Rev Gadfly's response to William Hartung: What's the Truest Book -- McKinsey's Biblical Errancy Forum Group

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 02:52:21 03/21/02 Thu
Author: Paul for Rev Gadfly (Peter)
Subject: Rev Gadfly's response to William Hartung: What's the Truest Book

kloMcKinsey wrote:

>Can someone help him out?
>
>Dennis
>
>Subject: What's the Truest Book
>Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 14:05:00 -0600
>From: "Hartung, William"
>To: "'klomckin@infinet.com'"
>
>Hello Dennis. I just bought your book by the way but have not begun.
>Unfortunately I am in about 7 books right now and I'm just waiting to finish
>one before I dive into yours. I have read much of your on line work and I
>think it is great. I just had one question. What is the Truest Bible? I
>want it to say young women instead of virgin. I want Moses to part the Sea
>of Reeds not the Red see. Is there a bible like that out there? One that
>correctly translates all the mistranslations that so many others have made.
>Just wondering. Thanks Will.
>
>William Hartung
>Temerlin McClain
>Project Manager
>Ph. 972-830-2364
>Pager. 214-512-4632

RevG

Hello William. Mr. McKinsey forwarded your question to the B.E. errancy panel,
composed of like minded people who assist him in his workload. Your question: is
there a bible out there which correctly translates the Hebrew, Aramaic, and
Greek into English? Am I on the right track?

There is no such thing as an accurate translation from one language into
another, especially when two languages are very different. A modern Greek cannot
read Greek from antiquities, and they are using the same basic language. Take
two relatively similar languages, English and French, direct translation is only
possible for the simplest of sentences, and even there there are difficulties.
For example:

j'ai dix ans. This can be translated two ways: 1) Literally, and by context.
Literally it makes no sense: I have 10 years. Contextually: I am 10 years old.
The problem with contextual translations, is that one is left to wonder exactly
what the author intended.

Let's return to Hebrew, I will provide an example to show you how complicated
translations are. As we know, a word can have several meanings, and deciding
context is left to the translator, and as such he is dependent on his 'gut'
feelings and hopes that the author did not use the wrong word -- a common
problem with ancient writings.

Let's use Strong's Concordance, which is pretty reliable overall.

Lexicon for Strong's Number 0120 Go to Gen 2:19
0120 'adam' {aw-dawm'}
from 0119; TWOT - 25a; n m
AV - man 408, men 121, Adam 13, person(s) 8, common sort + 07230
1, hypocrite 1; 552
1) man, mankind
1a) man, human being
1b) man, mankind (much more frequently intended sense in OT)
1c) Adam, first man
1d) city in Jordan valley

So as you can see, the Hebrew word 'Adam' isn't a proper noun at all, it is a
word with many meanings, singular, plural, hypocrite, .... So a translator
facing this word, which appears 522 times in the Jewish scriptures can be
translated several ways.

Look at the word Messiah, christians like to make it appear that it only applies
to Jesus as the Christ, in reality, it was widely used for many people:

Lexicon for Strong's Number 04899 Go to Dan 9:25
04899 mashiyach {maw-shee'-akh}
from 04886; TWOT - 1255c; n m
AV - anointed 37, Messiah 2; 39
1) anointed, anointed one
1a) of the Messiah, Messianic prince
1b) of the king of Israel
1c) of the high priest of Israel
1d) of Cyrus
1e) of the patriarchs as anointed kings

Here is a link for all the times it is used:
http://www.blueletterbible.org/tmp_dir/strongs/1016664221.html

The number above is misleading, this is a weakness of Strong, to have a
christian bias. The concordance attempts to make a distinction between anointed
and messiah, this is intellectual dishonesty; for there is the single word
mashiyach used a total of 37+39=76 times. Imagine the implications, there are 76
references to the messiah in the Tanakh [Jewish Bible], yet we are to believe
Jesus of Naz. was the only messiah.

As we can see, the Christian clerics and translators are playing a fast one on
us. Christians pretend that 'messiah', or 'chist' is unique to Jesus of their
religion. In reality, Every priest and king of Israel was the messiah, for the
word simply means 'anointed'; so was the Zorostrian Persian King Cyrus the
Great. To make it worst, "Christ" is a Greek bastardized version of the Hebrew
word "mashiyach", Jesus is a Greek bastaridized version of the Hebrew word
"Y@howshu`a", better known as Joshua.

So anyone called Joshua, who was also anointed, is in Greek: Jesus Christ. Which
means that the Joshua who worked with Moses [according to the story] was a Jesus
Christ, there are several kings and priests in ancient Israel and Judeae who
were called Joshua, in other words: Jesus Christ. Naturally this tidbit is
totally ignored by Christians, and with good reason.

If you want a good translation, for the Jewish scriptures, the Tanakh JPS is
your best bet; for the NT, find one with plenty of footnotes, and read them
closely. You'll discover items like the number of the antichrist is 666 in the
main text, but the footnote will tell you that some mss have it as 616. You'll
learn that Mark 16 verses 9 upward do not exist in the oldest mss available, in
other words, you are looking at an interpolation.

Anyway, hope that helps.

peace

Rev Gadfly

--
II Cor. 12:16, "Nevertheless, crafty fellow that I am, I took you in by DECEIT."

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]