The King James Bible Research Council, Inc.
A Council of
Fundamental Bible Believers with A Passion For Promoting The King James Bible
and Other Traditional Texts In A Sound and Sensible Way
Email: KJB.Research.Council@gmail.com Web: www.kjbresearchcouncil.com
Blog: http:/kjbrc.blogspot.com FaceBook:
www.facebook.com/KJBRC
Address: P.O. Box 173, Oak Creek Wisconsin 53154 Phone: 414-768-9754
President – Dr. David L. Brown Vice President – Dr. Phil Stringer
Volume
1 Number003
Which
Reading of John 9:4 Is Correct?
by David L. Brown, Ph.D.
Recently
I was asked a question concerning John
9:4, which reads like this in the King
James Bible – “I must work the works of him that sent me, while it is day: the night
cometh, when no man can work.” The question was, why the different reading in
other versions. I want to briefly answer that question and tell you why it
makes a BIG difference?
The NIV reads – “As
long as it is day, we must do
the works of him who sent me. Night is coming, when no one can work.”
NASB
reads – “We must work the works of Him who sent Me as
long as it is day; night is coming when no one can work.”
ESV reads – “We must work the works of
him who sent me while it is day; night is coming, when no one can work.
The
New King James reads - “I[a]
must work the works of Him who sent Me while it is day; the night
is coming when no one can work.” However, in the footnotes undercut the reading
by saying [a] the
NU (Nestles-United Bible Society) reads We.
The New
Living Bible reads - “We
must quickly carry out the tasks assigned us by the one who sent us.”
Let me say, that the overwhelming majority of
Greek Manuscript Evidence supports the King James Bible reading - –
“I must
work the works of him that sent me,
while it is day: the night cometh, when no man can work.”
Scrivner
Greek New Testament reads - John 9:4 εμε (eme
= I, me )
δει εργαζεσθαι…
Byzantine Greek New Testament
reads - John 9:4 εμε(eme
= I, me)
δει εργαζεσθαι…
The
corruption occurs, as you might guess in Westcott-Hort Greek New Testament,
which the Nestles and United Bible Society Greek New Testaments follow. John 9:4 reads
this way in them - ημας (hemas=us, we)
δει εργαζεσθαι…
Where
did Westcott & Hort come up with that reading? The corrupt reading occurs
in Sinaiticus, Vaticanus P66 and P75. But there is more. Instead of “him that sent ME” which is even the reading of Vaticanus (and so in the
NASB, NIV & ESV), Sinaiticus, P66 and 75 actually say “of him that sent US.” This reading is beginning
to appear in the modern versions, such as the New Living Translation.
These changes corrupt doctrine! - When “I must work the works of him that sent me” is changed to "We
must work the works of him that sent us."
The uniqueness of Christ as the Sent One of the Father is destroyed and He is
placed equally with the disciples as sent from God to do the work of God. This is an attack on the Person and Work
of Christ . Jesus was sent by the Father and the disciples were sent by
Jesus, "as my Father hath sent me, even so send I you."
The correct reading is “I must
work the works of him that sent me,
while it is day: the night cometh, when no man can work.”
This is just one example of
many showing how the Word of God is being undermined today.
DO YOU BELIEVE WHAT YOU PROCLAIM?
ReplyDeleteMany believers proclaim certain things that they believe to be factual, but do their actions comport with their assertions?
Example number one: Many claim that the 1611 version of the King James Bible is the only accurate English translation of the Bible. The problem is the original 1611 King James Bible contained 80 books. The 14 books of the apocrypha were included in the original 1611 King James Version. The so-called 1611 King James Bible found in most book stores is actually the 1769 King James Version with the 14 apocryphal books removed.
King James only advocates do not read the original 1611 King James Bible.
Example number two: Faith only believers deny that water baptism is not essential in order to become saved. They discredit what Jesus said in Mark 16:16 "...and is baptized will be saved," by saying that because some of the earliest manuscripts did not have Mark 16:9-20, therefore Mark 16:16 should not be included in the Bible.
If they really believe that Mark 16:9-20 should not be in the Bible, then they should take scissors and cut it out of their Bibles. Does this happen? I doubt that it does.
Example number three: More than a few who deny the water baptism is for the forgiveness of sins say that Acts 2:38 has been mistranslated. They state that the Greek "eis" translated -for- the forgiveness of sins should have been translated -because of- the forgiveness of sins. I know of no translation that translates "eis" as -because of, in Acts 2:38. I have checked out 60+ translations.
If men believe the Greek "eis" in Acts 2:38 should have been translated as because of, then they should take a black maker and blot out -for- and write in- because of. Does this happen? I would guess it does not.
DO MEN REALLY BELIEVE WHAT THEY PROCLAIM TO BE TRUE?
YOU ARE INVITED TO FOLLOW MY CHRISTIAN BLOG. Google search>>> steve finnell a view