It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Pretty much all the giants mentioned in the King James Version of the bible, are the result of a mistranslation. As most of you giant believers are only using your belief to support your faith, you should know that your version of the Bible is in error. To prove that, here is every King James version mention of Giants, posted above its original Hebrew version.
originally posted by: Seede
I have a copy of the JPS 1917 Hebrew Torah and I also have a copy of the 1962 JPS Hebrew Torah in which both use the word Nephilim. snipped for irrelevancy
The Greek word was used in Septuagint to refer to men of great size and strength, hence the expanded use in modern languages; in English of very tall and unusually large persons from 1550s
In Greek mythology, the Giants or Gigantes (Greek: Γίγαντες, Gigantes, singular Gigas) were a race of great strength and aggression, though not necessarily of great size, known for the Gigantomachy
originally posted by: Marduk
no giants, just Nephilim
Nephilim again, no giants
originally posted by: peter vlar
a reply to: cooperton
Oh, Look at that... You stopped looking at information once your confirmation bias kicked in and skipped over where the actual etymology Of the word "giant" Was demonstrated. That's nearly as big a shocker as making the claim that most geneticists believe our genetics are degrading and instead of providing a single citation, you provide quote mines. Well done. Scholar of the Year to be sure. And I really liked the random inclusion of Dr. Collins who doesn't believe any of the tripe you just posted at all. Well done by your research department. The only fail here is your parents failure to get you Hooked on Phonics sooner.
I am using the JPS 1917 Hebrew Torah, which can be found online quite easily. So pretty much everything you just said is based on your own misunderstanding You claiming that there were tribes of Giants is laughable, because again, like so many of the other believers in this thread, you missed the relevancy of the evolution of language Basically, if someone writing the bible wanted to say "Giants", they wouldn't have used the word "Giant", because it didn't mean giant back then, it didn't mean "giant human" until the 15th C Giant meant powerful it was another way of saying "men of renown" Buy yanno, if you weren't so quick to defend your faith, which hasn't been attacked, then you might have known that
originally posted by: Seede
You have overlooked a very important fact. There were many authors of the Tanakh and not all are known. They spanned hundreds and thousands of years and in various places. To make a statement such as you have made that they would not have used the translated word giant is absolutely unknown and foolish to even consider. You have no idea of what you are talking about.
Right, I think I understand what you're saying, in brief Because I can't prove who wrote the bible, then I am not allowed to say that anyone translated anything wrong Is that it ?
A cubit, as was mentioned in the post previous to this one, is the distance between the elbow and the tip of the middle finger. The cubit in the Bible was 44.5 cm (17.5 in). There are ways we can figure this out. The Siloam Inscription states that the length of the water tunnel built by King Hezekiah was 1200 cubits. Modern measurements of the tunnel measure it at 533m (1,749'). That gives us a value of 44.4cm (17.49") a cubit. There are numerous structures in Palestine that can be measured by this whole unit of measure of 44.5cm. Accordingly the bed of Og was 4 x 1.8 meters (13.1 x 5.8').
The fact that the Isaiah scroll was found among the Dead Sea Scrolls and dated to about 300 years before Christ proves that the translations we have today are trustworthy, and you are not just being blind in trusting them. Because if you compare them with the extant manuscripts, which were a thousand years older, there were no changes made, a few grammatical errors slipped in, but nothing more. Proving those that say we cannot know if they were changed or not over the thousands of years, or even those who go further and outright lie and say they have been manipulated and changed many times, as wrong.