Rick likes to quote erroneous material. It is his style.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coverdale
Bridges and Weigle claimed; "The phrase 'linen yarn' is a conjecture as to the meaning of the Hebrew word miqweh--a conjecture derived from the Geneva Bible (1560), which rendered it 'fine linen'"
While the Geneva did have the fine 'linen yarn', you missed the Hebraics referenced above. Oops. Rick has a policy to not let facts get in the way of false quotes. btw, Also the Bishop's Bible has linen. And a bit later the Italian Diodati and the Dutch Staten Vertaling bible (het linnen garen) all agreed with this proper Reformation Bible understanding. (Will Kinney reference)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coverdale
Farstad commented: "The 'linen yarn' of the KJV does not even seem to be a very good guess in the context of horse trading"
In the context of imports from Egypt, linen yarn is clearly very appropriate. See the post above. How could Farsted and Norris miss this context ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coverdale
The Liberty Bible Commentary noted: "Verse 28 is inaccurate as it stands in the AV. Linen yarn (Heb. miqweh) should rather be, 'from Kue,' or Cilicia" (snip RV and MV lemmings).
Already noted is how difficult any proper name will be there, and here we have one in the opposite direction of Egypt and without chariots, leading to all sorts of difficulties. All the mishegas about competing proper names and regions will need its own posts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coverdale
Bridges and Weigle pointed out: ... They noted: “Assyrian cuneiform records uncovered by archaelogy have now shown that Tyndale and Coverdale were correct” (Ibid.).
This is simply a gross deception. The simple existence of a place called Kue should not be at all suprising. (And without any archaeological indication of horse trading or any trade with Solomon's Israel afaik, please offer any if found.) This then involves major contextual and linguistic stretching and conjecturing to fit into the Hebrew text. The lemming claims are rather wild, especially if they claim a factoid of Solomon-Kue horse trading.
Remember even Rick's NKJV rejects this in favor of the non-existent "Keveh". As mentioned, the many differing geography conjectures and suppositions will get their own posts.
Meanwhile .. does Rick Norris offer his own "true" English Bible for 1 Kings 10:28. naaah
Rick simply has no idea what is the pure word of God.
Shalom,
Steven Avery
Last edited by Steven Avery; 10-22-2009 at 11:20 AM.
This is simply a gross deception. The simple existence of a place called Kue should not be at all suprising. (And without any archaeological indication of horse trading or any trade with Solomon's Israel afaik, please offer any if found.) This then involves major contextual and linguistic stretching and conjecturing to fit into the Hebrew text. The lemming claims are rather wild, especially if they claim a factoid of Solomon-Kue horse trading.
Those who pretend to know what the Hebrew text says, should not start their post with "this is simply a gross deception."
The Hebrew word translated Kue is very close to the actual Hebrew (depending if one pronounces the middle letter vav or waw, both proper). The absurdity of Avery to contend for a particular city carrying the same pronunciation throughout its history is clear. Avery comes from New York... yet, even his own city has been identified with various names in a matter of 300 years.
About the horse trading... why is is difficult to think that Solomon had traded with those in Kue? He had thousands of horses. Solomon had stables in the North (Megiddo) and in the South.
Further, the language of the Hebrew states "from Egypt and from Kue." The two prepositions with the intervening conjunction are clear. There is no conjecturing and no stretching of the Hebrew here. It is plain, simple, Hebrew 101 language. We are simply dealing with a person (Avery) who has no clue what the Hebrew says and he pretends to know.
__________________ Simply observing the floccinoccinihilipilification of the KJVO movement.
First, a note from the superb work of Will Kinney, about linen and flax. This goes with the post with Jonathan Edwards and others. Then some additional references from Matthew Henry to round out the flax-nificance.
Will Kinney
.. ancient Egypt is known for its massive linen exports. Proverbs 7:16 and Ezekiel 27:7 indicate that Egyptian linen was favoured in the ancient world. In a passage that catalogues King Solomon’s collection of the best materials for the temple, it may be unusual if the passage does not mention the import of Egyptian linen. 2 Chronicles 2:14 mentions that linen was one of the materials used for the temple.
2 Chronicles 2:14
The son of a woman of the daughters of Dan, and his father was a man of Tyre, skilful to work in gold, and in silver, in brass, in iron, in stone, and in timber, in purple, in blue, and in fine linen, and in crimson; also to grave any manner of graving, and to find out every device which shall be put to him, with thy cunning men, and with the cunning men of my lord David thy father.
Matthew Henry
Egypt was famous for the linen manufacture; but that trade shall be ruined. Solomon's merchants traded with Egypt for linen-yarn, 1 Kings x. 28. Their country produced the best flax and the best hands to work it; but those that work in fine flax shall be confounded
Matthew Henry here references :
Isaiah 9:9
And all the people shall know,
even Ephraim and the inhabitant of Samaria,
that say in the pride and stoutness of heart,
He opened also a trade with Egypt, whence he imported horses and linen-yarn, which he exported again to the kings of Syria, with great advantage no doubt, v. 16, 17. This we had before, 1 Ki. 10:28, 29. It is the wisdom of princes to promote industry and encourage trade in their dominions. Perhaps Solomon took the hint of setting up the linen-manufacture, bringing linen-yarn out of Egypt, working it into cloth, and then sending that to other nations, from what his mother taught when she specified this as one of the characteristics of the virtuous woman,
She maketh fine linen, and selleth it, and delivereth girdles of it to the merchant, Prov. 31:24.
