John 14:2 does anyone know why the wording was changed in KJV of the Bible?

.oldschool

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2020
Messages
118
Reaction score
80
Points
53
Strong's 3438 - μονή - translates to abode. Literal translations of the Bible render the Greek as rooms or dwelling places.

Mansions seems exclusive to KJV, and in part derives from the Middle English word Manse (from the Latin mansus, denoting house or dwelling). Mansion is just a rectory or vicarage, not actually a large estate.

To my mind, μονή denotes dwelling with the Father for all the saints, who are priests in the kingdom.
Thanks. It makes sense that the definition of "mansion" has changed over a couple thousand years. The sentence "In my Father's house are many mansions" just seemed odd to me.
KJV translators took mansion from the Latin Vulgate.

14:2 In domo Patris mei mansiones multæ sunt; si quominus dixissem vobis: quia vado parare vobis locum.

 

norwegen

Platinum Member
Joined
Dec 22, 2013
Messages
8,881
Reaction score
3,618
Points
390
Location
Ormond Beach, FL
Strong's 3438 - μονή - translates to abode. Literal translations of the Bible render the Greek as rooms or dwelling places.

Mansions seems exclusive to KJV, and in part derives from the Middle English word Manse (from the Latin mansus, denoting house or dwelling). Mansion is just a rectory or vicarage, not actually a large estate.

To my mind, μονή denotes dwelling with the Father for all the saints, who are priests in the kingdom.
Thanks. It makes sense that the definition of "mansion" has changed over a couple thousand years. The sentence "In my Father's house are many mansions" just seemed odd to me.
Yes, that mansions would be inside a house is odd. But then house isn't really a house - the house of David, the house of Israel, etc.

Likewise, mansions aren't really mansions (and rooms aren't really rooms). Even so, mansion is another mistranslation in the KJV. I don't recommend the KJV.
 

norwegen

Platinum Member
Joined
Dec 22, 2013
Messages
8,881
Reaction score
3,618
Points
390
Location
Ormond Beach, FL
Strong's 3438 - μονή - translates to abode. Literal translations of the Bible render the Greek as rooms or dwelling places.

Mansions seems exclusive to KJV, and in part derives from the Middle English word Manse (from the Latin mansus, denoting house or dwelling). Mansion is just a rectory or vicarage, not actually a large estate.

To my mind, μονή denotes dwelling with the Father for all the saints, who are priests in the kingdom.
Thanks. It makes sense that the definition of "mansion" has changed over a couple thousand years. The sentence "In my Father's house are many mansions" just seemed odd to me.
Yes, that mansions would be inside a house is odd. But then house isn't really a house - the house of David, the house of Israel, etc.

Likewise, mansions aren't really mansions (and rooms aren't really rooms). Even so, mansion is another mistranslation in the KJV. I don't recommend the KJV.
Yea, that may be. I know the 17th-century English scholars had an inadequate comprehension of the Masoretic Text when they translated the KJV. They also translated from the Textus Recepticus, which, though begun in the fourth century, included later-date manuscripts as Erasmus ultimately compiled it. Also the previous English translations that the translation committee relied on fell a little short on accuracy.

As scholarship increases and scholars eliminate textual variances, we know mansions is definitely not the right word.
 
OP
MarathonMike

MarathonMike

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2014
Messages
22,762
Reaction score
18,125
Points
2,445
Location
The Southwestern Desert
Strong's 3438 - μονή - translates to abode. Literal translations of the Bible render the Greek as rooms or dwelling places.

Mansions seems exclusive to KJV, and in part derives from the Middle English word Manse (from the Latin mansus, denoting house or dwelling). Mansion is just a rectory or vicarage, not actually a large estate.

To my mind, μονή denotes dwelling with the Father for all the saints, who are priests in the kingdom.
Thanks. It makes sense that the definition of "mansion" has changed over a couple thousand years. The sentence "In my Father's house are many mansions" just seemed odd to me.
KJV translators took mansion from the Latin Vulgate.

14:2 In domo Patris mei mansiones multæ sunt; si quominus dixissem vobis: quia vado parare vobis locum.

Awesome thanks!
 

hobelim

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2013
Messages
9,300
Reaction score
485
Points
130
Location
elsewhere
Can someone knowledgeable about the King James version of the Bible comment on why the wording of John 14:2 was changed from the original "My Father's house has many rooms" to "In My Father's house are many mansions"?
The house of David, like the house of Hur, or my Fathers house, is not about a house but a lineage or dynasty.

In the house of David there were many mansions. Literally mansions, and figuratively big shots or elohim, judges (not gods).

In my Fathers house "there are many mansions" is figurative for higher forms of life as when Jesus said to his disciples that he would be there when they died to welcome them into their eternal abode, which is not about a house either.
 
Last edited:

Picaro

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2010
Messages
19,491
Reaction score
4,367
Points
290
Location
Texas
The term translated simply means 'dwellings', with 'many rooms' implying mansions rather than mere huts. It is simply metaphorical language meant to convey the grandeur of the place where God's throne is and where all in Heaven will reside, which would hardly be a mere 'room' but much more, in contrast to the sacrilegious earthly temples, and desert tents per the pre-exilic Hebrewist Prophets' beliefs. Mansions is a much more appropriate terminology.

The phrase is also related to Isaiah 1 to 6, a reference in John 1:14, and 2:14, cleansing of the temple. In pre-exile Hebrewism, God dwelt in a tent with the tabernacle. Old school Jews would have found the 2nd Temple offensive and profane, same as many found Solomon's.

