The Bible is totally mistranslated

B

bigbear31

Registered Member
Okay I want to say that the Bible is mistranslated way too much and should NOT be taken literally!! There are too many people going around quoting bible scriptures and such which are totally misunderstood.
I speak some Hebrew and my wife is from Israel. She knows Hebrew because she grew up in Israel, she also knows Aramaic Hebrew which is slightly different. (You can compare today's English with English from the middle ages, that is the difference between Hebrew and Aramaic, it's just old words that people don't use as much today except for religious readings.)
The old testament was written in Hebrew and some of the New Testament was written in Aramaic, any Israeli can read the original texts of the bible.

My point is the bible was first translated from Hebrew to Greek. The first English crusaders translated from the GREEK TEXT NOT THE HEBREW TEXT! For instance Mary (the mother of Jesus) was referred to as an "ALMAH" in hebrew this means "Young woman." When the Greeks translated it to Greek "Young Woman" became "Virgin." No where in the original text does it state Mary was ever a virgin!! When Jesus rose from the grave he said to Mary Magnalene "Don't touch me!" In english we would assume this means,"Don't touch me." Actually in the hebrew text it is "Don't hold on to me with your heart!" In these translations chapters were reordered by the crusaders leading up to the birth of Jesus. (Do your research all of this info is available.)

Unfortunately Hebrew is the only language that cannot be scientifically translated to English. They have alot of words with double and triple meanings and some of their words do not exist in our vocabulary!! There are also two forms of "you" so you know whether you are speaking to a man (ata) or woman (at) and everything that exists can be either masculine or feminine which can add to confusion when translating to a language that has no masculine or feminine.

The Israelis do NOT believe that Jesus (which was NOT his birth name, his name was "Yehoshua" or "Joshua" in English. The Jews changed it to "Yehoshu" or "Jesus" because the "HA" in Yehoshua contained part of the name of God and the Othodox Jews didn't like him.) was the son of God only that he was a great Prophet of God like Moses. I believe in God and follow my heart because I believe God will put the answers there if you ask him to, I believe you can call on Jesus and he will help you also. I think prayers are answered when you ask. But as far as the bible is concerned I would not take it literally.
 
This is interesting

The New Testament, was originally written in Greek. Greek was the language of scholarship during the years of the composition of the New Testament from 50 to 100 AD.

It was around 300 BC a translation of the Old Testament from Hebrew into Greek was undertaken, and it was completed around 200 BC.

So if the New Testament was originally written in Greek, what was the problem with the translation of the New Testament into English?
 
You're Probably Right About A Lot Of This, But

Originally posted by bigbear31
. . . Hebrew is the only language that cannot be scientifically translated to English.
Click to expand...
Bah.
 
Originally posted by Vienna
This is interesting

The New Testament, was originally written in Greek. Greek was the language of scholarship during the years of the composition of the New Testament from 50 to 100 AD.

It was around 300 BC a translation of the Old Testament from Hebrew into Greek was undertaken, and it was completed around 200 BC.

So if the New Testament was originally written in Greek, what was the problem with the translation of the New Testament into English?
Click to expand...

The NEW Testament was originally written in Greek. It would probably have been easier to record Jesus' words in the Hebrew or Aramaic he used since it also is a far cry from Greek. You see none of these words were ever spoken in Greek. When you translate to Greek the meaning is lost and even further lost when translated to English although you can translate from Greek to English with accuracy.
You can blame Alexander the Great who had established Greek as the universal language of his empire – and that legacy still remained

The Hebrew word "almah," which appears in Isaiah 7:14 is thought by modern lexicographers to be derived not from "alam"
but from the Hebrew root aleph*lamed*mem which means, "to be ripe" and thus, by extension, implies one who is of marriageable age. In Classical Greek the word parthenos simply meant "a young woman" or "girl" and had no specific meaning of virginity. It later acquired the meaning of "virgin." (I also have seen research to show it was the English translation that changed the meaning, although there are mixed views on this.) It is very easy to get the meanings misinterpreted.

