Elsie: I'm glad the KJV doesn't do this. (Post #220)
In translating verse 10 the KJV does not do this, nor for verse 9, either.
For a deeper understanding of the complexities attendant in comparing translational philosophies of the formal equivalency (KJV, ASV) versus "dynamic" equivalency (NIV, TEV) kinds, I commend to you the paperback "ACCURACY OF TRANSLATION: The Primary Criterion in Evaluating Bible Versions with special reference to the New international Version" by Robert P. Martin (Banner of Truth Trust, Carlisle, PA), 89 pages still available for less than $10 at Christian book stores or online at, say, Amazon (click here). In it, the author analyzes the dynamic elements introduced and aggravated by version like the NIV:
1. The elimination of complex grammatical structures
2. The addition of words in translation 4. The erosion of the Bible's technical terminology
5. The leveling of cultural distinctives
6. The presentation of the interpretation of Scripture as though it were Scripture
7. The paraphrasing of the biblical text
This is one of the books I have read from cover to cover in my study for several years of this debate. The Amazon site includes three reader evaluations a the botttom of the page. Read them.
I've read the gospels; where many events of Jesus' life were recorded.
It appears; on the surface; that the 'formal equivalency' of what ACTUALLY happened is much less important than the '"dynamic" equivalency' seen in comparing them.
Since the Bible has NO modern language that has the same structure or vocabulary today; the BEST we can do; for those who have neither the time or the inclination to be versed in the ancient ones; is to make the best that we can.
I want to know just what the author(s) were trying to get across.
I'd lay good money that on the day of Pentecost, all the hearers UNDERSTOOD the message in their own language and were not worried about whether there were 2,999 other folks in the group or maybe 3,023 of them.