Mis-translated Bible terms infavor of meat eating?

[bhaktajan]

As a long-standing member of the Hare Krishna Movement, I have learnt by some of my Hindu Vaishnav scholars that certain Bible terms are mis-translated:

Indeed, My ulterior motive is to get nations to turn swords to Plowshares ---this is done by ultimately having a "Change of Heart" as to the reality of fostering Flesh eating [meat in German is 'Fleisch']. Flesh eating begets violence and non-compassion and the illogic fantasy of obtaining peace in an enviroment of butcher-based society.

Vegetarianism as a sublime means of eating, is borne of ordhodox yoga disiplines ---therefore the higher goal of "a-himsa" (No-violence) ergo, "shanti" (peace) can be achieved.

Please review the Greek & hebrew terms, and kindly, verify or deny their veracity:

I'd like to cut and paste the whole Bible text, but for here are the Chapter/Verse of mention of NONE-FLESH EATING:

Old Testiment RE-CAP:

gen 1:29 [vs. Gen 9:3 ~immediately after recovery from the flood].

gen 9:4-5

num 11:33

Isaiah 1:11,15

Isaiah 66.3

Leviticus 3:17



Regarding, "Thou shall not Kill" ---reference:

The hebrew words are: 'Lo tirtzach' ---according to Dr Reuben Alcalay's 'Complete Hebrew/English Dictionary', 'tirtzach' refers to any kind of killing.

Christ was vegetarian ---there are 19 Gospel referneces to 'meat' all have been mis-translated from the original Greek Bible text:


Greek (3 of references) - English meaning:
Broma (4) - 'food' Romans 14:15, 20-21; I Corinthians 8:8, 10:3
Brosis (4) - 'the act of eating' Romans 14:17
Brosimos (1) - 'that which may be eaten'
Phago (3) - 'to eat' Luke 8:55
Prosphagon (1) - 'anything to eat'
Trophe (6) - 'nourishment' John 4:8, Acts 9:19, Acts 27:33-36
and,
Trapesa (?) - 'table' "...They set a table before him ..." Acts 16:34

Thus, John 21:5 "Have ye any meat" ---is incorrect. it should have been translated:
"Have ye 'anything to eat'"

Regarding, "FISH" ---reference: The secret & mystical symbol/Password for "Christian" in Roman Prosecution Times, derived from the Greek word for fish, ICHTHUS ---forming the acronym: Iesous Christos Theou Uios Soter (Jesus Christ Son of God Saviour)

New Testiment RE-CAP:

Matt 3:4 ~(the word 'locusts' used here means Locust beans, aka, carob, aka, St John's bread)
Luke 8:55 ~the word used here is 'phago' (to eat).
Isaiah 7:14,15 ~prophets predict Jesus's diet: "... Butter & Honey shall he eat ..."
Luke 24:41-43 ~Note the words used, Jesus was offered two things 'Fish and a honeycomb' "... and he took it . . ." indicates that he choose one of the two judging from Isaiah 7:15 [the word used here is 'brosimos' (eatable)].

See the Offence for fleash eating:

Greek word for FLESH is: 'kreas'
I Corinthians 8:13

::::::::::::::::::::::::

Can someone be brave enough to address these words ---for it is the next portal to world peace.

 

[TheKnight]

gen 1:29 [vs. Gen 9:3 ~immediately after recovery from the flood].

This is not after recovery from the flood. It's right after God created man and placed him in the garden.

There are Rabbinic opinions that Adam and Eve were not permitted to eat meat.

gen 9:4-5

This is right after the flood. The verse you quoted states that we shall not eat flesh with blood in it.

The verse right before it (9:3) says "Every moving thing that liveth shall be for food for you."

EVERY moving thing that lives.....in other words, meat.

num 11:33

God's anger in this verse is due to their lust for the meat. It was due to the fact that they were greedy and dissatisfied with what He had provided for them.