I seriously doubt the KJV translators would have used the Latin Vulgate, given their animosity to it. When in doubt go with the NKJV over the others; it is much more up to date and accurate. The fact the Vulgate uses the term mansions doesn't mean they copied from it, merely that they translated it the same, which is true in quite a bit of it. Jerome was himself using earlier bad Latin copies for some of his work, which was why he was editing a new version in the first place. There is no contradiction in the context and meaning, despite how many wish there were so they can claim their own 'revisions' wish list are valid as well.

Over 85% of the is NT the same in the Textus Recepticus, the Alexandrian texts, and the Majority Text, supported with a lot from the Byzantine Text, the differences being in how much 'editorializing' some translations like the NIV and the Latin bibles do compared with the stripped down versions translating from the Greek sources. Even major Catholic scholars in the 17th century admired the KJV's translations and said so. Most of these 'conflicts' are imaginary and fabricated out of nothing.
 
Last edited:

hobelim

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2013
Messages
9,300
Reaction score
485
Points
130
Location
elsewhere
The term translated simply means 'dwellings', with 'many rooms' implying mansions rather than mere huts. It is simply metaphorical language meant to convey the grandeur of the place where God's throne is and where all in Heaven will reside, which would hardly be a mere 'room' but much more, in contrast to the sacrilegious earthly temples, and desert tents per the pre-exilic Hebrewist Prophets' beliefs. Mansions is a much more appropriate terminology.

The phrase is also related to Isaiah 1 to 6, a reference in John 1:14, and 2:14, cleansing of the temple. In pre-exile Hebrewism, God dwelt in a tent with the tabernacle. Old school Jews would have found the 2nd Temple offensive and profane, same as many found Solomon's.

I seriously doubt the KJV translators would have used the Latin Vulgate, given their animosity to it. When in doubt go with the NKJV over the others; it is much more up to date and accurate. The fact the Vulgate uses the term mansions doesn't mean they copied from it, merely that they translated it the same, which is true in quite a bit of it. Jerome was himself using earlier bad Latin copies for some of his work, which was why he was editing a new version in the first place. There is no contradiction in the context and meaning, despite how many wish there were so they can claim their own 'revisions' wish list are valid as well.

Over 85% of the is NT the same in the Textus Recepticus, the Alexandrian texts, and the Majority Text, supported with a lot from the Byzantine Text, the differences being in how much 'editorializing' some translations like the NIV and the Latin bibles do compared with the stripped down versions translating from the Greek sources. Even major Catholic scholars in the 17th century admired the KJV's translations and said so. Most of these 'conflicts' are imaginary and fabricated out of nothing.


The simple answer to the question of this post is that the people who translated the Hebrew scriptures were superstitious pagans who knew nothing about Jewish expressions,thoughts, beliefs, figurative language or culture, consequently they, like you, did not comprehend a single word that Jesus uttered.
 

Picaro

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2010
Messages
19,491
Reaction score
4,367
Points
290
Location
Texas
The term translated simply means 'dwellings', with 'many rooms' implying mansions rather than mere huts. It is simply metaphorical language meant to convey the grandeur of the place where God's throne is and where all in Heaven will reside, which would hardly be a mere 'room' but much more, in contrast to the sacrilegious earthly temples, and desert tents per the pre-exilic Hebrewist Prophets' beliefs. Mansions is a much more appropriate terminology.

The phrase is also related to Isaiah 1 to 6, a reference in John 1:14, and 2:14, cleansing of the temple. In pre-exile Hebrewism, God dwelt in a tent with the tabernacle. Old school Jews would have found the 2nd Temple offensive and profane, same as many found Solomon's.

I seriously doubt the KJV translators would have used the Latin Vulgate, given their animosity to it. When in doubt go with the NKJV over the others; it is much more up to date and accurate. The fact the Vulgate uses the term mansions doesn't mean they copied from it, merely that they translated it the same, which is true in quite a bit of it. Jerome was himself using earlier bad Latin copies for some of his work, which was why he was editing a new version in the first place. There is no contradiction in the context and meaning, despite how many wish there were so they can claim their own 'revisions' wish list are valid as well.

Over 85% of the is NT the same in the Textus Recepticus, the Alexandrian texts, and the Majority Text, supported with a lot from the Byzantine Text, the differences being in how much 'editorializing' some translations like the NIV and the Latin bibles do compared with the stripped down versions translating from the Greek sources. Even major Catholic scholars in the 17th century admired the KJV's translations and said so. Most of these 'conflicts' are imaginary and fabricated out of nothing.


The simple answer to the question of this post is that the people who translated the Hebrew scriptures were superstitious pagans who knew nothing about Jewish expressions,thoughts, beliefs, figurative language or culture, consequently they, like you, did not comprehend a single word that Jesus uttered.
^Ignore the crank poster, who is clueless about the OT as well as the NT, and doesn't know that what passes for Judaism since the 2nd Century is merely a weird little cult started by surviving Pharisees whose main focus was on fabricating fake 'oral Torahs' and composing bizarre legalistic fantasies for their Mishnahs and Talmuds, and pretty much abandoning the Hebrewism of the real Torah as attributed to Moses. The fact is the Evul Xians and the messianic Jews are more Jewish than today's Orthodox and ultra-Orthodox 'Jews' are, the latter being merely a racist tribal ideology left over from the post-exilic Persian cults.
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top