Man's Interpretation

[Shermana]

I am not certain consistency is a good point on interpretation. It is like stating: if the majority of people like coca-cola, it must be better than pepsi. It is a matter of taste, not reality.

That's not what I meant, I didn't mean appeal to majority, there are many cases where only a few older translations get it honestly right while the rest of the modern ones all dog pile on the same error which they believe best suits their doctrine. An example would be Mark 7:14, which the KJV and Douay Rheims get right but practically ALL the modern versions deliberately distort the grammar to render it different.

By consistency I meant "sticks to the whole nature of the original source". I.e., When the translation seems to not go with the flow of the theme of the older works. Mark 7:14 is a great example of how almost all modern translations will blatantly commit gross if not blasphemous dishonesty for the sake of their anti-Mosaic-Law agenda.

 

[InfidelRiot]

there are many cases where only a few older translations get it honestly right

Honestly right? Without the direct input from the writer, can anyone get it honestly, correctly right?

 

[Shermana]

Honestly right? Without the direct input from the writer, can anyone get it honestly, correctly right?

At some point you have to decide whether the available dictionaries and Lexicons are totally wrong. To prove my case here we'd have to go over Mark 7:14 in detail and I'll show you how the other, modern translations deliberately warp the grammar while the KJV and Douay Rheims retain the original grammar. If I can prove that all the modern versions deliberately change a key word from present tense to past tense and add in extra words that don't belong to change the meaning of the text, would that prove my case?

Either way At some point we have to agree on the meanings of the words or at least we have to agree on the basis of what the words come from, otherwise we'll have no way of determining which versions are less 'honestly right" than others.

 

[InfidelRiot]

If I can prove that all the modern versions deliberately change a key word from present tense to past tense and add in extra words that don't belong to change the meaning of the text, would that prove my case?

It would certainly prove that certain people misinterpret, which they tend to do in many cases when it suits their needs to validate a point in which they are against. Many Christians do it.

 

[Shermana]

It would certainly prove that certain people misinterpret, which they tend to do in many cases when it suits their needs to validate a point in which they are against. Many Christians do it.

It can prove that they deliberately misinterpret and willfully shy away from the correct translation because the original intended meaning is completely at odds with their agenda.

 

[InfidelRiot]

I agree.

 

[NIX]

It can prove that they deliberately misinterpret and willfully shy away from the correct translation because the original intended meaning is completely at odds with their agenda.

correct translation= original intended meaning, is also an interpretation based on an agenda. ('correct', and original intended meaning - being the two obvious agendas)

Those with a self interpretive agenda, might give more import to introspection and personal inspiration. From their own perspective they might very well also see the book as a sacred source. Though that may also have very different specific implications.

Just trying to point out how we all interpret with some agenda or another.

 

[Shermana]

correct translation= original intended meaning, is also an interpretation based on an agenda. ('correct', and original intended meaning - being the two obvious agendas)

Those with a self interpretive agenda, might give more import to introspection and personal inspiration. From their own perspective they might very well also see the book as a sacred source. Though that may also have very different specific implications.

Just trying to point out how we all interpret with some agenda or another.

I do not deny that the original authors had an agenda. However, reading the text outside of the lens of that agenda, is a real meaning of the word "Agenda" here. To take someone else's agenda and filter it through your own agenda lens is exactly what I'm accusing most of Christianity of. It's all nice fun and games to have a "self interpretive agenda", which one can arguably say my own interpretation since mine is far from the mainstream view, but I at least admit that I base my view on what I perceive the original agenda was. In essence, everyone's view is a "self-interpretation" even if they go by someone else's who represents some kind of authority among the church, but the question remains whether they are truly interested in getting to the original or if they think are reading it how it was originally intended. There's no way you can get an Evangelical to pass the scholarly objectivity test of how to read the text in its originally intended way in my opinion, they will dance and dodge and reinterpret and twist to suit their confirmation bias. Historic and cultural factors oft get thrown out the window. How many Christians even incorporate the very meaning of what it is to be the Jewish Messiah into their readings? How many are even aware of the passages that describe the Jewish Messiah in the OT and reflect on them? I have my own confirmation bias indeed, but it's up to the individual to decide who has what's closer to the originally intended confirmation bias: The Nazarene Jew or the post-orthodox gentile Christian.

 

[kylixguru]

It can prove that they deliberately misinterpret and willfully shy away from the correct translation because the original intended meaning is completely at odds with their agenda.

I too have experienced this from every Christian I have tried to collaborate with.
They are total light-weights who want fantasy more than the cold hard reality of things.

 

[garrydons]

Shalom! If we read the Scriptures (Bible) we will know that there are people who were entrusted by it that is the Jews (Pls. see Romans 3:1-3) that is one of their advantages. in Isaiah 49, Israel was and is the bearer of the light (Good News) to all the world. In Romans 2, they are the leaders of the blind. In other words when it comes to Bible interpretation, we ought to get what their interpretation is and not make or guess our own understanding. Why are there now so many interpretations? Because the Bible itself teaches that there are False teachers and false prophets, no wonder their are false interpretations of the Bible.

 

[kylixguru]

Shalom! If we read the Scriptures (Bible) we will know that there are people who were entrusted by it that is the Jews (Pls. see Romans 3:1-3) that is one of their advantages. in Isaiah 49, Israel was and is the bearer of the light (Good News) to all the world. In Romans 2, they are the leaders of the blind. In other words when it comes to Bible interpretation, we ought to get what their interpretation is and not make or guess our own understanding. Why are there now so many interpretations? Because the Bible itself teaches that there are False teachers and false prophets, no wonder their are false interpretations of the Bible.