Isaiah 1:11,15

This chapter has nothing to do with eating meet for consumption. Read the entire chapter and it should be clear. If you need more explanation after reading it, I can do my best to provide that.

Isaiah 66.3

Again, not about eating meet. It is, however, similar to Isaiah 1. I would suggest reading all of Isaiah. It's quite the book.

Leviticus 3:17

This doesn't mean meat either. Jews and Non-Jews are both prohibited by their respective codes of law from consuming blood. Jews are prohibited from consuming fat.

 

[bhaktajan]

Mis-translated Bible terms


Where are the Terms that I assert are mistranslated?

1st - State the word that corresponds to meat.
2nd - State the ethomology of that term.

Please.

We are already aware of the status quo purports?

Example:
I am not asking, "Is that white cloud WHITE?"

I am asking about the word white; --is the word white it translated/represented correctly?

 

[TheKnight]

Mis-translated Bible terms


Where are the Terms that I assert are mistranslated?

1st - State the word that corresponds to meat.
2nd - State the ethomology of that term.

Please.

We are already aware of the status quo purports?

Example:
I am not asking, "Is that white cloud WHITE?"

I am asking about the word white; --is the word white it translated/represented correctly?

You stated one term that aren't mentioned in any of the verses I commented on.

 

[bhaktajan]

You stated a] one term that aren't mentioned in any of the verses I b] commented on.

a] Which Term? Are you also going to reply without mentioning the term, again?

b] I read english, I have read many an english translation of Bibles. It is not the Verse I need read--- I am aking about the term/word that is the "synonym for meat" that may or may-not be a direct english rendering; or it may be a euphamism for foodstuffs etc etc etc.

I am not an Anti-Semite.
I am anti-Bad (*****-up) Bad-Karma (ugra-karma = Bad-Karma).

I would think that a Jew would be pre-occupied with stopping Bad-Karma ---for themselves and those that would be their comrades.

We are not talking about the word G*D here!

So be brave and face the subject like a real mensch.

 

[Oberon]

The hebrew words are: 'Lo tirtzach' ---according to Dr Reuben Alcalay's 'Complete Hebrew/English Dictionary', 'tirtzach' refers to any kind of killing.

The hebrew word isn't tirzach. It is רָצַח/rahtsach. And it means to murder a person (see e.g. the BDB lexicon).

Christ was vegetarian ---there are 19 Gospel referneces to 'meat' all have been mis-translated from the original Greek Bible text:

Prosphagon (1) - 'anything to eat'

prosphagiov doesn't mean "anything to eat. Where are you getting this from? It means simply fish. See the BDAG on this one.

Thus, John 21:5 "Have ye any meat" ---is incorrect. it should have been translated:
"Have ye 'anything to eat'"

No. me ti prosphagion echete/have you any fish?

New Testiment RE-CAP:

Matt 3:4 ~(the word 'locusts' used here means Locust beans, aka, carob, aka, St John's bread)

No, it doesn't. akrides are locusts or grasshoppers.

Luke 8:55 ~the word used here is 'phago' (to eat).

phago means "I eat." phagein means "to eat."

Isaiah 7:14,15 ~prophets predict Jesus's diet: "... Butter & Honey shall he eat ..."
Luke 24:41-43 ~Note the words used, Jesus was offered two things 'Fish and a honeycomb' "... and he took it . . ." indicates that he choose one of the two judging from Isaiah 7:15 [the word used here is 'brosimos' (eatable)].

The word "it" isn't in the greek. Lk 24:43 simply has kai labon/and taking. As is so typical in greek, what he took is implied by what was offered. Putting "it" here (autôn) would only be necessary if Jesus selected one of the items offered. Morever, Lk 24:43 also states the Jesus ephagen autōn/ate them. Not it. Jesus ate both things offered.

Why is this thread in the Judaism DIR when it has all of this stuff from the NT?

