Well seems that 'revisions' of the bible keep on coming....

From the KJV

Psalm 22:21 (King James Version)

21Save me from the lion's mouth: for thou hast heard me from the horns of the unicorns.

Now from the NIV

Psalm 22:21 (New International Version)

21 Rescue me from the mouth of the lions;
save me from the horns of the wild oxen.


I don't know about you, but I am but I'm sure that I can tell a oxen from a unicorn....so can any 2 year old.

So if it isn't a case of mistaken identity on identifying a creature in the bible, then it must be something with the passage of the bible.


Discuss!

agree that is a poor translation


So you admit that man can translate the bible wrongly? That an interpretation can be just as subjective?

Thanks, you have just validated my viewpoint of the bible all along.

:owned:

Now what? Unicorns? Can't wait to read about the Magic Bus.

I've never denied there are minutia translational errors; however, those minutia errors are primarily poor word choice (such as your example) and do not impact the authority or authenticity of the Bible


Wait, how so? If some group were to write the bible, and choose different words, are you saying that the authenticity of that bible would still be sound?

No it wouldn't, thats a really easy question. So yes, poor word choice would impact the authority and authenticity of that bible.



BTW, 'menutia' is a noun, as in "God blessed skidMarked with a menutia".

It is not an adjective, which you clearly used here.
If you wanted to use proper grammar, it should have been with the unabridged form:
"I've never denied there are minutial translational errors"




no, you mock foundational doctrines of the Bible as a worthless heretic, which is what you have done all along

Go fly that kite someplace else little man, your personal attacks are stupid and only prove that you have nothing worthwhile to say or to add.

http://i138.photobucket.com/albums/q255/95whitepep/tumbleweed.gif

it would, if such word choice errors were common, but the fact is they are exceedingly rare, and the scriptures are exceedingly well preserved...the only way you know about them is surfing your crackpot liberal websites

Rare? You just posted 8 examples above!!!!

And by your post above your really make no point. And BTW a monoceros is another word for unicorn!!! LOL Whose quoting crackpot sites now???

Should I start posting more examples of where translations have messed it up? Do you want to start doing a chapter by chapter comparison of the NIV and NKJ versions? There are so many glaring differences, no wonder your YEC friends are confused.

LOL you are so getting owned on this one...

:owned:

read the link, bonehead

I did bone head, and you quoted it as well. You fail again!

So if the interrupters of the King James Version messed up, it brought about millions of people still today thinking there are unicorns. How stupid to actually believe everything what the bible reads.

"stupid" to those outside the faith...the link I posted explians the reference is not to mythical unicorns
"stupid" to those inside the faith...it is "explains"

lol hermit

no, you failed to read

But wait, the bible is God inspired, so how can it be wrong. Thats the point here.
Unicorns, oxen, rhinos.....what ever. The point stands that errors like this lead to false beliefs, try to deny that fact.....

"A unicorn is in the bible so it must be true!"

"The earth was covered by a world wide flood!"

Get the point?

But wait, the bible is God inspired, so how can it be wrong.


in the original autograph.

...this is the process of textural criticism...look it up sometime


you DON'T HAVE the original autograph, period.

no matter what you come up with it WON'T BE the original autograph, and so IS NOT what god promised would be True, period.

something that is SIMILAR to absolute truth is NOT absolute truth.
something that is amazingly CLOSE to absolute truth is not absolute truth.

ONLY the original autograph is absolute truth, I would strech the point and accept an absolutely exact copy of the original autograph as being acceptable, but there is no such thing either.

This is a completey ridiculous point. Do you guys think the translators of the new testament actually had a horned pony in mind when putting this together?

why are you here?

Your writings are equivalent to watching sponge bob with the kids. We know a talking cartoon isn't real but you animate the whole Bible like it can eat the sandwich you placed next to it. Its a whole lot of hoots!

in the original autograph
http://www.gty.org/resources.php?section=issues&aid=176343


Whats really funny about everything you post is that at the end, they all have someone telling you what to think, and the conclusion is strictly biased to the writer.

Don't you have a brain for yourself skidMArk???? I truly believe that you have been brainwashed and can't think for yourself. And when anyone brings up a disagreement on what your cult(s) follow, you blow a fuse. Too bad, you seem smart at times but your attitude is less than to be desired.




your "point" is simple minded (as usual)


Like a child? :blah:

exactly what the original Hebrew term in question refers to is not altogether obvious,

So the Hebrew text confuses people? Did you just admit that you were confused? Wait a second, how do you know what the Hebrew text meant? Were you one of those scholars that knows Hebrew and translated it to english? You comments are speculative and without any evidence!



this is the process of textural criticism...look it up sometime

Textual criticism...
empirical science...

You keep on going with that....see how far in life you get with you 'little duckling' ways

This is a completey ridiculous point. Do you guys think the translators of the new testament actually had a horned pony in mind when putting this together?

Yes they did mean unicorn as they did use it several times...lets see here...what other strange creatures occurred.

