Dear people. Let me just quickly say this first. I’m not a religious person, and hope to, partialy through this webforum, find my answers regarding religion, and the way it moves people.
Now to get to my first question on this forum. This question is devided into two parts.
This has to do with Exodus 20:13, Matthew 18:19 and others.
I read this statement not to long ago and this sparked my inquiry.
“Ex 20:13 reads, “You shall not murder.” Not all killing is murder”
I was quite astonished to read this. You may ask why, and I would reply the following;
The english translation of the Holy Bible is the only translation where, in Exodus 20:13, Matthew 18:19, and others it states “Thou Shalt Do No Murder” Whereas all other translations of the Bible, may it be Dutch, German, Latin, Italian, Spanish, it states “Thou shalt not Kill”. Now I am not a language scholar and I have to rely on the help of others to translate some pieces, but if I’m correct the original relevant words for these pieces of text in the Bible come for Hebrew. The relevant Hebrew words in these texts are, for Exodus 20:13 “ratsach” (see www/blueletterbible.org/tmp_dir/words/7/1122783815-6579.html)). And the relevant Greek word in Matthew 18:19 is “phoneuo” (see blueletterbible.org/tmp_dir/words/5/1122783467-7726.html)
The classic King James version of the Bible does, also in english, state “Thou shalt not Kill”. Now I’m wondering how the author of that statement can state the explenation that not all killing is murder. Why is it then that the english version is the only translations that states it this way?
and this brings my to another question. Apparently a change has been made from the classic King james version to the modern version of the Holy Bible. Now how is it that, and correct me if I’m wrong, nobody questions the fact that if differences can be made to the bible now that this could have happend just as easily in the past? Just a few years ago, the dutch version of the bible was changed. It previously stated that christ, after being born, was to lay to rest in a crib. Now it states that christ was to lay to rest on a bail of hay (english??? sorry). Now ofcourse it is able to draw different conclusions from each statement. Now as I’ve understood taking conclusions from pieces of text in the bible is done very easily. How is it nobidy questions these chages, or questions the fact that changes could have been made in the future?