Question the OT translation...

A note about the background to the King James Version. After the Sephardic Jews were expelled from Spain by King Ferdinand V and Queen Isabella in 1492 A.D., the Jews settled in England and other countries where their presence was not readily appreciated or accepted. Some of the more fortunate Jews became court musicians and court jesters -- roles traditionally held by Jews throughout the Medieval Era. Rabbis, as well as all Jews, did not dare to present their Biblical knowledge to Christian theologians because of the popular idea that the Church had replaced the Jewish people as God's chosen people.
Therefore, the rabbis saw no need to offer their servicess to King Jame's translation committee, and the Royal Court of King James saw no relevance to asking the assistance of the local rabbis in making his translation from the Hebrew. After all, from the viewpoint of the Anglican Church, accuracy in the rendering of the Old Testament Scriptures was non-essential since Christ supposedly voided the Old Testament writings when He introduced the New Covenant.
For many years, Catholic and Protestant churches have allowed the assumption to persist that Hebrew is a "dead language" and that the religion of the Jews described in the New Testament is a "dead religion" of the ancient past, similar to the dead religions of classical Greece and classical Rome. Therefore the mainstream churches must accept the brunt of the responsibility for the lack of information which occurred within the WCG and CGI, and most other non-Jewish Christian church congregations here in America. The atmosphere in the Christian churches disuades congregational members from doing the "unthinkable" -- i.e., going to the Jewish sources and Jewish heritage to discover a more complete understanding of the original Apostles' writings and religious beliefs and practices.

The thought-form expression in Hebrew -- especially in ancient classical Hebrew -- is very dissimilar from our contemporary mode of American thinking. The cultural differentials between classical Hebrew and modern English have created vast misunderstandings since the majority of Christian churches usually try to figure out and interpret meanings of Hebrew words without researching into Hebrew verbal archaeology and seeking counsel from knowledgeable Jewish rabbis. Unlike English which has an approximate 550,000 vocabulary words for the expression of meaning and thought, Biblical classical Hebrew has only an approximate 8,100, and trying to determine how to best render this comparatively small regimen of words into the most appropriate English-language equivalents has always been a major plague to sincere Protestant linguists and Bible translators. This is why there exists so many translations of the Bible into English, and why each translation is worded somewhat differently from one another. Without seeking the counsel of the Jewish rabbis to whom Hebrew is their native language, Protestant translators have had to "guess" and "guess again" about how to properly render many Hebrew words and expressions into their best English equivalents. This is WHY it is so important for Bible translators to approach the translating of Hebrew from the perspective of Hebrew culture, rather than trying to impose Gentile culture and thought into the Biblical Hebrew meanings!
Back around 1611, the high level of anti-Semitism common in England prevented King Jame's translators from seeking assistance from the Jewish rabbis who were then living in England. During that period of British history, all Jewish rabbis living in England had to keep a low profile, and were expressly forbidden to attempt to introduce Jewish ideas into the national Christianity over which the Anglican Church and British Monarchy presided. As the result of this anti-Jewish bias constructed within British Christianity, many inaccuracies have been preserved by the "Authorized Version" (KJV) because of not properly obtaining from the rabbis the knowledge about meanings of Hebrew as applied in the ancient Israelite cultures!

Modern translations use the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Masoretic Text quite a bit. I'm also reminded of how much I enjoy using John Gill's commentary, since he did consul Rabbinical sources. It really makes the Gospels come alive, showing how Jesus "out-Jewed" the Jewish religious leaders in his teachings and debates.