Scuba Pete
Le plongeur avec attitude...
Does it matter when they lived? Not with God.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Errors in Bible translations...
- Thread starter t3gah
- Start date
Hi Everyone
One poster asked who were the principle writers of the Bible, and here they are:
Now, following are all the books of the Old Testament with their name given first, then who was the main writer of the book [some few books having had very minor parts written by others], approximate time for the completion of the Bible book, and in most cases the location it was written at clearly showing those with their pseudo-knowledge do not know of what they speak. But then they are NOT interested in learning anyhow:
Genesis - Moses - 1513 B.C.E., written in the Wilderness.
Exodus - Moses - 1512 B.C.E., written in the Wilderness.
Leviticus - Moses - 1512 B.C.E., written in the Wilderness.
Numbers - Moses - 1473 B.C.E., either written in the Wilderness or Plains of Moab.
Deuteronomy - Moses - 1473 B.C.E., Plains of Moab.
Joshua - Joshua - about 1450 B.C.E., written in Canaan
Judges - Samuel - about 1100 B.C.E., written in Israel
Ruth - Samuel - about 1090 B.C.E., written in Israel
1 Samuel - Samuel; Gad and Nathan - about 1077 B.C.E., written in Israel
2 Samuel -Gad and Nathan - about 1040 B.C.E., written in Israel
1 Kings - Jeremiah - about 580 B.C.E. - written in Judah and Egypt.
2 Kings - Jeremiah - about 580 B.C.E. - written in Judah and Egypt.
1 Chronicles - Ezra - about 460 B.C.E. - written probably in Jerusalem
2 Chronicles - Ezra - about 460 B.C.E. - written probably in Jerusalem
Ezra - Ezra - about 460 B.C.E. - written in Jerusalem
Nehemiah - Neihemiah - about 443 B.C.E. - written in Jerusalem
Esther - Mordecai - about 474 B.C.E. - written in Shushan, Elam
Job - Moses - about 1473 B.C.E. - written in the wilderness
Psalms - by David and others - about 460 B.C.E. - place written unknown.
Proverbs - by Solomon; Agur; and Lemuel - unknown - written in Jerusalem
Ecclesiastes - Solomon and others - about 1000 B.C.E. - written in Jerusalem
Song of Solomon - Solomon and others - about 1020 B.C.E. - written in Jerusalem
Isaiah - Isaiah - about 732 B.C.E. - written in Jerusalem
Jeremiah - Jeremiah - about 580 B.C.E. - written in Jerusalem
Lamentations - Jeremiah - about 607 B.C.E. - written near Jerusalem
Ezekiel - Ezekiel - about 561 B.C.E. - written in Babylon
Daniel - Daniel - about 536 B.C.E. - written in Babylon
Hosea - Hosea - after 754 B.C.E. - written in Samaria (District)
Joel - Joel - about 820 B.C.E. - written in Judah
Amos - Amos - about 803 B.C.E. - written in Judah
Obadiah - Obadiah - about 607 B.C.E. - place written unknown.
Jonah - Jonah - about 844 B.C.E. - place written unknown.
Micah - Micah - about 716 B.C.E. - written in Judah
Nahum - Nahum - about 632 B.C.E. - written in Judah.
Habakkuk - Habakkuk - about 628 B.C.E. - written in Judah.
Zephaniah - Zephaniah - about 648 B.C.E. - written in Judah.
Haggai - Haggai - about 520 B.C.E. - written in rebuilt Jerusalem
Zechariah - Zechariah - about 518 B.C.E. - written in rebuilt Jerusalem
Malachi - Malachi - about 443 B.C.E. - written in rebuilt Jerusalem
Now with respect the New Testament the scribes, divinely inspired writers used by God (YHWH) were few in number and all the books of the New Testament were written between approximately 41 A.D. and 98 A.D with the last three being Revelations, 1 John, 2 John, and 3 John, and they were all written by the Apostle John. All of the books of the New Testament were written within the boarders of the Roman Empire. We shall now consider who wrote each book by scribe:
The Apostle Matthew wrote Matthew.
Mark wrote Mark.
The Apostle Luke wrote Luke and Acts.
The Apostle John wrote John, Revelations, 1 John, 2 John, and 3 John.
The Apostle Paul wrote Romans, 1 & 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, 1 & 2 Thessalonians, 1 & 2 Timothy, Titus, Philemon, and Hebrews.
James (the half brother of Jesus (Yeshua)) wrote James.
The Apostle Peter wrote 1 & 2 Peter.
