It might help you to go back to the basics, as it were, and take a closer look at the origins of the book we know as the Bible, and more specifically the "Old Testament". An excellent introduction to this topic is Richard Friedman's Who Wrote the Bible? Consider this: Moses, according to tradition, wrote the first five books of the Bible. Yet, that would mean that Moses called himself the "meekest man", something that a meek man probably would not do. Also, there are two different occasions where Moses has to get water for the people:
"But in Numbers xx, under the marginal date 1453 B.C. (that is, 38 years later), the same or a very similar story is told again, but differently. For "then came the children of Israel into the desert of Zin [instead of Sin], in the first month," and stopped at Kadesh; and "there was no water for the congregation"; so they wailed and rioted again, because they and their cattle were like to die. This time Yahveh told Moses to take his rod and go with Aaron to a certain rock, and "speak ye to the rock" -- instead of using the rod to smite it. But Moses was annoyed this time, and he meekly yelled at the Israelites: "Hear now, ye rebels" (xx, 10), and instead of gently speaking to the rock, as Yahveh had commanded, he "lifted up his hand, and with his rod he smote the rock twice," and the waters gushed forth abundantly.
"But now Yahveh was angry with Moses and Aaron, and he said to them: "Because ye have not believed me, therefore ye shall not bring this congregation into the land which I have given them"; and the sacred writer informs us: "This is the water of Meribah; because the children of Israel strove with Yahveh" (xx, 13). Here we have the desert of Sin and the desert of Zin, and two waters Meribah, but thirty-eight years apart, and each with entirely different circumstances; which was which let him unravel who is curious. In either event, so far as revealed, this is about all the water that the millions of Chosen and their millions of cattle had to drink in the terrible wilderness for almost forty years."
From Is It God's Word? by Joseph Wheless
Dave
PrimateDave
JoinedPosts by PrimateDave
-
15
What Chance Do You Think You Have?
by Legolas inok...please bare with me; i'm trying to get my thought out through a headache...lol.
what kind of chance do you think you have with god?...meaning that if the 'meekest man' on earth pissed god off, (and i still don't really know why) so that god punished him with death before they entered the 'promised land', something that moses waited over 40 years for, what chance do you think you have?.
i mean think of it....here's moses living his whole life around god (closer than anyone today) and god punished him...(btw...who can tell me what horrible crime he did anyway?).
-
-
PrimateDave
-
11
Do you think that Jehovah and Jesus should take some of the blame?
by booker-t ini truly love jehovah and jesus and no matter what i will always serve them, but sometimes i feel that jehovah and jesus are the blame for satan the devil getting totally out of control.
i just don't understand(and maybe never will) why jehovah and jesus have allowed satan and the demons to cause nothing but heartache for thousands and thousands of years.
people always talk about free will and that jehovah has a bigger plan ahead but why should people have to suffer misery in order to possibly gain happiness?
-
-
PrimateDave
Prove to me that they exist, and then I'll let you know if they are blameworthy. Should Isis and Osiris take some of the blame? Should Shiva and Vishnu take some of the blame? Maybe Molech or the Baal-Peor? Zeus, Apollo, Athena? But I digress. If Jehovah/Yahweh and Jesus/Joshua exist, then they are the cause of death and suffering for all mankind. To prove - what? that Jehovah/Yahweh is a murderously insecure deity strangely preoccupied with the condition of male genitalia and who loves the smell of burnt flesh? Besides, if you are aware of a child being molested, and you do nothing about it in order to find out if the child deserves salvation from his/her unfortunate predicament, then you're just as despicable as the molester. The worship of nonexistent deities is a game that should have been over a long time ago.
Dave -
45
What is your favorite Bible Translation?
by Lo-ru-hamah indo you have a favorite translation?
king james, niv, or others that i might not of heard of that are perhaps more poetically written.
or a style/version that you particularly like?.