 

[bhaktajan]

1] Thank you
2] I'll be back.
...
3] I'm back:

2:13,18. {Have ye aught to eat?} (\mý ti prosphagion echete;\).
The negative answer is expected by this polite inquiry as in
#4:29. The rare and late word \prosphagion\ from the root \phag\
(\esthiÏ\, to eat) and \pros\ (in addition) was used for a relish
with bread and then for fish as here. So in the papyri. Nowhere
else in the N.T.

Folks, I think "there's trouble in River City"
BTW, I know who I am, You know who I am ---I don't know who you stand for.

3] I'll be back again.

PS: Can I help it if when I say, 'mazel tov' ---I say it with more depth than you can measure?

 

[bhaktajan]

Why is this thread in the Judaism DIR when it has all of this stuff from the NT?

I need the help of Rabbis to aide in peace by investigating my Claims.
Such requested assistance is very late in coming.
Sorry for my part, but here I am pleading.

 

[Oberon]

then for fish as here. So in the papyri. Nowhere
else in the N.T.

Exactly. Fish.

BTW, I know who I am, You know who I am ---I don't know who you stand for.

I don't stand for anything here, other than accuracy. I have a M.A. in classical languages and an M.A. in biblical studies and spent years in grad school after getting my masters in a biblical studies program (NT focus). As a result, I am very good at reading greek, from homeric greek to hellenistic greek, and I can read hebrew (but not nearly as well).

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

*** Thread closed for staff review ***​

 

[Riverwolf]

***MOD POST***
Moved to Religious Debates.
Reopening
​

 

[Harmonious]

As a long-standing member of the Hare Krishna Movement, I have learnt by some of my Hindu Vaishnav scholars that certain Bible terms are mis-translated:

Indeed, My ulterior motive is to get nations to turn swords to Plowshares ---this is done by ultimately having a "Change of Heart" as to the reality of fostering Flesh eating [meat in German is 'Fleisch']. Flesh eating begets violence and non-compassion and the illogic fantasy of obtaining peace in an enviroment of butcher-based society.

Vegetarianism as a sublime means of eating, is borne of ordhodox yoga disiplines ---therefore the higher goal of "a-himsa" (No-violence) ergo, "shanti" (peace) can be achieved.

Please review the Greek & hebrew terms, and kindly, verify or deny their veracity:

I'd like to cut and paste the whole Bible text, but for here are the Chapter/Verse of mention of NONE-FLESH EATING:

Old Testiment RE-CAP:

gen 1:29 [vs. Gen 9:3 ~immediately after recovery from the flood].

gen 9:4-5

num 11:33

Isaiah 1:11,15

Isaiah 66.3

Leviticus 3:17



Regarding, "Thou shall not Kill" ---reference:

The hebrew words are: 'Lo tirtzach' ---according to Dr Reuben Alcalay's 'Complete Hebrew/English Dictionary', 'tirtzach' refers to any kind of killing.

::::::::::::::::::::::::

Can someone be brave enough to address these words ---for it is the next portal to world peace.

Sure thing.

I don't claim to know anything about Greek, so I'll let that alone.

As for the Hebrew...

Genesis 1:19

29. And God said, "Behold, I have given you every seed bearing herb, which is upon the surface of the entire earth, and every tree that has seed bearing fruit; it will be yours for food. כט. וַיֹּאמֶר אֱ־לֹהִים הִנֵּה נָתַתִּי לָכֶם אֶת כָּל עֵשֶׂב זֹרֵעַ זֶרַע אֲשֶׁר עַל פְּנֵי כָל הָאָרֶץ וְאֶת כָּל הָעֵץ אֲשֶׁר בּוֹ פְרִי עֵץ זֹרֵעַ זָרַע לָכֶם יִהְיֶה לְאָכְלָה
There is nothing there about meat, but it is acknowledged that this is permitting humanity to eat from any and all plants (except for the one that was forbidden).