Jude (the half brother of Jesus (Yeshua)) wrote Jude.
The most important thing to remember from this discourse is that Almighty God (YHWH) is the author of the entire Bible, but inspired scribes, divinely inspired individuals, to write down his thoughts in their own words over an extended period of over 1,600 years. That it had one author is quite evident in that it retained harmony, when even most writers can not even stay on track or subject over a period of a few days and/or weeks at most with the original subject, over such a period so great as to almost stagger the imagination. This clearly shows that it was divinely inspired by none other than God (YHWH).
Your Friend in Christ Iris89
One poster asked who were the principle writers of the Bible, and here they are:
Now, following are all the books of the Old Testament with their name given first, then who was the main writer of the book [some few books having had very minor parts written by others], approximate time for the completion of the Bible book, and in most cases the location it was written at clearly showing those with their pseudo-knowledge do not know of what they speak. But then they are NOT interested in learning anyhow:
Genesis - Moses - 1513 B.C.E., written in the Wilderness.
Exodus - Moses - 1512 B.C.E., written in the Wilderness.
Leviticus - Moses - 1512 B.C.E., written in the Wilderness.
Numbers - Moses - 1473 B.C.E., either written in the Wilderness or Plains of Moab.
Deuteronomy - Moses - 1473 B.C.E., Plains of Moab.
Joshua - Joshua - about 1450 B.C.E., written in Canaan
Judges - Samuel - about 1100 B.C.E., written in Israel
Ruth - Samuel - about 1090 B.C.E., written in Israel
1 Samuel - Samuel; Gad and Nathan - about 1077 B.C.E., written in Israel
2 Samuel -Gad and Nathan - about 1040 B.C.E., written in Israel
1 Kings - Jeremiah - about 580 B.C.E. - written in Judah and Egypt.
2 Kings - Jeremiah - about 580 B.C.E. - written in Judah and Egypt.
1 Chronicles - Ezra - about 460 B.C.E. - written probably in Jerusalem
2 Chronicles - Ezra - about 460 B.C.E. - written probably in Jerusalem
Ezra - Ezra - about 460 B.C.E. - written in Jerusalem
Nehemiah - Neihemiah - about 443 B.C.E. - written in Jerusalem
Esther - Mordecai - about 474 B.C.E. - written in Shushan, Elam
Job - Moses - about 1473 B.C.E. - written in the wilderness
Psalms - by David and others - about 460 B.C.E. - place written unknown.
Proverbs - by Solomon; Agur; and Lemuel - unknown - written in Jerusalem
Ecclesiastes - Solomon and others - about 1000 B.C.E. - written in Jerusalem
Song of Solomon - Solomon and others - about 1020 B.C.E. - written in Jerusalem
Isaiah - Isaiah - about 732 B.C.E. - written in Jerusalem
Jeremiah - Jeremiah - about 580 B.C.E. - written in Jerusalem
Lamentations - Jeremiah - about 607 B.C.E. - written near Jerusalem
Ezekiel - Ezekiel - about 561 B.C.E. - written in Babylon
Daniel - Daniel - about 536 B.C.E. - written in Babylon
Hosea - Hosea - after 754 B.C.E. - written in Samaria (District)
Joel - Joel - about 820 B.C.E. - written in Judah
Amos - Amos - about 803 B.C.E. - written in Judah
Obadiah - Obadiah - about 607 B.C.E. - place written unknown.
Jonah - Jonah - about 844 B.C.E. - place written unknown.
Micah - Micah - about 716 B.C.E. - written in Judah
Nahum - Nahum - about 632 B.C.E. - written in Judah.
Habakkuk - Habakkuk - about 628 B.C.E. - written in Judah.
Zephaniah - Zephaniah - about 648 B.C.E. - written in Judah.
Haggai - Haggai - about 520 B.C.E. - written in rebuilt Jerusalem
Zechariah - Zechariah - about 518 B.C.E. - written in rebuilt Jerusalem
Malachi - Malachi - about 443 B.C.E. - written in rebuilt Jerusalem
Now with respect the New Testament the scribes, divinely inspired writers used by God (YHWH) were few in number and all the books of the New Testament were written between approximately 41 A.D. and 98 A.D with the last three being Revelations, 1 John, 2 John, and 3 John, and they were all written by the Apostle John. All of the books of the New Testament were written within the boarders of the Roman Empire. We shall now consider who wrote each book by scribe:
The Apostle Matthew wrote Matthew.
Mark wrote Mark.
The Apostle Luke wrote Luke and Acts.