-
-
PrimateDave
Thank you Narkissos. I am no scholar. I have often been impressed with your posts and your objectivity. And you are correct once again: the author cannot conclusively prove that all instances of elohim should be translated as "gods". I believe, however, that he was attempting to introduce the possibility that the verbs have themselves been tampered with, suggesting that perhaps in many instances the character indicating plurality had been dropped. He said, "But the actual verb plural-form (which in Hebrew is the tiny vav -- "u" -- tacked on the end, as we add "s" in English to form the plural of nouns), although mostly missing, is a number of times to be found..." Please don't think I am harping on the point. It is for me a matter of intellectual curiosity. It certainly wouldn't hurt my feelings to be wrong.
While my first language is English, I have been speaking (and I would say still learning) Spanish for nearly twenty years. I live in the Spanish Carribean (not Jamaica
and use Spanish on a daily basis. So, I too am well aware of the difficulties found in translation, though I have never done so professionally. Even in related languages like French, Spanish, and English, it can sometimes be awkward to make a perfect translation; how much more difficult it has to be to come up with an adequate translation of works in ancient dead languages! Modern Bible translation committees are for the most part to be commended for the level of effort that they apply to a monumental task. And, yes, they have to consider their customer's expectations.
One additional point about the JPS Tanakh: the translators are honest enough to admit when the original meaning of a passage in the received text is vague, making an accurate translation difficult if not impossible. On top of that the English text is structured well, making it very readable and understandable. Naturally, it uses the terms "Lord" and "God" instead of Jehovah or Yahweh, but the Hebrew text with vowel points is right there along side of the English translation.
Dave -
45
What is your favorite Bible Translation?
by Lo-ru-hamah indo you have a favorite translation?
king james, niv, or others that i might not of heard of that are perhaps more poetically written.
or a style/version that you particularly like?.
-
-
PrimateDave
Yes, those are good points Narkissos. I am aware of some of those instances, and you are right about them. Then there is the matter of redaction that you mention, which of course brings into question the issue of "inspiration". Did the god(s) have to keep going back over their sacred text until they got it the way they liked it? No, of course not. Did the writers of its various parts have the faintest idea that their work was someday going to be called an "inspired" text? Most likely not.
Back to the word elohim for a moment. I am basing my assumptions on the following text posted for the fun of it, as I am open to opinions and counterarguments:
This brings us to the climax of "revelation" of the Hebrew Scriptures, which to many good Christians and Hebrews alike, brought up on professional translations, may well seem startling; but which will now be fully proved by the literal words of the Hebrew Scriptures -- the patent plurality of Hebrew gods in their revelation to man.
The English, Latin, Greek, and other versions "diligently compared and revised" by professional "divines," to which texts the acquaintance of the vast majority of people is confined, diligently and persistently conceal this cardinal fact under a form of translation designed to give us a belief in an Only One God of Israel from "the beginning," who created heaven and earth, and performed the many wonders related as revealed. But this is a pious fraud; for, according to the texts of the Hebrew Scriptures, in their original language, all the works of creation and the many acts appearing in translation and in theology as of a One and Only God are attributed not to any One God, but to "the gods."
THE ORIGINAL HEBREW WORDS
It is no work of pedantic erudition but a simple and easy accomplishment for any one who will take the pains to learn the twenty-two consonantal letters of the Hebrew alphabet to recognize by sight and distinguish between four Hebrew words applied to the Hebrew God and gods, plainly printed in the texts of the "Word of God": first, their word El (Heb., S$ ), meaning God or spirit- shade; the plural forms of that word, elohim (Heb., nli'l?14 ) and elohe (Heb., 6$'lg& ); then their name-word Yahveh (Heb., L%*#!| ), or Jehovah, which is persistently falsely concealed and rendered in translation simply by the title "Lord"; and then the actual Hebrew- Chaldean word for "lord," which is "adon" (Heb., J'I$ ). Equipped with this easy and elementary learning, we shall proceed to pick out and examine these four words in some of the principal instances where they occur in the Hebrew texts, and ourselves "diligently compare" them with the pious mistranslations of the English versions -- asking any scholarly "Doctor of Divinity" to deny the result if he truthfully can.
