Fulfilled Prophecy

To be fair to Buz, I suggest that you check other translations, Jar. So far as I know the explicit naming of Nineveh in Nahum 1, apart from 1:1, is only found in the NIV. The Amplified Bible does add referecnes to Nineveh - but in squared brackets to indicate that they are not part of the explicit text.That aside, although the references seem not to be explicit in the original text, they are certainly justified by the context. I can't see a good reason to say that Nahum 1:11-14 refer to any other place, given the explicit statement of Nahum 1:1.If Buz wants to argue otherwise - and he needs to if he wants to preserve his case - he'll need more than he's come up with so far. And he'll need to explain why his reading should be accepted over that of the compilers of the NASB, the Amplified Bible and the NIV. A bit of a difficult task when he doesn't even have a viable alternative reading.

That is the NIV version spidey.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

I agree. But the NIV does explicitly point out that it is Nineveh that is that is the reference.The key here is that it is NOT me, or you, or spidey, or ringo or any of the others that Buz has accused of ignoring his blather, but rather the compilers of the NIV Bible who think Nahum really is an Oracle Concerning Nineveh. Also, as you said, the compilers of the AMP and NASB also read Nahum the same way as the compilers of the NIV.Buz said... Well, the NIV does mention Nineveh after verse 1.I will be happy to continue to Chapter 2 if Buz wishes to really see if there are any end time prophecies in Nahum.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

How is not your NIV bible version not an example conselling wickedness as mentioned in Nahum 1:11. The word HOLY has not been excised from the authorized King James Bible it has from the NIV bible.This is part of the problem with the interpretion of scripture is that these bible versions have been substituted for the HOLY BIBLE so while you profess to be Christians you are not using a HOLY BIBLE. In Fact the word Holy too has been excised from the NIV. The feminizing of the bible where you mention God as she can show anger is simply because you are using a counterfiet bible one that perverts the bible including the virgin birth by changing the Words to say the Childs Father when the Word says that Joseph and his mother marvelled at those things which were spoken by him.---------------------The NIV perverts the virgin birth!LUKE 2:33: The King James Bible reads, "And JOSEPH and his mother marvelled at those things which were spoken of him." The NIV reads, "The CHILD'S FATHER and mother marveled at what was said about him." The "CHILD'S FATHER"? Was Joseph Jesus's father? Not if you believe the virgin birth! Not if you believe John 3:16, that Jesus Christ was the Son of God! A subtil, "perversion" of the virgin birth. See also Luke 2:43.NIV ExposedEdited by Charley, : No reason given.Edited by Charley, : No reason given.Edited by Charley, : No reason given.

Interesting. It seems it is not the only version that replaces Ioseph with 'father'. I was surprised to see it even happens in the Vulgate!

quote:

---

et erat pater eius et mater mirantes super his quae dicebantur de illo

---

I thought there must be a good reason why the catholics used father here. Looks like they got this from the NU-text rather than the M-Text. I concur with my first sentiment...interesting.

Perhaps. I certainly don't read a word of those languages, obviously, so I don't know. I guess I just had an idea the other night that perhaps, as languages change over time and old words are co-opted to name new technologies (like "calculator), old statements not meant to be prophetic might become so.For instance, a statement like "I see calculators in powerful people's pockets" written in the 1800's might appear to be a prediction of microprocessor technology, when really all that the writer meant to say was that he had evidence of corruption among accountants and their office staff. In other words, appearance of prophecy might simply be a trick of shifting language over time.

You make an important and valid point that we MUST consider the purpose of the authors. One example often cited is prophecy of Jules Verne. In "From the Earth to the Moon" we can find some extraordinary "prophecies".The launch site is in Florida.The cost when converted to 1969 dollars is pretty close to the cost of the Apollo 11 flight (excluding of course all the costs of earlier flights and infrastructure).He named his vehicle Columbiad while the Apollo 11 effort was dubbed Columbia.In the story and Apollo 11 there were three passengers.Both vehicles splashed down in the ocean.BUT ...was Jules Verne writing prophecy, or just a good humorous story he hoped to sell?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Havign done a little investigation it seems that this is not a translation difference - it is due to a difference in the Greek texts. The Nestle-Aland text has "pathr", meaning father.It looks to me as if the NIV translators did the right thing in this instance.

Let it be noted that the New International Version was produced by evangelicals.I knew those people were up to no good!___

that's why i was asking. they're not in my jps, my kjv, or my masoretic hebrew. i think it's somewhat obvious -- from the introduction and the rest of the book -- who the "you" is. the context definitally indicates nineveh.

---

no, i don't think so. the context of luke has the virgin birth as part of the overall story. changing one word doesn't particularly change the context.

---

i really don't trust the niv. it reads pretty well, but they change around too much to get it to make sense easily. they're a little too idiomatic for my tastes. while nineveh is clearly indicated from the context, randomly inserting the name when it is not present in the original is not exactly honest translation technique.Edited by AdminModulous, : editing tags- dbcodes and html tags aren't able to close each other!