The Apostle John wrote John, Revelations, 1 John, 2 John, and 3 John.
The Apostle Paul wrote Romans, 1 & 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, 1 & 2 Thessalonians, 1 & 2 Timothy, Titus, Philemon, and Hebrews.
James (the half brother of Jesus (Yeshua)) wrote James.
The Apostle Peter wrote 1 & 2 Peter.
Jude (the half brother of Jesus (Yeshua)) wrote Jude.
The most important thing to remember from this discourse is that Almighty God (YHWH) is the author of the entire Bible, but inspired scribes, divinely inspired individuals, to write down his thoughts in their own words over an extended period of over 1,600 years. That it had one author is quite evident in that it retained harmony, when even most writers can not even stay on track or subject over a period of a few days and/or weeks at most with the original subject, over such a period so great as to almost stagger the imagination. This clearly shows that it was divinely inspired by none other than God (YHWH).
Your Friend in Christ Iris89
t3gah
Well-Known Member
If one goes for Option One, then the answer to the question is: To get a translation that is clearer than those that have been accomplished thus far, which seem to be colored in their own peculiar ways, by those who seemed to translate the scriptures to fulfill their own agenda's.No*s said:
Take for example the use of the words 'satan' and 'devil'. In many translations they have removed these from their original places in order to emphasize that the 'bad guy' angel of God is named 'satan the devil' when in fact many other places in the scriptures use 'devil' to describe the other fallen angels which newer translations have deemed 'demon'. Yes there is the account of Peter being called 'satan' which only confuses the unlearned who haven't studied the quote 'bible' that the masses can read. Jesus is the son of Joseph in Matthew, yet Holy Spirit empregnates Mary and not Joseph's sperm. So how could he be Joseph's son? And the list goes on and on.
Why not look at the text all these other bibles are using to translate from? Why limit yourself to someone elses interpretation of the writings or let someone else dictate what they deem is more important than something else? Why let them change the perspective of the accounts that God inspired his choosen people to pen in your viewpoint?
kiwimac
Brother Napalm of God's Love
Actually Moses is not the author of the Pentateuch. He cannot be, because the pentateuch records his death! Which might put a new spin on the phrase 'Ghost writer' but...
As for the Timothy reference, Paul was, of course, referring solely to the Old Testament as the NT had not yet been either written (finished about 100 CE) or Codified (Eusebius,) about 300 CE.
Kiwimac
As for the Timothy reference, Paul was, of course, referring solely to the Old Testament as the NT had not yet been either written (finished about 100 CE) or Codified (Eusebius,) about 300 CE.
Kiwimac
t3gah
Well-Known Member
This is a repost because I accidently deleted the previous one instead of editing it.
New World Translation
In Genesis 3:3 Eve adds something else to the command of Genesis 2:17 with the keyword being "touch".
The NWT has a cross-reference for the segment where Eve says "touch..." referring to Exodus 19:12 which is also about the word "touch" the holy thing.
Since God never gives the command not to "touch" the tree, the reference to Exodus 19:12 is invalid.
In 1 Chronicles 13:9,10 & Numbers 4:15 one can see the parallel to Exodus 19:12 but not Genesis 3:3.
Eve added something to the original command and the translating committee who added the cross-reference didn't notice that God never said that, etc.
New World Translation
Cross-reference error
In Genesis 2:17 God commands Adam not to "eat" from the tree of knowledge of good and bad.
In Genesis 3:3 Eve adds something else to the command of Genesis 2:17 with the keyword being "touch".
The NWT has a cross-reference for the segment where Eve says "touch..." referring to Exodus 19:12 which is also about the word "touch" the holy thing.
Since God never gives the command not to "touch" the tree, the reference to Exodus 19:12 is invalid.
In 1 Chronicles 13:9,10 & Numbers 4:15 one can see the parallel to Exodus 19:12 but not Genesis 3:3.
Eve added something to the original command and the translating committee who added the cross-reference didn't notice that God never said that, etc.
t3gah
Well-Known Member
This is for all Bible's that have some other name for God other than Ehyeh which is what the original scriptures have in Exodus 3:15.
Moses asks God who he is and God replies in Exodus 3:14, Ehyeh Asher Ehyeh (I will prove to be what I will prove to be). Then in Exodus 3:15 Moses hears God say that he, Moses, should tell the sons of Israel that "Ehyeh" has sent me to you.
Not YHWH or JHVH or Elohim or The LORD or Yahweh or Jehovah.
The Hebrew scriptures say Ehyeh.