"THE GODS CREATED"
In the very first sentence of Genesis, the Book of Beginnings, we find the "revelation" of the plurality of gods -- elohim: In- beginning created ELOHIM [gods] the-heavens and-the-earth" (Gen. i, 1). The forms of the sentences show the order of the Hebrew words, and the hyphens indicate the combination of the particles "and," "the," etc., which are joined to the noun in Hebrew and written as one word; e.g., "theheavens," "andtheearth." "And-the-spirit [ruach, wind] of-elohim [gods] moved upon-the-face of-the-abyss" (i, 2); "And-said elohim [gods], let-there-be light." And thus, for thirty-three times in the first chapter of Genesis, we read "ELOHIM" (gods) -- always plural, always "gods," but always translated "God."
There is proof of plurality which even translation cannot in this instance conceal: "And-said ELOHIM [gods], Let-make-us man [adam] in-image-our, after-likeness-our" (i, 26). And the words of the text indicate there must have been female gods, too; for it is recorded: "And-created elohim the-adam [man]; in-the-image of- elohim [gods] created-he-him; male-and-female created-he-them." This is reiterated for positive assurance: "In-the-day that elohim created adam [man], in-the-likeness of-elohim [gods] made-he-them; male-and-female created-he-them; and-blessed them, and-called name- their adam [man], in-the-day when they-were-created" (Gen. v, 1-2).
Not one God, but a plurality of gods, from the very beginning of Hebrew Scripture is further proved by the familiar dialogue between the serpent and the woman: "And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die; for elohim [gods] do know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods [elohim], knowing good and evil" (Gen. iii, 5). And the serpent spoke true; and when Yahveh-Elohim heard that the- man and the-woman had eaten the forbidden fruit of the tree of knowledge, he (they) said., "Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil" (iii, 22). Here certainly is one god speaking to another god or a whole assembly or Olympus of gods.
In the second, or Jahvistic, chapter, we first encounter the variants Yahveh and "Yahveh Elohim"' (Yahveh being here, as often, abbreviated: "yy"), which distinguish the use of a second and very often conflicting source, as is elsewhere pointed out. The Elohist account of creation, using the word "elohim, ends with Genesis ii, 3; immediately the totally different "Jahvistic" narrative begins: "In the day [not the six days of the Elohist version] that Yahveh Elohim made the earth and the heavens" (ii, 4). We find Yahveh Elohim thirteen times in the second chapter, doing a totally different work of creation -- always Yahveh Elohim, always plural, always "gods," but always misrendered "Lord God."
YAHVEH ELOHIM is the ordinary Hebrew "construct" form used to express the genitive, or possessive, case, there being no equivalent for "of" in Hebrew. "The relation of the genitive is regularly expressed by attaching the genitive noun to the preceding nomens regens in the construct state" (Gesenius, Hebrew Grammar, see. 114). The reader is already familiar with examples: beth-el, house of god; beth-ha-elohim, house of the gods; ben-adam, son of man, or of men; beni-ha-elohim, sons of the gods; Yahveh elohe- yishrael, Yahveh god of Israel; "Yahveh your God is elohe ha- elohim, and adonai ha-adonim, ha-el haggadol [God of the gods, and Lord of the lords, the great God]" (Deut. x, 17). Yahveh-elohim therefore is simply "Yahveh-of-the-gods," "Yahveh God-of-gods"; precisely, "Yahveh one of, chief of, the gods." In the same way elohe is used in the "construct state" for singular and plural, followed by the genitive of the governed noun, as in the examples just cited; for example, elohe yishrael, God of Israel; elohe ha- elohim, God of the gods; Yahveh elohe-ka, Yahveh thy God.
