Thread: 1611 vs 1769
View Single Post
Old 07-06-2009, 10:21 AM
Critical Thinking
Posts: n/a

Originally Posted by bibleprotector View Post
... Almost all these above cases clearly fall into the category of typographical errors in the first printing of 1611. ...
Mostly I agree with you. The information in the top half of your post is closer to the mark.

Originally Posted by bibleprotector View Post
* Matthew 14:9 – “the othes sake” vs. “the oath’s sake”

This is utter foolishness, in that apostrophes were not used in 1611, and clearly ONE oath was made, not multiple ones, which is the suggestion of some who rely upon book-learning of the Greek. ...
It is true that possessive apostrophes were not in standardized use at that time. However, I think you are wrong about the word's number; it is plural, not singular. The associated Greek article confirms it is plural. It has exactly the same Greek form as found in Matthew 5:33 which is rendered "oaths" (plural). One possible way of looking at it: one statement was spoken, but it was accepted by multiple people.