Moses asks God who he is and God replies in Exodus 3:14, Ehyeh Asher Ehyeh (I will prove to be what I will prove to be). Then in Exodus 3:15 Moses hears God say that he, Moses, should tell the sons of Israel that "Ehyeh" has sent me to you.
Not YHWH or JHVH or Elohim or The LORD or Yahweh or Jehovah.
The Hebrew scriptures say Ehyeh.
Iris,
Considering that you disagree with every Biblical scholar on authors and dates for the Bible books, could you please show us your references. According to consensus, the earliest part is the Song of Deborah in Judges 5. It used to be dated to ca. 1100 BCE, but today several scholars think that it is considerably younger. There are no traces of writing in Hebrew before ca 900 BCE.
And I am not impressed by the arguments of M. Gertoux regarding the name of God. I have found no comment on the Internet from university scholars, so I continue believing in the YHWH-Adonai mixture.
Considering that you disagree with every Biblical scholar on authors and dates for the Bible books, could you please show us your references. According to consensus, the earliest part is the Song of Deborah in Judges 5. It used to be dated to ca. 1100 BCE, but today several scholars think that it is considerably younger. There are no traces of writing in Hebrew before ca 900 BCE.
And I am not impressed by the arguments of M. Gertoux regarding the name of God. I have found no comment on the Internet from university scholars, so I continue believing in the YHWH-Adonai mixture.
Scuba Pete
Le plongeur avec attitude...
Just don't call me "late for dinner"...
Really. God asks us to "seek his face" and to "call on his name", but I don't think he is pleased with a pseudo-scholastic argument over whether we should call him by some mystical name.
Somehow the "straining a gnat and swallowing a camel" picture comes to mind.
Jesus never said "They will know you are my disciples by the way they say Dad's name". Or "by the scholarly research done in my name." He wants us to major in LOVE. A thinking others better than yourself type love.
If you think that the external is important (what you should call him, what religious holidays to bash, or how many of us are getting to heaven), then you done missed the real boat and are heading out on the Titanic instead. You may THINK your reasoning is infallible, but pride has a way of catching up to itself. So go out on a limb and love bomb someone today. It may just save two souls.
Really. God asks us to "seek his face" and to "call on his name", but I don't think he is pleased with a pseudo-scholastic argument over whether we should call him by some mystical name.
Somehow the "straining a gnat and swallowing a camel" picture comes to mind.
Jesus never said "They will know you are my disciples by the way they say Dad's name". Or "by the scholarly research done in my name." He wants us to major in LOVE. A thinking others better than yourself type love.
If you think that the external is important (what you should call him, what religious holidays to bash, or how many of us are getting to heaven), then you done missed the real boat and are heading out on the Titanic instead. You may THINK your reasoning is infallible, but pride has a way of catching up to itself. So go out on a limb and love bomb someone today. It may just save two souls.
t3gah
Well-Known Member
New World Translation
Jesus is telling people how they should be cautious with worldly people and things in Matthew 10:16.
In Genesis 3:1, the serpent, which some scholars state is 'satan', is "cautious" when it stalks Eve with it's deception. The New World Translation with References, or the large nwt bible, has a footnote of "cunning" for the word "cautious" in Genesis 3:1.
The translation committee have these cross-references solely due to the word "cautious" in the translations when the reference bible states that the word is actually "cunning" in a footnote for Genesis 3:1 and not "cautious" in actual text form.
Since the actions or rather the context of what each scripture is denoting is being used for cross-reference, the scripture in Genesis 3:1 cannot be related to Matthew 10:16 by the standards set out in the description of what cross-references are in the preface of the NWT's.
The NWT's state and I shall paraphrase due to copyright laws, cross-references denote similar thoughts and meanings or definitions of the thought of one scripture versus another.
Clearly they, the translation committee, need to re-evaluate what's printed versus what's being said.
Cross-reference error
Here's another referral to the wrong counterpart of the first scripture. The keyword being used for both references is "cautious" with Genesis 3:1 pointing to Matthew 10:16 which also have a reverse lookup, that is, Matthew 10:16 refers to Genesis 3:1 as well.
Jesus is telling people how they should be cautious with worldly people and things in Matthew 10:16.
In Genesis 3:1, the serpent, which some scholars state is 'satan', is "cautious" when it stalks Eve with it's deception. The New World Translation with References, or the large nwt bible, has a footnote of "cunning" for the word "cautious" in Genesis 3:1.