Chapter iii is composite, and we find sometimes Elohim, sometimes Yahveh Elohim; but always the plural; and so in chapter iv. Even more explicit are the words of chapter v, where it is twice recorded: "And Enoch walked with THE-GODS [ha-elohim]; and (gods) [elohim] took him" (22, 24). And so of Noah, in chapter vi: "And Noah was a just man; he walked with the-gods" (ha-elohim; vi, 9). Chapter vi is a veritable medley of composition, and of plurality of deity, beginning the fable of the Flood: "The SONS of the GODS [beni ha-elohim -- a Hebraism for 'the gods'] saw the daughters of men" (vi, 2), and (vi, 3) "Yahveh said." And again (vi, 4): "The sons of the GODS [beni ha-elohim] came in unto the daughters of men, and they bore children unto them"; and (vi, 5) "Yahveh saw." "The earth was corrupted before THE GODS [ha-elohim]" (vi, 11); and (vi, 12) "Elohim [gods] saw the earth"; and (vi, 13) "Elohim [gods] said to Noah"; and (vi, 22) "Noah did all that elohim commanded him." Here again, the word is always plural (except where we have Yahveh), always the gods, but it is always rendered "God."
"The sons of the gods" (beni ha-elohim -- a synonym for Gods) are frequently mentioned in the Hebrew Scriptures: "the sons of the gods came to present themselves before Yahveh" (Job i, 6; ii, 1); and "all the sons of the gods shouted for joy" (Job xxxviii, 7). The God of the Hiebrews was thus plainly not one God, but a plurality of gods and goddesses, who themselves, [Eneye. Bib., Vol. IV, cols. 4690-91; art. Son of God.] or whose children were of so sportive a nature that they corrupted the earth and brought on its fabled destruction by the Flood of Noah.
Now we have a singular confirmation of the plurality of the Hebrew elohim (gods), and of their identity with the elohim (gods) of the other heathen tribes and peoples thereabouts. In Genesis xx, Abraham takes Sarah, his wife, and journeys to Gerar, in the Philistine country, of which the king was Abimelech, whose name signifies "Moloch (or the king) is my father" -- certainly a heathen who knew not the supposed One-God, Yahveh, of Abraham. Abimelech, according to a jovial custom of the country, took Sarah and slept with her, thinking she was Abraham's sister, as he had falsely stated. Lo, "Elohim [gods] came to Abimelech in a dream" (xx, 3) and warned him of the error of his way; and "the gods [ha- elohim] said unto him in the dream" (xx, 6). Being a heathen, Abimelech would hardly dream of foreign Hebrew gods; they were clearly the same elohim with which he was familiar. Abimelech was scared sick; but Abraham "prayed unto THE GODS [ha-elohim], and elohim healed Abimelech" (xx, 17).
In Genesis xxii, 1, "it came to pass that the gods [ha-elohim] tempted Abraham" -- as he dreamed -- to offer up Isaac as a sacrifice; and Abraham (xxii, 3) rose up and took Isaac and "went unto the place which THE GODs [ha-elohim] told him"; but fortunately at the critical moment (xxii, 11) "an angel of Yahveh" called out and checked his hand from the human sacrifice. When Isaac came to die, and Jacob, disguised to feel like Esau, came in to receive the stolen blessing, Isaac said: "You smell like a field which Yahveh has blessed" (xxvii, 27); "may THE GODS [ha-elohim] give thee," etc. (xxvii, 28). Then, in chapter xxviii, Isaac further says to Jacob: "And El-shaddai [God my Daemon] bless thee" (xxviii, 3); "mayst thou inherit the land which elohim [gods] gave unto Abraham" (xxviii, 4). Here, again, throughout, is the plural, "THE GODS," (always rendered "God") and a fairly clear distinction is always made between the particular El, Yahveh, and the plural Elohim, gods in general.
