Re: [TruthTalk] corrector/revisor

[Taylor]

Kevin states   >  Bill was asked to provide ERRORS in the KJV, this is not an error & in fact is the way MOST Translators & Translations translate the verse   No, Kevin, I was not asked to provide errors in the KJV; I was asked to provide "mistakes," which I have done, having suggested that a "cursory" reading of this verse may lead a person to draw a wrong conclusion, which is exactly what you and Judy did, which is demonstrated in your ongoing argument against the present passive aspect of this participle.   Bill  ----- Original Message ----- From: Kevin Deegan To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2005 9:30 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] corrector/revisor My point is it is a good translation to tranlate it simply as sactifiED PERIOD Bill was asked to provide ERRORS in the KJV, this is not an error & in fact is the way MOST Translators & Translations translate the verse   David Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Kevin, the KJV inserts the words "THEM THAT ARE" which is not in the text as separate words.  So what is your point?   In regards to the other modern texts that fall in line with how the KJV translators did it... GOOD POINT!   Peace be with you. David Miller. ----- Original Message ----- From: Kevin Deegan To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2005 10:29 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] corrector/revisor He is talking about the NUance of the greek idiom Yet the Nuance does not INSERT the whole word "BEING" The Greek word for "Being" is neither in the Textus Receptus NOR the 27th Corrected Greek of N/A (I checked the 26th also NOT THERE!) The word as given hagiazo in the text, is in the form of a Present Passive Participle. When considering it's MOOD, it can be TRANSLATED sanctifyING or santifiED The Greek participle corresponds for the most part to the English participle, reflecting "-ing" or "-ed" being suffixed to the basic verb form.   So they INSERT as the NKJV & NIV do the word BEING which is not in the text to get "being sanified" As posted earlier even the ASV & Beloved NASV Translate it W/O being as "santifiED" It is HARDLY a KJV error, if it was MOST other Translations commit the same error and so too, most Greek Scholars!   It is just someones PREFERENCE that ALIGNS with their THEOLOGY!  JD & Bill insert it since they are in process of becoming Christians. Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: So this is an example of how the KJV is in error Bill? IMO the error is with your understanding rather than with the text of the KJV translation.  You have read something into the text that is not there and have made a straw man to knock down.  The word sanctification does not necessarily mean an action being performed;  the same word is used in 1 Cor 7:14 for an unbelieving wife who is sanctified (set apart, consecrated) by the faith of her husband.  In this sense "sanctified" means something entirely different from what you describe. So IOW "By one offering Jesus has perfected for ever them that are set apart, consecrated (or sanctified)."    Is there someone here who speaks Judy's language that could maybe explain to her the meaning of a present passive verb? If she respects you, she may listen. The same goes for Kevin; he needs your help, too.   Thanks,   Bill __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com Yahoo! FareChase - Search multiple travel sites in one click.