[Steven Avery]

Hi Folks,

The Hebrew word is nispeh, 'joined' in the pure Bible. The accusation is that this word really must mean 'captured' and it was misread in the KJB as another word nispach meaning 'joined'. Thus, under this theory, nispeh should not at all legitimately mean joined.

Isaiah 13:15
Every one that is found shall be thrust through;
and every one that is joined unto them shall fall by the sword.

The first obvious consideration is the other English Bibles of the period. The Geneva, Coverdale, Rheims, etc. Surely they could not have the same accidental oversight error ? A special mass one-word fuzziness that envelopes readers over decades or centuries ? Well, let's go to the videotape.

Verses from studylight.org.

Miles Coverdale (1535)
Who so is founde alone,
shalbe shot thorow:
And who so gather together,
shalbe destroyed wt the swerde.

Bishops Bible (1568)
Whoso is founde shalbe shot thorowe:
and whoso taketh their part,
shalbe destroyed with the sworde.

Geneva (1587)
Euery one that is founde,
shall be striken through:
and whosoeuer ioyneth himselfe,
shal fal by the sworde.

Here is the updated Geneva.

Geneva (updated English)
Everyone that is found,
shall be stricken through:
and whosoever joineth himself,
shall fall by the sword.

The two Latin translations translate closely.
To cometh about, to come to their aid - very close to join themselves.

Wycliffe (1395)
Ech man that is foundun, schal be slayn;
and ech man that cometh aboue,
schal falle doun bi swerd.

Rheims NT (1582)
Every one that shall be found, shall be slain:
and every one that shall come to their aid,
shall fall by the sword.

Wow. So this wasn't just a King James Bible misreading ? The excellent scholars of Geneva (world-class like those of Oxford and Cambridge) also made the exact same error !

And I actually asked James Price about this, when writing to him about some of the evidences. Did Price reconsider his theory ? Naaahhh.

In fact I had even added the literal translation by Robert Young (known from Young's Analytical Concordance). How did the supposed vision-reading problem go forward centuries ? As well as backwards ?

Young's Literal Translation (1862)
Every one who is found is thrust through,
And every one who is added falleth by sword.

Here is the James Price response !

"The pre-KJV editions indicate that the misreading was made before 1611 by Coverdale ... The Geneva translators evidently reworked Coverdale uncritically on this verse. The KJV translators followed Geneva without checking it out; this happened at times as the evidence indicates. I cannot speak for Young."

Geneva "reworked Coverdale uncritically" .. . Clearly they translated afresh, their text is quite different, they had world-class Hebrew scholars, however Price needs a Cover (dale) Story.

Today, I just noticed the "I cannot speak for Young" classic line. Hmm... top scholar James Price .. maybe you should think a little bit. If even Robert Young, on top of every Bible of the Reformation period, agrees with the King James Bible on the meaning of nispeh in Isaiah 13:15 .. maybe your theory is a tad on the flimsy side.

(And wait, there is a lot more.)

Earlier, when I first noticed this verse, I had tried corresponding to James Price, figuring a "scholar" would have no problem seeing that the claim did not wash and making a correction. Boy, was I mistaken on that one !

Shalom,
Steven Avery