Yet a little more, "to make assurance doubly sure" that the God of the Hebrews was "THE GODS" of the other heathens among whom they lived. Jacob had played his notorious cattle-breeding tricks on his heathen father-in-law Laban, who got angry and broke up the family arrangements. Thereupon "an angel Of THE GODS [ha-elohim]" (Gen. xxxi, 11), spoke to Jacob in a dream; and said: "I am THE GOD of Beth-el [ha-el-Beth-el]" (xxxi, 13), and advised him to take secret leave of Laban, and return to his own country; and Jacob's wives, who were plain Chaldee heathens, said to him, "all that elohim [gods] said unto thee, do" (xxxi, 16). Then Rachel, one of his heathen wives, daughter of the heathen Laban "stole the teraphim [phallic idols] which belonged to her father" (xxxi, 19) and the Jacob family fled. Laban pursued after them for a week before he caught them; and "elohim [gods] came upon Laban the Syrian in a dream, and said," etc. (xxxi, 24). And Laban said to Jacob: "Why hast thou stolen my GODS [elohim]?" (xxxi, 30); and Jacob told Laban to search for them, and said: "Whoever hath THY GODS [elohim] shall not live" (xxxi, 32). Laban searched, but Rachel had hidden the idols, and Laban could not find them. After a quarrel between them, Jacob invoked "THE GODS" (elohe) of his father Abraham for making peace between them; and he set up a phallic mazzebah ("pillar") for a testimonial (xxxi, 45), and invoked the GODS (elohe) of Abraham, Nabor, etc., to "judge between us" (xxxi, 53). Then Jacob went on his way, "and angels Of THE GODS met him" (xxxii, 1), and Jacob called them "the hosts of THE GODS" (xxxii, 2). Thus all through these chapters and following ones, we find nothing but elohim, ha-elohim and elohe (gods) for heathen Laban's teraphim-gods and Jacob's gods alike.
At Jabbok Jacob fought with a stranger, who asked him his name; and the stranger changed Jacob's name to Israel, for "thou hast fought with GODS [elohim] and with men" (Gen. xxxii, 28); and Jacob called the place Peni-el ("face-of-God"; xxxii, 31), for, he said, "I have seen GODS [elohim] face to face." Jacob erected an altar and called it El-Elohe-Israel (xxxiii, 20) -- "GOD OF THE GODS of Israel" -- positive proof of belief in a plurality of gods.
In chapter xxxv the plurality of GODS, Hebrew and "strange" is further clearly shown: "Elohim [gods] said to Jacob, Go to Beth-el, and make there an altar unto THE GOD [ha-el] who appeared to thee when thou fleddest" (xxxv, 1); then "Jacob said unto his household, Put away the strange Gods [elohe] which are in your midst" (xxxv, 2); and "I will make there an altar to THE GOD [ha-el] who," etc. (xxxv, 3); and "they gave unto Jacob all the strange gods [elohe]" (xxxv, 4); and Jacob came to Beth-el and built an altar which he called "El-bethel, because there the gods [ha-elohim] appeared [Heb., were revealed] unto him" (xxxv, 7). Thus distinction is clearly made between a particular el (god), and the generality of elohim or elohe, (gods) common to the heathen peoples of those parts.
Pharaoh dreamed a dream, and called on Joseph to interpret it. This "baal of dreams" (dream-master), as his brothers called him (Gen. xxxvii, 19), said to Pharaoh: "What ha-elohim [the gods] is about to do, he has told Pharaoh" (Gen. xli, 25); and "the thing is settled by ha-elohim" [the gods; xli, 28]; and "ha-elohim [the gods] is hastening to do it" (xli, 33). Pharaoh certainly knew of no Hebrew only-one God, but all the gods of Egypt, and of them clearly he spoke, saying to his servants: "Can we find such a one as this is, a man in whom is the spirit of elohim? [gods; xli, 38]"; and to Joseph he said: "Forasmuch as elohim has shewed thee all this" (xli, 39). The elohim of Pharaoh and the ha-elohim of Joseph were clearly one and the same gods to whom they both appealed. To his brothers Joseph said: "It was not you that sent me hither, but ha-elohim [the gods]" (Gen. xlv, 8); and "elohim [gods] has made me lord [adon] of all Egypt" (xlv, 9).