Genesis 9:4-5

4. But, flesh with its soul, its blood, you shall not eat. ד. אַךְ בָּשָׂר בְּנַפְשׁוֹ דָמוֹ לֹא תֹאכֵלוּ: 5. But your blood, of your souls, I will demand [an account]; from the hand of every beast I will demand it, and from the hand of man, from the hand of each man, his brother, I will demand the soul of man. ה. וְאַךְ אֶת דִּמְכֶם לְנַפְשֹׁתֵיכֶם אֶדְרֹשׁ מִיַּד כָּל חַיָּה אֶדְרְשֶׁנּוּ וּמִיַּד הָאָדָם מִיַּד אִישׁ אָחִיו אֶדְרֹשׁ אֶת נֶפֶשׁ הָאָדָם:
I think the relevant root words you are looking for are:
Basar = flesh
Nefesh = soul
Dam = blood

This passage means that people are not supposed to eat living animals. Eat whatever animal you choose (assuming you're not Jewish - then the laws about that are a bit more complicated); just make sure it's dead first.

It also means that people are commanded not to eat blood. (I guess that means black pudding is right out.)

And it also means that people are forbidden from killing each other.

Leviticus 3:17

17. [This is] an eternal statute for all your generations, in all your dwelling places: You shall not eat any fat or any blood. יז. חֻקַּת עוֹלָם לְדֹרֹתֵיכֶם בְּכֹל מוֹשְׁבֹתֵיכֶם כָּל חֵלֶב וְכָל דָּם לֹא תֹאכֵלוּ:
I think the relevant words are:

Chelev = fat
Dam = blood

This is a commandment saying that Jews are forbidden to eat blood and certain fats. Which are a bit complicated to explain, but some are more easily identified than others. For example... Jews are forbidden to eat the tail of a sheep or a goat.

Numbers 11:33

33. The meat was still between their teeth; it was not yet finished, and the anger of the Lord flared against the people, and the Lord struck the people with a very mighty blow. לג. הַבָּשָׂר עוֹדֶנּוּ בֵּין שִׁנֵּיהֶם טֶרֶם יִכָּרֵת וְאַף יְ־הֹוָ־ה חָרָה בָעָם וַיַּךְ יְ־הֹוָ־ה בָּעָם מַכָּה רַבָּה מְאֹד:
The relevant word is:
Basar = meat

This passage refers, not to God being angry at people in general eating meat, but to the Jews who specifically ate the meat of this batch of quail. The Jews had just complained needlessly concerning the food that God provided in the desert, and God was angry with the people who complained.

Jews are permitted to eat quail, on a regular basis. It was the situation that God was angry about.

I don't have a fun place to cut and paste the Hebrew for Isaiah, but I will transliterate the verses and then translate them.

Isaiah 1:11, 15

11. Lama li rov zivcheichem yomar Hashem sava'ti 'olot eilim v'cheeilev 'ri'im v'dam parim uch'vasim v'atudim lo chafatzti.

11. Of what use are your many sacrifices to Me? says the Lord. I am sated with the burnt-offerings of rams and the fat of fattened cattle; and the blood of bulls and sheep and hegoats I do not want.

I believe the relevant root words are:
Ziva = sacrifice
'Ola = burnt offering
ayil = ram
Cheilev = fat
Re'e = fattened cattle
Dam = blood
Par = bull
Keves = sheep
'Atud = hegoat

15. Uv'farischem kapeichem a'lim 'einai mikem gam ki tarbu t'fila eineni shomei'a y'deichem damim malei'u.

15. And when you spread out your hands, I will hide My eyes from you, even when you pray at length, I do not hear; your hands are full of blood.

The only possible relevant word I can conceive of is Dam = blood.

This entire chapter has nothing to do with people eating, and everything to do with the trend at the time, which was to bring lots of sacrifices and offer lots of prayer, but dealing unjustly with fellow humans. God was annoyed that people were putting a higher value on the sacrifices and ignoring justice.

(By the way... the passage is NOT saying that God doesn't want sacrifices and prayers. It IS saying that treating people properly is MORE important, and that the people at the time were missing the point.)

Isaiah 66:3 is on that same theme.

