[Steven Avery]

Hi Folks,

The companion thread to this is :

http://av1611.com/forums/showthread.php?t=932
integrity accusations - subtile alexandrians at work

That thread is more for discussion of the overview of dealing with the wiles and woolies of the cornfuseniks. Understanding their tactics, sharing the pure Bible against their attempts to paint every ploughman's Bible as impure. While this thread is meant more for the straightforward analysis, although open discussion is welcome.

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.

James Price and William Combs made this verse their battleground "best case" attack on the King James Bible. Here are the accusations.

James Price

Emendations with No Support from Ancient Versions

"The MT, supported by the LXX, Vulgate, and Targum reads 'captured' "
King James Onlyism: A New Sect p. 288 - James Price

(this was the first listing, and he marketed this as his best, through the following William Combs "indisputable error" strangeness)

William Combs
... the KJV was based on the Second Bomberg Edition of 1525 edited by Jacob ben Chayyim. However, on occasion the translators did not follow the Hebrew/Aramaic text before them.

The following example was supplied to me by Dr. James D. Price, who is currently producing a manuscript on this subject.

For instance, in Isaiah 13:15 the KJV reads “joined” (“every one that is joined unto them shall fall by the sword”). There is no support for this reading in any Hebrew manuscript, text, ancient version, or rabbinic tradition. Instead, the correct reading is “captured” (“anyone who is captured will fall by the sword,” NASB). Possibly, the KJV translators misread one Hebrew letter for another, mistaking the word sapah, “capture,” for sapah, “join.” Whatever the case, the reading of the KJV is not the reading of the autographs and is thus an indisputable error.
Errors in the King James Version? - DBSJ 4 (Fall 1999): 151–64
(Detroit Baptist Seminary Journal)

=======================================

And we can break down this accusation into three parts.

========================

EVIDENCE OFFERED

no support for this reading in any Hebrew manuscript, text, ancient version, or rabbinic tradition - Combs
The MT, supported by the LXX, Vgt., and Tgm., reads "captured," - James Price

THEORY OF TRANSLATION ERROR

"The translators misread one Hebrew letter for another" - James Price
"Possibly, the KJV translators misread one Hebrew letter for another" - William Combs

RESULT

"indisputable error" - William Combs
"emendation of the MT with no support from ancient versions" - James Price

========================

Wow. Powerful accusations. This is supposed to be "without controversy" .. like "God was manifest in the flesh ...." (Wait ... Price and Combs might want to controvert that as not scripture.)

Anyway, we are supposed to have an "indisputable error" ? Must be a powerful case to make that claim, don't you think ?

Well .. this thread will be doing a spot of examination.

Notice that Price and Combs do not give the reader much to go by. In the alexandrian cult the lemmings are supposed to simply take the word of their leaders who tell them that no Bible is truly pure. Their non-faith is supposed to be taken by faith as truth.

The Combs paper even passed a Journal "peer review" . If you don't laugh at that now, come back to this post when all the evidences are in. Watch their "best case" turn into a "textbook case" of alexandrian bumbling incompetence (and that is putting it nicely and mildly).

Shalom,
Steven Avery.