{"id":16947,"date":"2024-03-18T13:11:21","date_gmt":"2024-03-18T17:11:21","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/awarningministry.com\/?p=16947"},"modified":"2024-03-18T13:14:24","modified_gmt":"2024-03-18T17:14:24","slug":"wealthy-or-rich-purecambridgetext-com","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/awarningministry.com\/index.php\/2024\/03\/18\/wealthy-or-rich-purecambridgetext-com\/","title":{"rendered":"Wealthy or Rich? (purecambridgetext.com)"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"\"\/
Wealthy or Rich? (purecambridgetext.com)<\/a> <\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\n

Wealthy or Rich? (purecambridgetext.com)<\/strong><\/a> – <\/strong>Paul Scott<\/strong><\/a> – 3\/18\/24 – 3 min read<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Wealthy or Rich? – Wealthy or Rich? (purecambridgetext.com)<\/strong><\/a> – <\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

The new bible versions claim to be easier to read, and initially, that may seem to be so, but I contend they are harder to understand!  When we study God\u2019s word, which is the specific revelation he has given to us, it\u2019s far better to seek understanding than ease of reading.  Here is an example:
<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cLet no man seek his own, but every man another\u2019s<\/strong> wealth\u201d<\/strong><\/em> –<\/em> 1 Corinthians 10:24.  Using the OED\u2019s definition of wealth \u2013 The condition of being happy and prosperous; well-being<\/strong> \u2013 this verse fits perfectly with the selfless \u2018care for others<\/em>\u2019 theme of the chapter: \u201c\u2026 not seeking mine own profit, but the profit of many\u2026\u201d<\/strong> \u2014 v. 33.
<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Why do some versions replace wealth<\/em> with riches<\/em>?  In so doing, they completely confuse the understanding of verse 24 (above).  Should we disregard our own and instead seek other men\u2019s riches?  What?!!  Isn\u2019t this covetousness?   If I seek another\u2019s riches (like a thief) – what kind of character do I have?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\tWealth: a state of being happy, healthy, and successful: well-being<\/a>, work to \t\t \tthe public\/common weal – Brittanica<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\t– Notice the root word is Germanic: weal (common good, success), <\/em>and is occasionally \tcontrasted with woe<\/em> (a miserable state).   Weal and woe – good times and bad times.<\/em>
<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The rebuke to the Laodicean church was for their attitude to their increase in goods, their riches; it was not for being wealthy (Rev. 3:17).  So, why do some versions change the word rich<\/em> to the word wealth<\/em>?
<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Luke 19:2 \u2013 Why do they change the description of Zacchaeus from rich to wealthy?  He was apparently a hated tax collector: rich in goods, but not rich in goodness: not concerned with the well-being of others.  If wealth is a good characteristic (A good name is rather to be chosen than great riches\u2026) why do they change riches <\/em>to wealth<\/em> in Mark 4:19?  Wealth (loving favor) is not deceitful, but silver and gold can be.   
<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Luke 18:23 \u2013 Why do these versions claim the covetous ruler was wealthy<\/em> (when, in fact, he was rich<\/em>)?
<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Shall we address 1 Timothy 6:9: \u201c\u2026 rich in this world\u2026\u201d<\/strong>?  They had money;  but they were snared by their misplaced love.  They supposed that gain (riches) equated to godliness, or in other words, they were deceived and high-minded to trust riches instead of God (v.17).  These are charged to do good and to do good works \u2013 that is, be wealthy!  So, why change rich to wealthy, a word that seemingly contradicts the rebuke of their selfish greed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

For a nearer and perhaps somewhat secular reference: Four of our United States are technically Commonwealths<\/em>: Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and Kentucky.  The title describes their intent: common-wealth (well-being of all their citizens, as opposed to that of the King and his officers).  These individual State Constitutions mirror the intent Paul penned in 1 Corinthians 10.  I think the real Bible was being read at that time!  (We know Jefferson was influenced by the persecuted Baptists.)
<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Luke 16 (v. 19): \u201cThere was a certain rich man\u2026\u201d<\/strong> \u2013 this hell-bound man had lots of stuff, he was rich; but he was not wealthy \u2013 he cared not for his fellow man\u2019s welfare, his well-being: poor Lazarus was ignored.  This disregard was a only a symptom, revealing the rich man was hardened against the law of Moses (Deut.15:7).  It\u2019s such an obvious and, in this case, tragic misunderstanding between rich and wealthy!  So, again, why do some versions replace rich for wealthy?
<\/p>\n\n\n\n

If I had followed the new bible versions, being unwilling to study, and sought an easy-to-read text, I\u2019d be awfully confused in 1 Corinthians 10:24, and other noted texts.  Instead, I want to carefully understand God\u2019s revelation to us, not simply breeze through it as if it were a literary race to the finish line.  I\u2019ll stay with the reliable, the understandable, the wealthy<\/em>, Authorized Version.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Thank you.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n