3. Shochet hashor makei ish zoveach hase 'oref kelev ma'alei mincha dam chazir mazkir l'vona m'vareich aven gam heima bacharu b'darcheihem uv'kutzeihem nafsham chafeitza.

3. Whoever slaughters an ox has slain a man; he who slaughters a lamb is as though he beheads a dog; he who offers up a meal-offering is [like] swine blood; he who burns frankincense brings a gift of violence; they, too, chose their ways, and their soul desired their abominations.

The relevant words:
Shochet = slaughters
Shor = ox
Maka = plague, but in this context slaying
Ish = man
Zoveiach = slaughters (for sacrificial purposes)
Se = lamb
'Oref = beheads
Kelev = dog

Basically, the purpose of this passage is to say that people were bringing sacrifices for their poor treatment of fellow humans, but didn't really change their bad behavior. Therefore, the prophet is using some rather strong terms to show God's displeasure at the "indulgence" - bringing the sacrifices but not bothering to change the bad behavior wasn't worth the effort.

And for the translation you brought, you are mistaken.

Lo tirtzach very distinctly means "do not murder." Harag is the Hebrew word that means "kill" when referring to lawfully killing someone. Rachatz means "murder".

 

[Harmonious]

The hebrew word isn't tirzach. It is רָצַח/rahtsach. And it means to murder a person (see e.g. the BDB lexicon).

Oberon, Tirtzach is a different conjugation of the word Ratzach.

It is the same word root, but Tirtzach (as it is being used) is the singular masculine command form. Ratzach is the singular masculine third person past tense.

 

[Oberon]

Oberon, Tirtzach is a different conjugation of the word Ratzach.

It is the same word root, but Tirtzach (as it is being used) is the singular masculine command form. Ratzach is the singular masculine third person past tense.

Yeah I got that later when I actually bothered to look at the text. My hebrew is so much worse than my greek. It's the bias of NT focus in biblical studies.

 

[Harmonious]

Yeah I got that later when I actually bothered to look at the text. My hebrew is so much worse than my greek. It's the bias of NT focus in biblical studies.

Understood.

 

[bhaktajan]

Oy Boobalah, how I am always worrying for your welfare.

people were bringing sacrifices . . . for their poor treatment of fellow humans . . . but didn't really change their bad behavior.

. . . the prophet is using strong terms to show God's displeasure

bringing the sacrifices + bad behavior = wasn't worth the effort.

Which Prophet was speaking here accordingly?

bringing the sacrifices + bad behavior = wasn't worth the effort.

Hmm?

1 + 1 = negative 1 . . . ? . . . bad Karma?

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

My Dear Web-rebbe,
The Good News is we have the Law, "Treat Others as you would treat yourself".
The bad news is Hindu Law has no Law Stated Emphatically:
"Thou shall not Murder".

In the land of Ancient India whence the progressive maxim, "Treat Others as you would treat yourself" originates along side all the philosophical talk of "Good & Bad Karma", as espoused by devote Brahminical yoga-tistas ---no one needed to proclaim the propriety of Non-Homocide.

The Law applies to all, regardless of anyone's particular cases of negligence.

My intention is to stop murder of _________.

passage means that people are not supposed to eat living animals

My aim is not to nullify the Historical rendering of the past in Text and commandment ---but to shine light of the profound purports of the Scripture.

Lo tirtzach = "do not murder."
Harag = "kill"
Rachatz = "murder".

Nuanced word roots that had latter usages that inform us ---the concordance cross-references must be brought to bear!

<&#9835;Now I gonna sing that song the B.Streisand sang in 'Yentle' when she entered the Yeshiva &#9835;>

 

[Harmonious]

Oy Boobalah, how I am always worrying for your welfare.

:sarcastic

Um... Okay...

Which Prophet was speaking here accordingly?

Isaiah.

In case you didn't know, Jews are of the mind that only the Five Books of Moses were God-breathed. The other Prophets received visions from God, and they worded the prophecy how they saw fit.

Hmm?

1 + 1 = negative 1 . . . ? . . . bad Karma?