In all labour there is profit.
Shalom,
Steven Avery
Last edited by Steven Avery; 10-22-2009 at 11:22 AM.
Those who pretend to know what the Hebrew text says, should not start their post with "this is simply a gross deception."
The Hebrew word translated Kue is very close to the actual Hebrew (depending if one pronounces the middle letter vav or waw, both proper). The absurdity of Avery to contend for a particular city carrying the same pronunciation throughout its history is clear. Avery comes from New York... yet, even his own city has been identified with various names in a matter of 300 years.
About the horse trading... why is is difficult to think that Solomon had traded with those in Kue? He had thousands of horses. Solomon had stables in the North (Megiddo) and in the South.
Further, the language of the Hebrew states "from Egypt and from Kue." The two prepositions with the intervening conjunction are clear. There is no conjecturing and no stretching of the Hebrew here. It is plain, simple, Hebrew 101 language. We are simply dealing with a person (Avery) who has no clue what the Hebrew says and he pretends to know.
A certain KJV-only poster seems to attempt to smear a number of documented statements with his false accusation "gross deception."
Would it not be expected that different people would given a different English spelling for a foreign name from the past that had no one accepted English name? KJV-only advocates will attempt to justify different spellings for the name of the same person in the KJV, but they seem to apply a different and double standard to variations in spelling in translations made in different periods of time [in the 1500's and in the 1900's] and by different translators. The spelling of many words in English changed from how they were spelled in the 1500's to today [even the spelling of many words in the 1611 KJV was changed].
Now we will go into some of the translation complexities difficulties that Rick has tried to hide. Tamar on this thread has been forthrigh and informative, although we may disagree on the conclusion.
Until tonight (planned) I will leave you with two quotations on the verses:
"The reading is very uncertain" - Albert Barnes
"The versions are all puzzled" - Adam Clarke
Adam Clarke's quotation can be given a far wider application !
Proper Reformation Bible understanding would include Tyndale's, Coverdale's, and Matthew's Bibles. Tyndale's, Coverdale's, and Matthew's were some of the pre-1611 English Bibles of which the KJV was a revision. Why would a KJV-only poster attempt to smear documented information that agrees with these Reformation Bibles in considering the Hebrew word to be a reference to a geographical place?
attempt to smear a number of documented statements with his false accusation "gross deception." .
The dynamic duo are totally incompetent. The gross deception is claiming that the existence of a city named Kue up north thus means that it must be the Solomon horse-trader.
Remember,
a) no proper name is ever given in any Hebraic commentaries,
b) how the NKJV renders the text.)
c) the Greek OT (socalled LXX) has a different proper name.
d) there are huge difficulties trying to mix and match Egypt and Que, causing all sorts of proposed emendations
We will get into all the difficulties and alterntives and theories later, but an honest writer would simply say something along the line of :
"We have a theory that there was horse-trading from Kue, we have a theory that it was with Solomon's Israel, and we have a theory that it fits into the King's and Chronicle's verses with Egypt. This is simply a possible interpretation, here are some of the reasons why, and the difficulties and alternatives"
However when it comes to Bible correctors, dishonesty is the standard policy.
Shalom,
Steven Avery
Last edited by Steven Avery; 10-22-2009 at 11:59 AM.
Reformation Bible understanding would include Tyndale's ...
The earlier Reformation Bible understanding was a proper noun, with difficulties. The later Reformation Bible understanding, when Hebraics was more advanced, include the Bishops, Geneva, King James Bible, Dutch and Diodati, were generally linen yarn.
Adam Clarke's quotation can be given a far wider application !
Adam Clarke's quotation was made before the discovery of the Assyrian cuneiform records uncovered by archaelogy. This quotation was made before a number of modern English translations were made. You have not even demonstrated that Clarke intended his comment to be directed at Tyndale's, Coverdale's, or Matthew's Bibles. In his commentary, Adam Clarke clearly rejected KJV-only type reasoning or claims.
Bridges and Weigle pointed out: "Kue was the fertile coastal plain in the southeast portion of Asia Minor, known in the New Testament as Cilicia" (KJV Word Book, p. 204). They noted: “Assyrian cuneiform records uncovered by archaelogy have now shown that Tyndale and Coverdale were correct” (Ibid.).
The views and opinions expressed on this web site are not necessarily those of the Fighting Fundamental Forums management. This is an open and unmoderated forum. The content of each post is the sole responsibility of the poster. Participants are expected to follow the simple rules of the forum. Within these wide parameters various views are welcome to be expressed freely.
The college names used on the FundamentalForums.com web site are trademarks of their respective schools. The forums are not officially sanctioned by any of the institutions represented.
a Norris lemming-fest !
Linear Mode