That the Egyptian Pharaohs by elohim meant only their own myriad gods is made evident by the incident of 430 years later, when the Pharaoh of that time commanded the Hebrew midwives to kill all the male Hebrew children as they were born; and it is twice said, "but the midwives feared ha-elohim" (the gods; Ex. i, 17, 21). Surely these were none other than the gods of Egypt, for after 430 years in Egypt the Hebrew slaves knew of no other gods; even Moses knew not Yahveh and had to ask his name; and for centuries, down to the time of Ezekiel, "they did not forsake ha-elohim [the gods] of Egypt" (Ezek. xx, 8). It cannot be gainsaid that elohim is plural, and means and reveals more gods than one, wherever used either of Hebrew ha-elohim or of ha-elohim of Egypt and other heathen lands round about Israel.
PLURALITY OF GODS BETRAYED
Plural Nouns and Plural Verbs
All through the Book of Genesis we see "the-gods" of the ancient Hebrews, who are throughout just like the-gods of their heathen neighbors. It is but fair to say, for what it is worth, that the verbs used, for the most part, in the Hebrew texts with this plural elohim are generally in the singular number. The verb- forms "am," "is", "are," "was," "were," and such forms of the present and imperfect tenses of the verb "to be" are not used in Hebrew, as any one may see by glancing down any page of the Authorized Version of the Old Testament, where these words are always written in italics, signifying that they do not occur in the original.
But the actual verb plural-form (which in Hebrew is the tiny vav -- "u" -- tacked on the end, as we add "s" in English to form the plural of nouns), although mostly missing, is a number of times to be found, and is undeniable proof of the plurality of ha-elohim. Father Abraham himself avows this plurality: "When elohim [gods] caused [plural: hith-u] me to wander from my father's house" (Gen. xx, 13). Jacob built an altar at Luz, "and called the place El- bethel"; because there ha-elohim were revealed [plural: nigl-u] unto him" (Gen. x-xxv, 7). And David makes the selfsame open avowal of the plural gods of Israel: "Israel, whom gods [elohim] went [plural: balk-u] to redeem ... from the nations and their gods [elohim]" (2 Sam. vii, 23).
The law says: "At the mouth of two witnesses, or at the mouth of three witnesses, shall the matter be established" (Deut. xix, 15). Here then is the fulfillment of the law: three witnesses, of the chiefest of Israel, have declared by inspiration the plurality of the gods of Israel. But there is more textual proof of plurality of the-gods of Israel. Moses uses the plural adjective with the plural noun elohim: "hath heard the voice of the living gods [elohim hayyim]" (Deut. v, 26; Heb. text, v, 23). And twice David threatens Goliath for defying "the armies of the living gods" (elohim hayyim; I Sam. xvii, 26, 36). Here we have six times the textual admission of the plurality of elohim; the editorial blue- pencil overlooked the little "u" plural-sign of the Hebrew verbs and the unobtrusive "im" of the adjective; as, on the recently discovered throne of Tut-ankh-Amen, the zealous orthodox priests of the king undertook to change the numerous heretical mono-theistic Aten-signs blazoned thereon to Amen-signs of the orthodox faith, but in an instance or two overlooked the Aten-sign left unchanged through the ages, a silent but potent witness to the "One-God" heresy of Amenhotep IV and the youthful Tut-ankh-Amen, before he was forced by the priests back into the prevalent polytheism.
The "Plural of Dignity"
The apologists for the use of the plural, elohim and elohe, reason that this is a "plural of dignity" -- a sort of divine "editorial we"; they even go to the length of saying that elohim connotes the awful sense of "Godhead." If so, there were scores of pagan god-heads-elohim.
But when the Hebrew Deity Yahveh alone speaks or is particularly spoken of, there is no hiding behind the anonymous "editorial plural," but always forthright "I" (Heb., ani, anoki), or the singular El (God), or the personal name "Yahweh." A few instances out of many hundreds must suffice.
Time and again the chief tribal Baal says, "Anoki El" and "Anoki Yahveh," "Anoki El-shaddai" (Gen. xvii, 1; Ex. iii, 6); "Anoki ha-el beth-el (I am the God of Beth-el)" (Gen. xxxi, 13); "Anoki El, and there are no other elohim" (Isa. xlvi, 9); "I am El" (Isa. xlv, 22). Yahveh descended in a cloud upon Sinai and proclaimed: "Yahveh, Yahveh El" (Ex. xxxiv, 5-6). Moses often quotes Yahveh as saying: "Thou shalt worship no other El: for Yahveh, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous El" (Ex. xxxiv, 14; xx, 5; Deut. iv, 24; v, 9; et passim). Again, "There is none like El" (Deut. xxxiii, 26); "This is my El" (Ex. xv, 2). Hagar said: "Thou art a god [El] of seeing" (Gen. xvi, 13). Balaam said to Balak: "El is not a man [ish], that he should lie, neither the son of man [ben adam], that he should repent" (Num. xxiii, (Num. xxiii, 19). "God [El] who brought them forth" (Num. xxiii, 22); "When El does this" (Num. xxiv, 23); "Who hears the words of El" (Num. xxiv, 4); "El is my salvation; Yah Yahveh is my strength" (Isa. xii, 2); "Verily, thou art an El that hidest thyself" (Isa. xlv, 15). Joshua says: "Hereby ye shall know that El is among you" (Josh. iii, 10).
This usage of El for a particular God, Hebrew or other, and of elohim and elohe for gods indiscriminately, as in hundreds of instances in this chapter and elsewhere, quite explodes the pious notions of an "editorial we" and "plural of dignity," and demonstrates the common polytheism of Israel and their neighbor heathens.
End of quote
the potential for translator's fraud as well as the probability that translation to modern languages takes place within currently accepted social-religious norms. One thing I have noted about my JPS Tanakh is that they have translated errors in the received text faithfully, unlike the redactionist NWT. The Bible is a fascinating cultural product and has in many ways become more interesting to me than it ever was when I was a Witness.
Dave -
45
What is your favorite Bible Translation?
by Lo-ru-hamah indo you have a favorite translation?
king james, niv, or others that i might not of heard of that are perhaps more poetically written.
or a style/version that you particularly like?.
-
-
PrimateDave
I don't have much experience with different Bible translations, but I have been using the Jewish Publications Society's Tanakh (pocket edition), and I find it more satisfactory than the New World Translation.
I am no bibliolator, however. I know that the Bible is a man made product, copies of copies, translations of translations. I am aware of translator's fraud that exists in all current Bibles. Despite it being a form of pious fraud, it is fraud nonetheless. For example, one of my biggest complaints is in the translation of the word elohim which means "gods" (plural) as opposed to "god" (singular). The tradition of professional translators is to translate this plural noun into the singular noun "god" wherever it is supposed to be used to represent "The God" of the "Hebrews", this despite the fact that this plural noun may also be the subject of a plural verb. Monotheism is now retroactively enforced upon the polytheistic patriarchs and early Israelites. I don't doubt that there is much scholarship that claims to refute this opinion of mine and others. Still, to me, it makes more sense to read the first chapter of Genesis using "the gods" instead of "God", since they are obviously existing in plural as represented by the expression "let us make".
The Bible is a fine book as long as you make no claims of eternal salvation or damnation based upon it's teachings.
Dave -
23
Don't know what to belief anymore?
by GBSJG ini'm in my twenties and am raised as a jw by my parents.
i've been reading this board for over a year.
have read several books: crisis of consience, apocalypse delayed, who wrote the bible, the bible unearthed.