Also take into account that if you went back in time and spoke to someone who lived in the 1960's, the slang and the meaning of words would be slightly different. Now take that back to 200 BC and change the language in which it was actually spoken translate it into a foreign language and then try to understand it today. Also remember people were very naive in those times!!
 
Re: You're Probably Right About A Lot Of This, But

Originally posted by LaoTzu
Bah.
Click to expand...

Well I know Hebrew to English is like day and night. Although Israelis now are taught English as a requirement in grade school. I actually read a quote that said there is no exact science in the translation and it is the only language as such. I know there are some words that are difficult or almost impossible to translate because they have strange meanings or meanings we don't use in English.
I am still learning from my wife and it's not as difficult as it seems once you learn the basic alephbet (Alphabet) although like I mentioned before there are some strange words that are hard to understand.
 
Originally posted by Vienna
This is interesting

The New Testament, was originally written in Greek. Greek was the language of scholarship during the years of the composition of the New Testament from 50 to 100 AD.

It was around 300 BC a translation of the Old Testament from Hebrew into Greek was undertaken, and it was completed around 200 BC.

So if the New Testament was originally written in Greek, what was the problem with the translation of the New Testament into English?
Click to expand...


The reason the Israelis disregard the New Testament is because it was NOT written in their language. Why should they believe it?? It probably wasn't written by their people. They do not believe that Jesus was the son of God. There is even a lack of evidence as to who wrote the NEW TESTAMENT. Whoever said that whoever wrote it was actually even there?? Some people say the Roman Piso family wrote the New Testament.

The first generation of Christians didn't see any need for a permanent written record of the sayings and stories of Jesus. Jesus' return and the restoration of the Kingdom of God on earth were imminent--why bother preserving stories if the world was about to end? Stories were simply passed along orally, primarily as a means of preaching and convincing outsiders. But as the first generation began to die off and hopes for the Second Coming dimmed, there was a need to preserve Jesus' words and deeds for posterity.
 
Not Really The Point Of Your Arguments, But Oh Well

Originally posted by bigbear31
Well I know Hebrew to English is like day and night . . . .
Click to expand...
Oh, I'm not disputing that it's difficult to translate. I'm just saying that it's by no means the ONLY one that is: oriental languages, arabic, african languages, even the romance languages in some cases, have words with no exact equivalent in English. Your statements seemed to imply that there were English-based languages and then there was Hebrew, and nothing else. I was just being picky.
 
I guess you could be right on that point since I know little about oriental and African languages (which are also very old) and Arabic stems from Hebrew some where down the line I believe.
 
Hello Bigbear,

I have read all what you have written, initially I was unaware of the translation problems until I read your logical explanations.

Yes, the Bible is nothing more than a collection of badly told stories and chinese whispers, I couldn't agree more.
 
Out of curiosity, whatever happened to the original copy of the Bible?
 
Out of curiosity, whatever happened to the original copy of the Bible?

Well, a couple of thousand years ago there were these two guys walking down a sandy road when they came across a book on the ground. One of them picked it up and the other said "Whats that book about?". The other guy replied "Dunno, its all Greek to me", and threw it in a bin. :D
 
Originally posted by Vienna
Out of curiosity, whatever happened to the original copy of the Bible?

Well, a couple of thousand years ago there were these two guys walking down a sandy road when they came across a book on the ground. One of them picked it up and the other said "Whats that book about?". The other guy replied "Dunno, its all Greek to me", and threw it in a bin. :D
Click to expand...

haven't you seen Indiana Jones and the Temple of the lost ark? :D
It can answer at least part of your question...