The translation committee have these cross-references solely due to the word "cautious" in the translations when the reference bible states that the word is actually "cunning" in a footnote for Genesis 3:1 and not "cautious" in actual text form.
Since the actions or rather the context of what each scripture is denoting is being used for cross-reference, the scripture in Genesis 3:1 cannot be related to Matthew 10:16 by the standards set out in the description of what cross-references are in the preface of the NWT's.
The NWT's state and I shall paraphrase due to copyright laws, cross-references denote similar thoughts and meanings or definitions of the thought of one scripture versus another.
Clearly they, the translation committee, need to re-evaluate what's printed versus what's being said.
t3gah
Well-Known Member
New World Translation
The real Hebrew word is hanNephilim not the word Nephilim which the New World Translation uses.
The definition of hanNephilim is fellers (causing people to fall down).
The New World Bible Translation Committee decided to leave Nephilim in to emphasize whatever.
Genesis 6:4 versus Numbers 13:33
This is a word used to describe a type of people that existed in Noah's time. Nephilim. In 1 Samuel 17:4 these persons are described as what was created when the true "sons of God" (angels) came to earth, had relations with human women and fathered Nephilim children. The scriptures later go on to state during the flood that all the Nephilim are destroyed yet in Numbers 13:33 the word Nephilim appears again twice. These Nephilim are not the Nephilim that angels created but are the Nephilim associated with the Sons of Anak. So there are the 'pre-flood' Nephilim and then the 'post-flood' Nephilim.
The real Hebrew word is hanNephilim not the word Nephilim which the New World Translation uses.
The definition of hanNephilim is fellers (causing people to fall down).
The New World Bible Translation Committee decided to leave Nephilim in to emphasize whatever.
Why not use the english word for this english translation?
Why not use the real word hanNephilim if you are going to go for the Hebrew word?
We will all just have to wonder...Why not use the real word hanNephilim if you are going to go for the Hebrew word?
I'm sorry, but could you tell me what a lower case Paleo-Hebrew "n" looks like?t3gah said:
Could you also suggest any Hebrew scholarship unassociated with your sect that translates Nephilim as anything other than something akin to "the fallen ones"?t3gah said:
Finally, what is your point? Anyone who speaks of "the original scriptures" is simply demonstrating textual ignorance. Repeating such a demonstration is getting a bit tiresome.
t3gah
Well-Known Member
I made an error typing my post out. I edited it but took longer to do so than I thought. You are quoting something about a post that no longer exists. The correct word is hanNephilim which I have since corrected for.Deut. 32.8 said:
My point is they used Nephilim instead of hanNephilim.
Your avoidance of the second question speaks volumes. Again: Could you also suggest any Hebrew scholarship unassociated with your sect that translates Nephilim as anything other than something akin to "the fallen ones"? I have 5 different Torahs on my shelf, and others accessible on line. Every one of them agree. By what quirk of astounding arrogance do you stand there and submit your fringe version as authoritative without a shread of evidence?
t3gah
Well-Known Member
I'm not a Jehovah's Witness anymore, not due to disfellowshipping, due to my choice to leave and they, Jehovah's Witnesses, don't believe that they are a sect. You can call them that if you like.Deut. 32.8 said:
Please stop calling it "your sect". I'm not one of them anymore.
I'm not sure I understand you correctly. Are you asking for another definition of hanNephilim? Are you saying your torah's have Nephilim only and not hanNephilim? Because you see I made an error when I was typing this all up in wordpad and didn't notice what I put up until it was posted. One little mistake...:banghead3
So, what I am stating has to do with their choice of the word Nephilim over hanNephilim which is what the NWT reference bible says is the real word to be used in all three parts of the NWT. Also their choice to kind of "coin" the word where the angels mated with human women and then use the term again in Number 13:33 to denote the sons of Anak. And then they have publications that state that all of the Nephilim were destroyed. But then they have other documents printed later on that detail that the Nephilim in Number 13:33 are not the same and they, the watchtower bible & tract society do some damage control it looks like by the verbage to explain why they said they were all destroyed in another publication.
My post is up to ask why they didn't put the english word or term there since I'm looking at a NWT that's in english. Maybe I should edit my post and add that comment. As for Torah's, they are in Hebrew, no? So what's the point of the comment stating that they agree? The NWT that I am analyzing is an english version. The code on the letter from the Governing Body page has bi12-E.
I could care less. The term is not inherently perjorative.t3gah said:
OKt3gah said:
Rather than incessant rhetorical questions, why not tell us which translation of which vorlage you support and why.t3gah said: