[Steven Avery]

Originally Posted by Greektim

why the KJV translators decided to transate a plural word as a singular .. a misleading effect on the interpretation of the Kingdom of the heavens.

Hi GT,

First, let us see what verses you are referencing. Apparently you mean all the 30+ verses in Matthew that use the phrase. We will use Matthew 18:1 as an example.

Matthew 18:1
At the same time came the disciples unto Jesus, saying,
Who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven?

We notice first that virtually every English translation agrees on "kingdom of heaven". So you are accusing every team of translators of getting it wrong, making the mistake of translating a plural as a singular.

Now we know that in Hebrew often a word in a plural form is properly translated as a singular. Including shamayim, heaven (or heavens, depending on context and accompanying words). In languages in general, plurals and singulars are often properly adjusted in translation. Simple example, one that I know reasonably well, Isaiah 53:9 in the Tanach (OT) where the plural form "with the rich in his death(s)" is indicating an intensity, not a plural of number. Likely from Greek to English there are frequently similar proper translation aspects.

Here was the discussion on the b-greek forum, showing this point.

http://www.ibiblio.org/bgreek/test-a...-11/33992.html
> why can't the phrase TWN OURANWN be translated as a plural?

... the normal understanding is that Matthew uses the genitive plural OURANWN where the general practice elsewhere is to use the singular genitive OURANOU is that the Hebrew dual form for heaven, SHAMAYYIM is being expressed by the plural ... Hebraisms seem more common in Matthew, and Matthew regularly does use BASILEIA TWN OURANWN rather than BASILEIA TOU OURANOU.

More discussion along similar lines here, with another translational aspect added.

http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/b...ne/021580.html
Re: Mt 3:2, 4:17

Another related aspect was discussed here.

http://www.ibiblio.org/bgreek/test-a...-11/33996.html
what I think we have here (with BASILEIA TWN OURANWN) is simply a translation of a semitic circumlocution, which simply functions as a synonym to BASILEIA TOU QEOU.

GT, whether you personally agree with virtually every Greek Bible translator in history or not, I think your idea that there is some sort of hidden doctrinal agenda involved is unsupportable.

Shalom,
Steven