and confidence. Remember The Bomb which annihilated
Shinto-cultic Jap terrorists and their supporters
who had brutally demolished Pearl Harbor. Remember
Getting back to the Dark Ages, saints within and outside the Catholic Church faithfully copied The ONE Text which they had received from previous saints and preserved by a Power not of this Earth.
Autograph-accurateText in papyrus,
headquartered in Antioch, was diversely scattered
and read, becoming more ancient and worn as time
went on, but CAREFULLY-copied duplicates
were PAINSTAKINGLY produced, and such
already-canonical Text was disseminiated in
greater and greater numbers worldwide.
Inevitably, counterfeits (like weeds) began to appear from heretics such as Marcion and others who concocted corrupt Alexandrian and Sinaiticus type Greek-lettered replacements - blasphemously miscalled " manuscripts"- ultimately synthesized by the occultic-spiritualist demonic duo Hort and Westcott in England in the late 1800s, peddled and promoted thereafter by Metzger, Aland, and Nestle.
The ORIGINAL Text survived in entirety, however, true to God's promise and power of indestructibility and eternal longevity. Erasmus (respected by Martin Luther) tried to sort out the genuine from the garbage, and at that time did his best with consecutive improving editions. Beza and Stephanus continued the refinement, and Scrivener of England finally put it all together in 1894 into what is now know as the Scrivener Trinitarian Greek Text of the New Testament for these momentous last days before Christ's visible bodily return to Earth at Armageddon.
The Revised Standard Version (RSV) has, for its
Isaiah 7:14, the following: "a young
woman shall conceive and bear a son"
whereas the King James Version (KJV) has the phrase
"...virgin shall conceive..."
instead of young woman for the exact
Well, WHICH IS it: "young woman," or "virgin?" All young-women virgins are young women, but obviously not all young women are young-women virgins. If you the reader don't get it, I'll elaborate: A young woman who has lain with a man sexually is not a virgin, but she is still a young woman. Allow NONE to be accursed FOOLS and blatter that "it doesn't matter " or "whatever" pertaining to precise word choice. It certainly DOES matter!
Neither the words "young woman" nor "virgin" could legitimately be REPLACED with the SUBSTITUTE word damsel, maid, maiden, nor girl - being that such are not necessarily (and usually NOT) of childbearing age, NOR necessarily virgin. Besides, both boys and men can ALSO be virgins - though male ones, of course.
Also, the word maid is INADEQUATE as a substitute word, because "maid" of nondeniable necessity carries an additional connotation of SERVITUDE as a SLAVE or EMPLOYEE.
The TRUE Greek Text of Matthew 1:23 contains the Greek word parthenos for virgin (pronounced PARTH-en-ahss) speaking of that blessed virgin Mariam (literal Greek spelling) who would conceive her FIRST-born (NOT "only"-born) son (per Matthew 1:24) of the Holy SPIRIT [not occultish "ghost" and not by Planned Parentlessness/Planned Promiscuity] with eroskenative "knowledge" (Gr. gin(o)sk(o), pronounced jean-OH-skoh) of and with a male human (see Luke 1:34) and -- to repeat as a choice-for-lifer -- bear a SON (Gr. uion, pronounced HWEE-ahn, per Luke 1:31) not abortive-tissue "fetus."
Many have related that Matthew 1:23 passage to the Old-Testament reference of Isaiah 7:14. Isaiah 7:14 does NOT contain Strong's English-lettered Hebrew-text Word# 1330 for VIRGIN, but DOES contain Strong's Word# 5959 for YOUNG WOMAN. In Genesis 24:16 virgin Rebekkah [with whom no male had yet lain] is identified with Strong's Word# 1330 (which the RSV has correctly translated as virgin), while Abraham's servant (in Genesis 24:43) requests of the Lord a Strong's Word# 5959 "young woman" (which the RSV has correctly translated as young woman).
Strong's Word# 1330 for VIRGIN is found in Job 31:1 describing who Job refused to look lustfully at. The KJV has MIS-translated Strong's Word# 1330 as "maid," while the RSV got it right using the word virgin.
Moreover, Strong's Word# 5959 (young
woman) used in Isaiah 7:14 the RSV properly
translated in their main text as "young
woman" but which the KJV got WRONG using
"virgin" in theirs. Strong's Word#
5959 (young woman) is ALSO found in Exodus
2:8 with reference to the YOUNG-WOMAN
(NOT "virgin") sister of
Moses who called her mother as a nurse for Moses
at the request of Pharoah's daughter. The KJV
there used a somewhat-adequate word
"maid" while the RSV states the
somewhat-adequate word "girl."
Concerned theologians (including yours truly) wonder that since Isaiah 7:14 only refers to a young woman and in no way to the virgin according to Strong's word numbering, WHAT is the SOURCE reference of the Matthew 1:23 inerrant prophecy which obviously was indeed spoken through some prophet? And while we consider that, WHAT is "the book of Jashar" [something not in my Sacred-66 canonical Bible!] referred to in Joshua 10:13 and II Samuel 1:18? How about some "Jannes and Jambres" [never heard of them before!] who according to II Timothy 3:8 opposed Moses? And nowhere in the entire Bible is there any record of anyone being "sawn in two" (Hebrews 11:37).
I realize that all this may be too much for martyr-stories-fabricating, purgatory/apocrypha-and-Paul-beheaded-presuming, perpetual-virgin-ascended, mary-mother-of-god-worshipping, cultic catholics to tolerate....but that's the way it is.