As was demonstrated in the days of Jesus, the Jews got up so close they couldn't see the forest for the trees.

But, it stands to reason, it isn't a matter of interpretation that they were deemed to go right back into judgment along with the others of the northern tribes at some point. Ezekiel said of Aholibah that she would at some point be given the cup of her sister Aholah to drink of. This means that all 12 tribes of Israel fell under a general diasopora. The people of the southern kingdom got (are getting) a double whammy. Their original judgment was typified in Ezekiel 4 as a 40 year period, but they didn't reform so the Leviticus 26:23-25 factor kicked in to make that a 280 year period of judgment. So, they got wiped out by Babylon but then they were able to be gathered again and go back after their period of exile. However, with the decree that they would yet drink of their sisters cup, this meant that their national redemption would be short-lived. Jesus knew this and so he knew that he would not be able to become their king at that time and that he should be put to death so that he could return at the timing when all 12 tribes were eligible with their judgment being all completed. Ezekiel 4 says the northern kingdoms judgment was 390 years and with the 7x factor from Leviticus that makes it 2,730 years. So, if you do the date math, this puts us all the way from 721 BC to 2011 AD. All the 12 tribes of Israel have now had their longstanding period of judgment decreed against them expire and so it is not unreasonable to expect that some very significant global shifts are going to start to play out. It is now high time that the Messiah the Jewish people, as well as those of the northern kingdom, have been looking for to come and deliver them as Moses did of old. Of course, they are gathered together in preparation for this per Lev 26:25 but we have to first be given over into the hand of our enemy and suffer the rest of our terms of punishment. But, the key to knowing the key to the door out of the evil time that we yet must endure right here at the tail end of our judgment is in Lev 26:40-45.

 

[Shermana]

All the 12 tribes of Israel have now had their longstanding period of judgment decreed against them expire and so it is not unreasonable to expect that some very significant global shifts are going to start to play out.

You mean like millions of Jews gathering in the Holy Land, forming a new Jewish state and winning victory after victory against their enemies?

 

[kylixguru]

You mean like millions of Jews gathering in the Holy Land, forming a new Jewish state and winning victory after victory against their enemies?

Yes, that is the gathering stage spoken of in verse 25. But, after their gathering, the State of Israel will be totally usurped by what is actually Israel's adversary. Because of this, what shall be perceived by Islam as Jewish infidelity to their God by suffering the enemy to overcome them, they will then wage a war of cleansing and purification until the Jewish people reach the level of humility and contrition that they cooperate with the terms in Levitics 26:40-45.

Little do most Jews know, but Islam will actually be a critical part of your ultimate national salvation and redemption. Since you won't have the power to overcome your own usurped corrupt state powers, Islam shall have to do it for you.

Islam has problems of its own as well, but it is important to recognize that it isn't Jews and Christians, in and of themselves, that they detest and feel a divine mandate to war against. It is those Jews and Christians who are infidels, meaning not having fidelity to their own covenants, that they have the divine mandate to war against.

So, if you are Jews and Christians, its time to take into consideration that unless and until you cure your infidelity to your God, your God will empower Islam to one glorious victory after another over you. Islam isn't your problem, your infidelity to God is.

 

[Shermana]

I most certainly agree, along with many prominent Rabbis in Israel, that the continued social decay and trend towards Secularism will result in an Islamic victory in the next war.

 

[kylixguru]

I most certainly agree, along with many prominent Rabbis in Israel, that the continued social decay and trend towards Secularism will result in an Islamic victory in the next war.

Perhaps some of what I've shared here can be passed on to them to give them some ammunition to call their people to repentance?

My heart greatly yearns for the ultimate triumph of Israel, but I also see the extremely grave predicament they are in, due primarily to their own corruptions and infidelity to God.

There are even people here on these boards claiming to be Jewish who openly seethe contempt for God's Law. Such need to come to confession, penitence and circumcision of heart as soon as possible.

 

[Hawkins]

If biblical scripture means what it means, why is man divided on its interpretation?

If the bible is divinely inspired and god meant exactly what he meant, then why is it that man has to interpret what god meant?

Human imperfection will not hinder the purpose of the Bible. Thus the Bible is perfect in serving its unique purpose, which is to allow His sheep to be saved but not the goats nor the wolves.

Human minds varies, there's no a single duplicated brain. So they may interpret what they perceived to be the best at the moment of interpretation as guided by God. In the end, this seem to be variance will save the expected number of human souls. The perfection of the Bible doesn't rely on the perfection of humans.

 

[InfidelRiot]

The perfection of the Bible is not defined by that imperfection of humans.

How so when man wrote it? It is not, after all, as though god faxed it directly to us.

 

[Hawkins]

How so when man wrote it? It is not, after all, as though god faxed it directly to us.

Of course. It's men wrote it but under the influence and approval of God. As for the interpretation, God allows His faithful servants to interpret it. It is perfect as long as the same number of expected souls are saved.

 

[InfidelRiot]

Of course. It's men wrote it but under the influence and approval of God.

Where is the proof that the men who wrote the books of the bible were divinely inspired? Could it be possible that it was written for the same reason that all religion is created? For the sole purpose of having power over the people?

 

[Hawkins]

Where is the proof that the men who wrote the books of the bible were divinely inspired? Could it be possible that it was written for the same reason that all religion is created? For the sole purpose of having power over the people?

Faith means the possible truth which you may choose to believe or not. You have a wrong concept about what proof is about.

Can you provide proof for the most part of human history? No one can. But does it mean that we should disregard human history?