Very good post ,dear friend. The KJV is a mess or errors and you just touched upon another.
I'm pinging Kosta 50 to this because he has brought KJV error into the light many times
“Very good post ,dear friend. The KJV is a mess or errors and you just touched upon another.
I’m pinging Kosta 50 to this because he has brought KJV error into the light many times”
********************************************************************************
Kosta50? The same kosta50 who is a self-professed agnostic?
The same kosta50 who argues against the deity of Christ?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2495846/posts?page=2766#2766
You trust his discernment on spiritual matters?
No wonder the Catholic church is such a mess.
There was a Catholic priest when I was in junior high who questioned the virgin birth. How he got far enough along to be ordained is beyond me. However, he didn’t last long after that sermon, to that parish’s credit, which is more than I can say about whoever ordained him.
Post-Christian Masoretic text agrees with the pre-Christian Qumran (Dead Sea) Scrolls to a very high degree. They also agree (to a lesser extent) with the Septuagint. Trouble is, pre-Chirtsian Septuagint doesn't exist, except in some fragments spanning more than two centuries. Post-Chritsian era Septuagints also don't exist. What we have is a little bit of one and a little bit of the other...but we really don't know what the "original" Septuagint contained.
The Torah (Pentateuch) portion of the Septuagint agrees very well with the MT, but the rest doesn't. Cerveza's argument about Isa 7:14 is a separate issue, but ti is true that KJV departs form the MT and uses the Septuagint in verse 7:14. This is nothing new in the manipulative doctrinally "adjusted" editions of various Bibles.
But, Even if it is about a "virgin," it is irrelevant because Isaiah 7 is not about Jesus. That much is obvious to anyone who has actually read the whole chapter.
_____
As for Harley's unsuccessful search for the Greek word "victim," Christ is most definitely considered a victim, but you won't find it in the Reformed Bibles and reformed Random Verse Generators because it clashes with the Deformed Protestant theology! So, it's doctrinally inadmissible and therefore expunged. (more biblical manipulations) From the Reformed point of view, God demanded, indeed preordained, Christ as the just propitiation, so how could Christ then be a "victim!"
This may come as a shock to the Paul-worshiping crowd, but it was none other than him who introduced the word hilestarion (Roman 3:25) among other plentiful innovations, which means an expiatory sacrifice or an expiatory victim.
In general, the term "victim" also means "sacrifice" in Greek (thusia, prosphora); also Greek-derived Church Slavonic zhertva, or hebrew pecach. If you think about it, a sin offering was an innocent specimen (by definition a victim) offered in place of the guilty one! The Gospel of Luke makes it very clear that Christ's death was supreme injustice, because he was the last man on earth who deserved to die.
Even the idea that Christ offered himself as ransom as an act of supreme mercy is also an act of supreme injustice, because mercy and justice are diametrically opposite.
All this changed when Anselm (11th century) introduced the ridiculous notion of "satisfaction of divine justice " theology of atonement, making Christ's suffering and death a vicarious satisfaction of the divine "justice."
HA! Our friend Kosta doesn't even believe in the existance of the full Septuagint as he just posted. Are you willing to take that stand?