Ark of the Covenant (quotes from various websites do a search anywhere)

In Judaism and Christianity, the ornate, gold-plated wooden chest that in biblical times housed the two tablets of the Law given to Moses by God. The Levites carried the Ark during the Hebrews' wandering in the wilderness. Following the conquest of Canaan, it was kept at Shiloh, but was sometimes carried into battle by the Israelites. David took it to Jerusalem, and Solomon placed it in the Temple of Jerusalem, where it rested in the Holy of Holies and was seen only by the high priest on Yom Kippur. Its final fate is unknown.

Interestingly, the thesis of the Raiders of the Lost Ark, that the Ark was taken from the Temple by Egyptian Pharaoh Shishak is not a popular view today. This may be due to the lack of traditions suggesting the Ark's presence at the mouth of the Nile, in Lower Egypt.

Others suggest the Ark is hidden somewhere near the Dead Sea, on the Jordan's west bank. This location is usually considered in association with the ancient site of Qumran and the people of the Dead Sea Scrolls. Here, the Ark and other artifacts are believed buried in one of the region's caves, like the Dead Sea Scrolls.

Apparently the Ark now lies somewhere inside Ethiopia and is being guarded by some monks etc BUT this is disputed as nobody really ever gets to see it. WHY? a) it is sacred and needs not be seen b) they say if you did see the writing of god you'd die and c) it's all so convenient.


ps- my real reason for subscribing to this thread is because i would like to know what the english translation has totally mistranslated? is there more of a message to understand? does the whole idea of god make sense suddenly because mary was a young girl and not a virgin? I'm really just interested in knowing what a brand new, and correct translation might bring? would it bring anything new or better or more convincing? i doubt it. We all know there were no 3 kings mentioned in the bible nor was there any apple made mention of, but so what? it just goes to show how people have change the stories to suit themselves, always have and always will.
 
I think there are alot of basic rules in the Bible that are useful. Such as "don't kill, don't steal, treat people with respect, so forth and so forth." These are things people need to know if we are going to survive and live with each other. I don't think we could ever really understand alot of the Bible because the meanings died about 2000 years ago, but I think the basic idea is there to teach us.
But the real truth is "YES" things have been changed so much to suit people's needs that the truth is lost somewhere back in Israel a long time ago. Even then what was the truth??
I just don't like it when people quote sayings in the Bible and say that it is the ONE AND ONLY answer to everything.
 
how do you think muslim's feel about christians and vice versa? it's the same as what your saying about mixed up bible quotes, it's all the same, it would annoy each religion equally because you are saying that this is the correct way, what about all those people who don't believe in the bible at all and believe in something else? you should be angry at them for the same reason you are angry at bible literalists, the reason being that their version of religion goes beyond themselves(lust for power perhaps i cannot judge) and yours does not, nor should it.
religion is a personal thing, henceforth it should remain personal.
 
I really don't believe in Religion. I know that too many people have died in the name of Religion!! Religion creates war, a simple belief in God whether it be Allah, God or Buddha cannot harm others unless religion is involved.
When Religion is involved people try and push their religions on others which creates conflict, these are the people who spend their time spouting off Bible quotes. You can believe in God and not condemn others for what they believe. I only condemn people who condemn me for not going to church or thinking the Bible is the ONLY answer to everything. I would consider myself on the defensive not the offensive.
 
bigbear's big boo boo

Originally posted by bigbear31
My point is the bible was first translated from Hebrew to Greek. The first English crusaders translated from the GREEK TEXT NOT THE HEBREW TEXT!
Click to expand...
With all due respect to your wife, your point is embarrassingly wrong. For example, the Torah "was first translated from Hebrew to Greek" by Hellenistic Jews at Alexandria during the period 275 - 100 BCE, while the English Crusades occurred in 1095-1500 CE. Not only did you 'indict' the wrong people, you were off by more than a millenium - that's pretty bad for 2 short sentences. :D
 
ever had a line of people that had to pass on a sentence from one person to another...remember the outcome? gibberish...

and then realize that the NT was written a long time after the so-called events took place.
And then it was translated...

and then we interpreted this historic book with our modern views?

care to guess how reliable this all is?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top