---

FYI, the NIV (New International Version) is one of the more liberal translations so far as acuracy goes. Why? A few decades ago when I lived in Escondido, Ca, while the NIV was being translated, one of the translators spoke in our church. He made a very disturbing statement, imo, which went something like this: "We are not so much interested in the accuracy of the translation as we are in the message." The disturbing thing about this to me was that these NIV translators were introducing their interpretation of the message into the text rather than to do what good and accurate translators do, i.e, translate the text, keeping what the text/manuscript says without adding names and other data not in the text. Let the reader be the interpreter of what he/she is reading and let not it be programmed into the thinking of the readers by translators. All kinds of bias and ideological bents corrupt translations which deviate from what is written as is the case here. Thus, the NIV has come to be replaced by the NASV in the majority of the fundamentalist churches in recent years. I have done extensive comparison of the translations and I find the ASV to be the most literal tranlation to the Alexandrian Text, the text which contains the oldes of the manuscripts. Btw, fyo, the NIV was also taken from this same Alexandrian (sometimes referred to as Nestlies) text for the most part. Compare it with the ASV and you see how liberal the NIV translators were in adding to and taking away from the literal message of the text.I suggest if one really wants to know the truth about what chapter one of Nahum says, you go to Google and read the ASV on it. If you don't like that, go to the KJ (King James,) the NASV (New American Standard Version) or some of the mainline more literal translations and you will see that Ninevah is not in the events of chapter one. Other places are named, including Judah, Lebanon, Bashan, Carmel, the seas, the mountains, the earth, "the earth is upheaved, at his presence, yea the world and all that dwell therein." (ASV)Then in the remaining verses of chapter one you see a number of "thee"s, the last of which implies to whom the "thees" refer. It goes in verse 15: "Keep thy feasts, O Judah, perform thy vows; for the wicked one shall no more pass through thee; he is utterly cut off. The latter day prophets like Zechariah, et al prophesy that after the last battle which will be Armageddon in the Valley of Jehosaphat at the river Kedron near Jerusalem where the nations are gathered against Jerusalem, the Judah and the nations will be required to keep some of the feasts of Jehovah in the new messianic kingdom.Chapter one, folks, is a segue end time prophecy segued in there to proclaim to Ninevah that they, like the other world enemies of Judah and Jerusalem would eventually all be taken out. Even if some of the "thees" in chapter one may be interpreted as addressing Nineveh, the events named in chapter one do not refer to Ninevah. They clearly apply to the peoples specified in them.Note, that in the original text, chapters and verses did not exist They were added in tranlating for specification as the early translators saw fit to their liking. I see the chariots of chapter two as descriptive of something far different than in ancient days. Their ways were not broadways. They were only as fast as a horse. They had no purpose or reason to crash in the "broadways" in battle. For the most part they were not of steel. If they were, they wouldn't have burned as the burning chariots pertaing to Ninevah in verse 13 of chapter 2. and though torches may have been used on occasion, they were pretty much daytime vehicles, et al.Then in chapter 2 beginning with verse 7 or so, Ninevah is addressed directly as to their demise by Jehovah via nations he rises up for his purposes, whatever they be.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW ---- Jesus said, "When these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draws near." Luke 21:28

The point is Buz that it is not the folk here that disagree with you but even those translating the Bible.I will point out that unlike in my message you do not bother posting things in context.Are we ready to go on to Chapter 2?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Well, I'm not going to try and convince anyone of anything, the thread is just going round in circles now so I'd just like to add some information. These are from some commentaries found on Blue Letter Bible.Chuck Smith - Pastor of Calvary Chapel seems to be of the opinion that Nahum is basically about Ninevah, not the end of the world.

quote:

---

The message is that of God's judgment that is going to come against Nineveh and against the Assyrian empire. A hundred years plus earlier, Jonah had been called to Nineveh. But the people of Nineveh repented at the preaching of Jonah, and Nineveh was spared for another hundred and fifty years or so. But now God is proclaiming the judgment that is gonna come against Nineveh and against Assyria.

---

Pastor David Guzik (Calvary) also agrees that is about Ninevah and not the end of the world.Pastor Ray Stedman (Peninsula Bible Church) says the same things.

quote:

---

As we begin this book it is important to know why and at whom God is so angry. this prophecy is directed against the city of Nineveh to whom God sent the prophet Jonah.

---

Matthew Henry, that famous commentator concurs :

quote:

---

even this prophet, though wholly taken up in foretelling the destruction of Nineveh, which speaks terror to the Assyrians, is, even in that, comforter to the ten tribes of Israel, who, it is probable, were now lately carried captives into Assyria.

---

Finally, A. R. FAUSSET says:

quote:

---

as the prophet advances, vengeance on the capital of the Assyrian foe is the predominant topic...

​

...The prophecy is remarkable for its unity of aim. Nahum's object was to inspire his countrymen, the Jews, with the assurance that, however alarming their position might seem, exposed to the attacks of the mighty Assyrian, who had already carried away the ten tribes, yet that not only should the Assyrian (Sennacherib) fail in his attack on Jerusalem, but Nineveh, his own capital, be taken and his empire overthrown; and this, not by an arbitrary exercise of Jehovah's power, but for the iniquities of the city and its people.

---

Other commentaters agree - my own reading concurs. Buz has failed to convince me that this is end time prophecy in any sense no matter how much I squint. Hopefully others will find these commentaries interesting or useful.Edited by Modulous, : No reason given.