-
-
PrimateDave
It was from a rather silly movie, but it is as true as anything in the sacred scriptures of any religion:
Be excellent to one another; party on dudes!
Dave -
17
Mom nearly ate me alive!
by Anony-Mouse inwe had a major talk about jws today.
i couldn't use the un or pedophiles, as this is 'outside' information, and she would never belive me.
then she would question my source, and i'd be killed by elder firing squad.
-
-
PrimateDave
Frankly, I would suggest that you don't get into arguments with your mother (or anyone else for that matter). It is enough that you believe what you do. However, if you must attack your mother's beliefs, you must attack the Bible using the Bible itself. For that I can recommend one book in particular available online for free:
http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/joseph_wheless/is_it_gods_word/
Starting in Chapter 2 it gets interesting. It is not a perfect book, but it has enough to keep you reading. You may find something that can get your mother to think. But before you present what you think is a convincing argument, look up what kind of counter-argument the Society has presented in the WT CD-ROM. Believe me, the old men in Brooklyn have heard it all. Still, you may come up with something that even she will agree with. If you enjoy that book you might consider:
http://www.biblicalnonsense.com/
Hope this is helpful. Dave -
37
I'm scared and I need help
by Chameleon infor those of you that don't know my story, read my first post here: http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/6/122526/1.ashx
so, i think next week is when i find out if i am approved to be an ms. if not, thank god, but if i am, i'm in deep crap.
elder dad is confident that i'll accept, but my plan is to try to get out of it by saying that i want to finish school and get an aa degree, at least, before accepting more responsibilities.
-
-
PrimateDave
Accept the appointment and just don't be a responsible MS. If it's not convenient for you to out and out DA yourself or even fade, then don't (yet). By all means, though, get that degree even if you cannot handle the MS responsibilities. You know where your priorities are. You can make your excuses after the fact.
Dave -
4
Intelligent design redux
by ackack inin a thread about id, it got a little bit off-track discussing id theories.. essentially, i'm sure there are those here you are proponents of id, and perhaps, you could lets us in on what is considered proof for and intelligent designer.
i think i've heard a few of the lines of evidence id proponents use, but i'm always open to hearing other lines, or even if someone feels they have a genuinely test that could demonstrate (or not) the plausibility of id.. ackack.
-
-
PrimateDave
Well, I read Behe's book, Darwin's Black Box back in my dub days. Biochemistry is very fascinating. He had some nice explanations and illustrations of cellular machinery. Sadly, his presentation falls flat when he goes down the ID road. Basically, he views biochemical machinery as irreducibly complex and presents arguments that are convincing to the lay person with little knowledge of evolutionary biology. His premise, intelligent design, is not falsifiable because you can always claim that "god" made it if you don't understand the natural processes behind biological evolution.
If humans were intelligently designed, we would have replaceable OEM parts and modular construction for easy repair and replacement of damaged and defective components. Our operating systems would be upgradeable to improve our mental abilities and emotional well-being. We would have the capability of backing-up our memories in case of accidental deletions. Our bodies would have stand-by modes to allow for the passage of time during periods of resource scarcity.
What does our current "design" allow us to do?
1. reproduce
2. consume resources to the limits of our environment's capacity
3. modify our environment
4. complete the cycle (birth/death)
Dave -
54
Hypothetical ? for u. What if armageddon really did come...
by *jeremiah* inok, here's a hypothetical that i'm curious about.. what if armageddon really did happen?
not necessarily according to jw terms or timetable, but at some point it happens in your lifetime.
would any of you return to the jws?.
-
-
PrimateDave
Hi Darth, well said. But, you know you're just preaching to the choir, so to speak. That kind is neck deep in you-know-what and thinks it smells like a bed of roses. If you want to space your paragraphs in Mozilla/Firefox, type in <br><br> at the end or beginning of a paragraph to give a one line spaceing. Use more <br> to get more lines. Just leave the HTML formatting box checked and don't worry about the Automatic Cr/Lf box. Dave