If thinking like that makes you happy, then I suppose so.

There is no reason that disparate belief systems can't touch and agree with each other, even if they seem to come from different sources.

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

My Dear Web-rebbe,
The Good News is we have the Law, "Treat Others as you would treat yourself".
The bad news is Hindu Law has no Law Stated Emphatically:
"Thou shall not Murder".

Interesting.

In the land of Ancient India whence the progressive maxim, "Treat Others as you would treat yourself" originates along side all the philosophical talk of "Good & Bad Karma", as espoused by devote Brahminical yoga-tistas ---no one needed to proclaim the propriety of Non-Homocide.

The Law applies to all, regardless of anyone's particular cases of negligence.

Hmm.

I guess the death penalty doesn't apply. Or, does Hinduism proclaim that war of self-defense is never to be waged?

All death is bad. Gotcha.

My intention is to stop murder of _________.

Killing animals does NOT constitute murder.

It might, as far as your belief system goes. But not at all according to MINE.

We are commanded to care for animals, but for the most part, they are there to be used for our purposes, whether as food, as clothes, as parchments, or to shear wool or to milk. Pets are a different level that I've never really had with animals, but they are there for that purpose, too.

My aim is not to nullify the Historical rendering of the past in Text and commandment ---but to shine light of the profound purports of the Scripture.

Lo tirtzach = "do not murder."
Harag = "kill"
Rachatz = "murder".

Nuanced word roots that had latter usages that inform us ---the concordance cross-references must be brought to bear!

Or people who actually know Hebrew, and have studied the laws that were given thereby can simply tell you.

So no... you don't win the prize for correcting my "historical usage" here.

<&#9835;Now I gonna sing that song the B.Streisand sang in 'Yentle' when she entered the Yeshiva &#9835;>

I'm not sure of the purpose of your OP, nor am I sure of your particular response to me. I gave you an honest translation to the best of my ability, answering your question, and you seem to scorn me for it.

That can't possibly be "treating others as you would treat yourself."

 

[McBell]

Flesh eating begets violence and non-compassion and the illogic fantasy of obtaining peace in an enviroment of butcher-based society.

Is there any science that supports this claim?

The hebrew words are: 'Lo tirtzach' ---according to Dr Reuben Alcalay's 'Complete Hebrew/English Dictionary', 'tirtzach' refers to any kind of killing.

There goes vegetarianism...

 

[bhaktajan]

Is there any science that supports this claim?

Wow, such air-tight logic? Or flailing in the dark?

Allow me to remind you of how the mother of invention was driven by neccessity to make advances in military technologies ---How Ironic that you asked.

Due to the scientific gains directly tied to military research and development, ... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_technology

I am shining the light in your caves!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I am not in denial ---I am trying to active in this regard!
Lethargy disquaifies students from proper certifications ---get off your rocking-horse and trust a stranger who speaks of those things you never ever knew anything about.

Again, how Ironic, that: "a stranger who speaks of those things you never ever knew anything about" ---is similar to Colombus' idea that The Earth is Round. Or Galileo's Ideas. Or Socrates, Or Tesla, or corporarte or govermental 'whistle-blowers' ---yet it does not sound like the 'rallying cries' of a Dictator's oration.

Again, how Ironic, that:

As senior scientists and engineers, we are deeply concerned that while the government is threatening to cut public funding for research and development, including world-class research into health and global environmental problems, it appears to be committed to maintaining high levels of military R&D such as the multibillion-pound research programme at the Atomic Weapons Establishment at Aldermaston.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2010/oct/13/cut-military-research-spending

Must of us don't farm, manufacture, invent, dispense medical miracles, or make a living from entertaining elites attendees ---but we do seek any way to pay for those "Services and commodities".

 

[McBell]

Wow, such air-tight logic? Or flailing in the dark?

Allow me to remind you of how the mother of invention was driven by neccessity to make advances in military technologies ---How Ironic that you asked.

Is that your way of saying "no"?