|
|
HOME
- TABLE OF CONTENTS
- WAR ROOM -
THE GOSPEL
- BIBLE
STUDY - MORAL
ISSUES - KING
JAMES BIBLE - CULTS |
SHOES OR SANDELS?A
study in the alleged contradiction in the King James Bible |
Version | Bible text Matt. 10:10 | Bible text Mark 6:9 | Bible text Luke 10:4 |
All Greek texts (1) | Huperdema (2) | Scandalion (3) | Huperdema |
KJV (4) | Shoes | Sandals | Shoes |
NIV (5) | Sandals | Sandals | Sandals |
NASB (6) | Sandals | Sandals | Shoes |
Living Bible (7) | No extra shoes | No extra shoes | No extra shoes |
NKJV (8) | Sandals | Sandals | Sandals |
(1) Both the Textus Receptus and Nestle's Greek agree on the two Greek words.
(2) HUPERDEMA is a shoe to cover the foot, possibly over the sandals as well. Cf- Matt. 13:11 implies it was carried to use at the destination-- a sort of dress shoe. Acts 13:25 implies it was strapped on. Mark 1:7 & Luke 3:16 indicate it had a latchet. So, this is the nicer dress shoe of Jesus era.
(3) SANDALION is a basic sandal for traveling, a simple foot pad, sometimes tied on. Thus, sandals were required in Mark 6:9. Dress shoes were forbidden in Matthew and Luke. This would be the Nike walking or traveling shoe of today, while the HUPERDEMA would be the dress shoe into which you changed before the meeting where you were to appear.
(4) The KJV gives the clear and NON-contradictory distinction of two kinds of foot wear. There is no contradiction! Any "scholar" with a pair of wing tips should be able to get this one.
(5) The NIV provides the Edinburgh and Dallas Seminary textual critics with a grand case for a contradiction.
(6) The NASB damns itself, showing that it knows the distinction, but it plans to muddy the waters. So much for the claim that the NASB is more true to the Greek than other recent versions. It makes even more certain that the alleged contradiction is not answerable.
(7) Ken Taylor, trying to correct the "contradiction," shows that he believes there is an error. This serves the critics very well. They can claim his correction of the Bible as highly incriminating proof that it was needed.
(8)
The NKJV makes all three the same, so it points to a contradiction in the text.
Wicked!
The Conclusion:
Again, make a jerk and a fool of yourself if you like-- Just get a load of scholarship, an NIV, and a proud look. Trash a few Bible texts, then go around to some old hill Billy who loves the old King James, and that old fella will gladly rub your ever lovin' nose in it.
Presented by: Pastor Steve Van Nattan
BACK TO BIBLE STUDY AND SERMONS PAGE
BACK TO KING JAMES BIBLE DEFENSE MENU PAGE
BACK TO ENTRY PAGE OF THE JOURNAL
ge