I have to wonder. You say you have no agenda, and only wish to put forth facts. But you miss the mark so often. In all the reading I have done, there were 54 men first chosen. Some did die before the translation was complete.
"All the reading you have done" simply isn't enough:54 men
were chosen, only 47 participated in the translation. They were organized into three groups at Westminster, Oxford and Cambridge. Each group was divided into subgroups, and those subgroups were assigned chapters of the Bible. They were charged from the onset under certain rules, the first of which hampered them:
1. The ordinary Bible read in the Church, commonly called the Bishops Bible, to be followed, and as little altered as the Truth of the original will permit.
This is, of course, the english translation of 1568, followed by the Church of England, and revised in 1577.
It
sucks.
All were linguists, and adept in at one of the two languages; Greek or Hebrew.
Their Greek was apparently okay-and only okay-they also relied upon the Vulgate for numerous passages. Where they weren't satisfied with what the Bishop's bible said, they had a pre-approved list of English translations to consult, including Tyndale. The product of 1611 was also revised in 1760 and 1769-the Bible you know as the KJV was revised by one man, Benjamin Blaney, who mistakenly assumed that the committees had used the 1550 edition of the Textus Receptus, rather than a later one, and made something like 20,000 changes to that book that you believe those committees were blessed and moved by God to tranlsate.
Can you show where Aramaic survived to the 1600s? If there were Aramaic which was considered inspired and preserved, they would have certainly used it.
I asked you about it:
Matthew 27:46
King James Version (KJV)
[SUP]46[/SUP]And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?
OF course, the phrase that was supposed to be uttered in Aramaic, is transliterated in Greek, phonetically.
There you go again. The KJV says, in
Matthew 28:1, "In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week,
came
Mary Magdalene and the other
Mary to see the sepulchre." In other words, the sabbath was ended, the time being "... as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week... " When you say the Bible says something, you really should specify which translation/version you are talking about. There are many. I only believe in the KJV. You can believe in another if you wish. That is your right. But to be honest, you need to say which version it is you are referring to. Not all who say they are Christians agree on the correct version of the Bible. But I believe in the KJV and will only try to defend it.
Here ya go:
Matthew 28:1
King James Version (KJV)
Matthew 28
[SUP]1[/SUP]In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre.
The end of the sabbath is sunset on Saturday, not sunrise on Sunday, when they went to see.......
I can't really comment of this. I don't have enough understanding of Greek. But considering your current track record, I am sure there is a good and reasonable explanation. My Greek/English interlinear Bible does translate as 'For a root' but I think is has something to do with the use or lack of use of the definite article in Greek.
I took Homeric Greek, Latin and Hebrew in high school-I'm the victim of a classical education. :lol: At one time, my father thought my facility for languages would make me a good minister........ I took koine Greek and Aramaic in college, virtually at the same time as high school-really, I got my degree at the end of the summer after I graduated from HS.
I'm not showing off-I'm telling you that I don't
need a Grfeek/English inrilinear Bible, or even a Greek/English dictionary. Greek has definite articles-we used some in reference to "tekton,"-and it's
"a root", which subtly changes the meaning....
I
really could go on like this all day,
really.
Well, I can hardly wait, so please tell us (and from the KJV) and how it means that Jesus was married?
Matthew 23:8
But be not ye called
Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren
John 1:38
Then Jesus turned, and saw them following, and saith unto them, What seek ye? They said unto him,
Rabbi, (which is to say, being interpreted, Master,) where dwellest thou?
John 1:49
Nathanael answered and saith unto him,
Rabbi, thou art the Son of God; thou art the King of Israel.
John 3:2
The same came to Jesus by night, and said unto him,
Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from God: for no man can do these miracles that thou doest, except God be with him.
John 6:25
And when they had found him on the other side of the sea
, they said unto him,
Rabbi, when camest thou hither?
And maybe I'd leave it to Canuck, but "Rabbi" is a title that doesn't merely mean "teacher," it's applied to
married men, and Christ, as depicted in the Gospels, was indeed a
rabbi-how else would he come to teach in a temple?
Matthew 13:54
King James Version (KJV)
[SUP]
54[/SUP]And when he was come into his own country, he taught them in their synagogue, insomuch that they were astonished, and said, Whence hath this man this wisdom, and these mighty works?
Jesus was married.