Unicorns.
satyrs ( Men who have legs like a goat)
cockatrices ( chicken/ serpents that kill when you look at them)
Giant men (half men/half demon)

What you fail to see is the point of this discussion, or the direction that was taken...

where are these terms used? and what wacky liberal website are you trolling to get this stuff? talkorigins?

King James Version (KJV)
Isaiah 11:8

8And the sucking child shall play on the hole of the asp, and the weaned child shall put his hand on the cockatrice' den.


Hold on a second...you yourself said that those men in Gen 6 were half men /half demons...or did you forget? What kind of crack are you smoking?


the point is crystal clear: you don't think God's Word can be trusted, and you're outside the faith (doubt looking for proof)

Get out of here with that crap...

Yes they did mean unicorn as they did use it several times...lets see here...what other strange creatures occurred.

Unicorns.
satyrs ( Men who have legs like a goat)
cockatrices ( chicken/ serpents that kill when you look at them)
Giant men (half men/half demon)

What you fail to see is the point of this discussion, or the direction that was taken...

Well maybe you're right. I think it's really dumb to read something like this from KJV and think it's a horned pony. What do you do then with Exodus 17:20? I guess the ass here is his neighbor's buttocks and not his animal.

textural criticism

a process where a number of different documents are compared in the attempt to derive an approximation of an unavailable source document.

=

the inerrent word of god, close enough.

"no, we don't actually have the documents god officially gave us as His Word, what we do have is the best imitation science can give us." :blah:

clear from the text....once again I have to correct your peerless ignorance

When men began to increase in number on the earth and daughters were born to them, the sons of God saw that the daughters of men were beautiful, and they married any of them they chose. Then the LORD said, "My Spirit will not contend with man forever, for he is mortal; his days will be a hundred and twenty years."

The Nephilim were on the earth in those days—and also afterward—when the sons of God went to the daughters of men and had children by them. They were the heroes of old, men of renown.


Why can't you keep your head straight and stay focus. The question is , where are these strange creatures in the bible coming from? IT has nothing to do about my understanding of it. You blind hatred of me is costing you skidMarked.

Second, where do you get demons for 'the sons of God'?
I thought that there were only one son of God and that was Jesus?
Where is this defined? Why in Genesis is there a passage of 'sons of God'?


So the bigger question is, why do you think that sons of God are demons, because that is not in the text?

a process where a number of different documents are compared in the attempt to derive an approximation of an unavailable source document.

=

the inerrent word of god, close enough.

"no, we don't actually have the documents god officially gave us as His Word, what we do have is the best imitation science can give us." :blah:

LOL
Sounds like 'liberal polling' to me. What are you averaging out God now? Shouldn't his word stand alone?

Who's the liberal now!

:roll: :roll: :roll:

what is interesting to me is Jesus allows the demons to go free

not just go free, they directly go forth and destroy a valuable herd of livestock that BELONGS TO SOMEBODY ELSE.

jesus cursing a herd and destroying it did NOT impress the locals at all.

in fact what he did was pretty much exactly what got witches burned at the stake by later christians.

Jesus allows the demons to go free, knowing they are His adversaries and the adversaries of the Church...they have a purpose

only if adversaries means, in this context, servants.

why did jesus want the livestock dead ?

ok, the people MIGHT have willingly traded the herd for the healing of the man, but this stranger did not ASK ! he simply up and killed a valuable property.

if I have a headache and a stranger comes by and kills the kids puppy while making me feel better would not the kids be justified in being PISSED at him for not asking ?

I get the feeling that since it was a herd of PIGS that it was ok, but it looks like jesus effectivly STOLE the herd from their owner.

as proof of his moral perfection, oops.

{aside, what is with jews and HAVING herds of swine ? the prodigal son was a swineherd, eh ? what were the pigs FOR if the jews were forbidden to eat them, what function did they serve ? }

They must be real. There's a museum and everything. (http://www.unicornmuseum.org/index.html)


Based on the idea of 'if it's in the Bible, it must be true', The Unicorn Museum promotes belief in the Biblical Truth of unicorns, a creature mentioned nine times in the KJV Bible.

Why can't you keep your head straight and stay focus. The question is , where are these strange creatures in the bible coming from? IT has nothing to do about my understanding of it. You blind hatred of me is costing you skidMarked.

Second, where do you get demons for 'the sons of God'?
I thought that there were only one son of God and that was Jesus?
Where is this defined? Why in Genesis is there a passage of 'sons of God'?


So the bigger question is, why do you think that sons of God are demons, because that is not in the text?

there's plenty of context to determine what this shit means.
what has been written about these stories is not just contained in the bible.

there's a shitload of extra-biblical works that were not canonized; aka apocrypha.

and in various other works, you get the full story. off the top of my head i believe its in at least the book of enoch and the book of jubilees

the sons of god are the watchers, the grigori, or angels sent to watch over mankind. they teach mankind the arts of war, armor, weapons, astrology, cosmetics, among other forbidden knowledge. then they have mad sechs with women, who beget the giant nephilim.

god drowns the world in order to kill them. what you see in the canonized bible is the super short version of that story. he also locks them up underground until judgment.