Our authorized version, with its many words which have changed their meaning (some of them altogether) since it was written with its many italic words, put in to make it like English with its want of uniformity as to the use of the same word in English for the same word in the original (this last because of the king’s order, and with the view of showing the largeness of the English vocabulary, &c. 3 in the English Bible, I am as one listening to a narration when I read the same portion in Hebrew, I am as one in the presence of God, the living God in action… Moreover, the change in the mode of presenting the matter to be communicated is a serious change, and without warrant. Regarding the poor quality of the KJV translation, this author states,īeautiful English is not so good, if it gives us only an approximation to the original (and that not a close one), as a rougher and less polished English, which gives the original as nearly as possible as it stands. The next author makes the point, which I have often enunciated, that the translator’s first job is to translate, not EDITORIALIZE or interpret. I have demonstrated this fact in my book, The Great Impersonation, and in many other writings. Likewise, the KJV translators were very poor at understanding the Hebrew idioms that cannot be translated literally. It follows that any passages of Scripture that deal with natural history could not possibly be translated by them, except from the perspective of 17 th Century knowledge. The fact is that the KJV was translated by scholars who had little or no scientific knowledge. The fact is that, since it was discovered that the earth goes around the sun, not vice versa, many theologians have argued that the days of Genesis 1 are not literal. The more we consider the meanings of the Hebrew words, the more we realize that the creationist interpretation is contradicted by the Hebrew.īible skeptics have asked the question: “ How can there be an evening and a morning if there is no sun to set and rise?” Good question!! Concerning the first three “days” of G1, how can anyone speak of a literal 24-hour day when there is literally no sunlight? The root meaning of the word yowm is “ to be hot,” meaning the heat of the day caused by sunlight. There is simply no doubt that, when we speak of “days” in Genesis 1, we are speaking of eons, not literal 24-hour days, especially since G1 does not record the sun and stars appearing in the sky until the fourth day. Their refusal to consider these alternative meanings proves that they are only interested in promoting a particular dogma. The reason they conflict with natural history is because these creationists do not care to consider the alternative meanings of the relevant Hebrew words. Creationism is based on numerous false assumptions about Scripture, all of which conflict with natural history. But this is what the Creationists do, without any justification. The quoted article cites a wealth of Scripture which backs up the fact that the Hebrew word yowm cannot be arbitrarily assumed to mean a 24 hour-day. We did not use this choice in the body of our discussion since eon or aeon do not appear in the King James Versions and Strong’s. Therefore, the translation of yowm in the Genesis 1 passages to aeon is also a good choice. However, the connection between aeon or eon and yom (Strong’s yowm) is not so difficult to understand since the sounds are very similar. While it is often difficult for the amateur to recognize the origin of English words from the Hebrew mother tongue because the two languages seem to be so different. The meanings of both words range from a 24-hour day to an unspecified length of great age, as represented by the English words, eon and era. We find that, in Scripture, the Hebrew word yowm has exactly the same range of meanings as the English word day has. It is true that this word is usually meant to designate a 24-hour day, but this is not always the case. To get a complete understanding of Genesis 1, we have to start with the concept of Yowm, the Hebrew word translated as “day” in Genesis 1. My comments on Genesis 1 & 2, with reference to the Hebrew word for “day” are specifically addressed and were published in a Spanish-language website:įrom Laverdad Con Cristo: In Genesis1 the days weren´t literal days of 24 hours Here is a pastor sating that the traditional interpretation of YOM (or YOWM), as meaning a literal 24-hour day, is not supported by linguistic scholarship. Here is the link to the whole article and www.anglo-saxonisrael EVERYONE needs to be awakened to the fact that Judeo-Christianity and Judaism are fraudulent doctrines, which teach a lot of mumbo-jumbo in the name of the Bible. Now a Spanish-language website has picked up on my Bible studies. Eurofolkradio, along with are the world’s leading Bible scholarship websites.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |