It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

A translation conspiracy

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 6 2005 @ 01:12 PM
link   
I have just encountered a certain few situations that led me to the understanding that there is at least one case of gross carelessness/sabotage in accurate translations from the Greek NT to both the KJV and Douay-Rheims--one that makes a significant impact on the gospel message.

When you read either translation, the word 'world' comes up a lot. In truth, there are three distinct words which are all translated 'world.'

World
G2889
kosmos
Probably from the base of G2865; orderly arrangement, that is, decoration; by implication the world (in a wide or narrow sense, including its inhabitants, literally or figuratively [morally]): - adorning, world.



Age
G165
aion
From the same as G104; properly an age; by extension perpetuity (also past); by implication the world; specifically (Jewish) a Messianic period (present or future): - age, course, eternal, (for) ever (-more), [n-]ever, (beginning of the, while the) world (began, without end). Compare G5550.


Land
G3625
oikoumene
Feminine participle present passive of G3611 (as noun, by implication of G1093); land, that is, the (terrene part of the) globe; specifically the Roman empire: - earth, world.


So we've got the population of the world, the people/inhabitants as one 'world' (cosmos), a time period of unspecified duration (aeon), and the actual 'world' (terra firma, aka 'land') all being defined in the general and unnecessarily vague 'world.'

This may not seem significant, but it is.

Read some of these verses, corrected according to the original greek text in the instance of 'world':

Matthew
4:8 Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the *population*, and the glory of them;

5:14 Ye are the light of the *population*. A city that is set on an hill cannot be hid.

12:32 And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this *age*, neither in the *age* to come.

13:22 He also that received seed among the thorns is he that heareth the word; and the care of this *age*, and the deceitfulness of riches, choke the word, and he becometh unfruitful.

13:35 That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, saying, I will open my mouth in parables; I will utter things which have been kept secret from the foundation of the *population*.

13:38 The field is the *population*; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one;

13:39-40 The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the *age*; and the reapers are the angels. As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this *age*.

13:49 So shall it be at the end of the *age*: the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from among the just,

16:26 For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole *population*, and lose his own soul? or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?

18:7 Woe unto the *population* because of offences! for it must needs be that offences come; but woe to that man by whom the offence cometh!

24:3 And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the *age*?

24:14 And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the *land* for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.

24:21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the *population* to this time, no, nor ever shall be.

28:20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the *age*. Amen.

That's just the first book of the NT.

Was this a purposeful muddying of terms? If there are enough clarifying words to differentiate between the three words translated 'world' in definition, why weren't these words used?

If religion let people know there was truly another time to come, they'd have no leverage to maintain the people. Ignorance is bondage of those kept in ignorance by the holder of the key of the knowledge.


[edit on 8/6/2005 by queenannie38]




posted on Aug, 6 2005 @ 06:43 PM
link   
This really more has to do with scholars that helped in the creation of the KJV bible. With most of it being based on the first greek-english translation done by Tyndale back in 1525 , later revised with help of the german bible in 1535, and then revised by Thomas matthew, who printed the Great bible during 1539.

there were revisions upon revisons with even a calanistic twisted added on until you finally came to the 'final' KJV which is not realyy a direct translation of the Greek texts anymore.

WHich is why I use the NIV, and I suggest every christian to do the same



posted on Aug, 6 2005 @ 07:13 PM
link   
I was always taught " World" is greek " Cosmos" meaning " The System of things" so to my understanding it is the system of things that are in the Earth.
So its like when people say " The worlds going to end" lets say... I take it as meaning the System of things in this Earth. so yes I believe that this system will burn itself out. It will come to an end. How? I am not sure.
I did not know it had three different meanings. this is helpful to know.



posted on Aug, 6 2005 @ 07:18 PM
link   
I also heard that anywhere in the Bible it says the end of the world, or anywhere that pertains to this. It should read The End of Age. This was suppose to be the original meaning. any help with this would be good to know. has anyone else heard of this?
so we should be reading it as the End of Age, not End of days.



posted on Aug, 6 2005 @ 08:00 PM
link   
I hadn't heard of it--but I have discovered it is absolutely correct.

These are the verses which say 'aion' and so should be understood as 'age' instead of 'world.'

Matthew 13:22
Matthew 13:39
Matthew 13:40
Matthew 13:49
Matthew 24:3
Matthew 28:20
Mark 4:19
Mark 10:30
Luke 1:70
Luke 16:8
Luke 18:30
Luke 20:34
Luke 20:35
John 9:32
Acts 3:21
Acts 15:18
Romans 12:2
Romans 16:25
1 Corinthians 2:
1 Corinthians 2:7
1 Corinthians 2:8
1 Corinthians 3:18
1 Corinthians 8:13
1 Corinthians 10:11
2 Corinthians 4:4
Galatians 1:4
Ephesians 1:21
Ephesians 3:9
Ephesians 3:21
Ephesians 6:12
1 Timothy 6:17
2 Timothy 1:9
2 Timothy 4:10
Titus 1:2
Titus 2:12
Hebrews 6:5

But this is not a complete list of the word 'aion' in the NT--because often it was translated to 'forever' and 'everlasting' and sometimes 'world without end.'

'Forever and ever' is actually aion eis aion (or perhaps more properly eis aion aion) which means 'age of ages'. And many times, 'ever' by itself means 'always'. But not always. LOL Sometimes aion is translated ever, but not very often.

Also, whenever it says 'foundations of the world' it is 'kosmos.'

Kosmos is found the most times, with aion next in frequency, and last is oikoumene.



posted on Aug, 6 2005 @ 08:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jehosephat
WHich is why I use the NIV, and I suggest every christian to do the same

I have an NIV that I really like, too--but I find the best way to get to the heart of the matter is to have as many different translations for comparison, and a KJV with Strong's numbers is indispensible, along with a concordance, Strong's and another or two if possible--for comparison as well.

No translation is perfectly correct according to the original texts, at least from what I've found so far. And something that has nothing to do with translation is the fact that people and languages change and evolve, and what a word meant to one culture at a certain point in history doesn't mean the same for other cultures in other times.



posted on Aug, 6 2005 @ 08:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by queenannie38

Originally posted by Jehosephat
WHich is why I use the NIV, and I suggest every christian to do the same

I have an NIV that I really like, too--but I find the best way to get to the heart of the matter is to have as many different translations for comparison, and a KJV with Strong's numbers is indispensible, along with a concordance, Strong's and another or two if possible--for comparison as well.

No translation is perfectly correct according to the original texts, at least from what I've found so far. And something that has nothing to do with translation is the fact that people and languages change and evolve, and what a word meant to one culture at a certain point in history doesn't mean the same for other cultures in other times.


This is a site I like to utilize when studying the Bible:

bible.crosswalk.com...

I find that it comes in quite handy at times.



posted on Aug, 6 2005 @ 09:01 PM
link   
I believe that translation of the Bible from hebrew to Greek- Latin, that you will have many errors. man is not perfect.
In Matt. 24-3 when they ask him " What shall be the sigh of thy coming and the End Of the World?" what do you believe was meant by this. was it The End of the Age. ? or the End of the System of things that were happen already?



posted on Aug, 7 2005 @ 12:06 AM
link   
I believe it was the end of the Jewish way of life that had existed since the Exodus--specifically the nation living within 90 miles of the their temple. It was the only way they had lived for so long and when the temple was destroyed in 70AD, no doubt it was the end of the only world many of them had ever known.

It was the end of the chosen nation of Israel, the end of that Jerusalem, and the end of the temple age.

When they went into Babylonian captivity, no doubt it was also devastating, but they retained their national identity to some extent, since the survivors were together in exile. But after the second temple destruction, they were finally and completely scattered.

Most of us can't really relate to what they might have felt, having never lived that type of life--but in those days, the life of the Jewish people was molded by their cohesiveness and tight community. They were a world unto themselves, in many ways, basically one big family, when you consider that they truly were a family/nation. On top of that, they had always had God tabernacled in their midst (although I can't see that it was ever the same after the Ark was gone after Solomon's kingdom split when he died.)

To lose their homes, each other, and the place where they believed their God dwelt--although it had been desolate for 40 years before the Romans razed it--to lose all that in the space of a few months, and under the horrible conditions that the siege brought upon them, was surely the literal end of the world to many of them.

I think that prophesy always serves a dual purpose in the bible, one time for soon after it's prophesied, and another applicable to our times now. And so I think Christ meant both the end of that world (and system) as well as the end of this age (and systems).

The disciples asked Him about the end of the age, and He spoke of the coming destruction of Jerusalem, but only said 'the end will come', not the end of the age or world, just 'the end.' Then He goes on to talk about the end of our present age. IOW, I think He gave information that covered from that moment on till His return for judgment.

There's something about the verse that throws us all off:

Matthew 24:34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.

'This' could also be translated 'that', too, but I'm not sure what the qualification is for them choosing to render it 'this' because I don't know enough nor have an interlinear to be able to tell. At any rate, I don't think He was saying that those He was speaking to is who He referred, but rather the generation that was alive when the children of Israel began to be born again into our current time. They are the new leaves on the fig, not the country of Israel started in 1948.



posted on Aug, 7 2005 @ 12:10 AM
link   
If the Letter " J " is only 500 yrs old or so, Then what were the Jews called before the letter J came into our own Lanuage? you know what I mean? like what did they refer to these people as? Hebrews?



posted on Aug, 7 2005 @ 01:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by Chasrac64
If the Letter " J " is only 500 yrs old or so, Then what were the Jews called before the letter J came into our own Lanuage? you know what I mean? like what did they refer to these people as? Hebrews?


Jew: Strong's Number: 03064, ydwhy (yeh-hoo-dee' )

bible.crosswalk.com...

Hope that helps.



posted on Sep, 9 2005 @ 02:58 PM
link   
What about the opening lines of Genesis, where it states " In the Beginning was the word. And the Word was God. And the Word was with God."?

In the Torah ( the Original Version of the OT), the word translated to mean God is Elohim.
But isn't this inaccurate? The singular Hebraic translation for God is El. Why then does the original translation say Elohim, which is plural for Gods or the Gods?



posted on Sep, 9 2005 @ 04:28 PM
link   
Well I've heard that Elohim has a few disputed translations, one being multiple, polythiestic deities, or powerful beings, or simply the singular "God" of the Bible.

From Wikipedia:


Elohim (אלהים) is a Hebrew word related to deity, but whose exact significance is often disputed. It is the third word in the Hebrew text of Genesis and occurs frequently throughout the Hebrew Bible. In some cases (e.g. Ex. 3:4 ...Elohim called unto him out of the midst of the bush...), is generally understood to denote the God of Israel but from a neutral point of view there is no evidence proving that this originally meant one rather than several acting in accord. In other cases (e.g. Ex. 20:3 Thou shalt have no other gods before me.), it refers to the polytheistic notion of multiple gods. In still other cases (e.g. Gen. 6:2 the sons of Elohim saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them for wives...), the meaning is not clear from the text, but may refer to powerful beings.


As for the translation errors...I don't think there was a deliberate "conspiracy" by the early translators. But there were mistakes made. And with religious texts, even little mistakes can make a symbolic difference.

One such argument I've heard is about "the Word," used to describe Jesus etc in the Bible. "The Word" was translated from the Greek word "Logos."

From Wikipedia:


The Greek word λόγος or logos is a word with various meanings. It is often translated into English as "Word" but can also mean thought, speech, reason, principle, standard, or logic among other things. It has varied use in the philosophy, analytical psychology, and religion.


Take this verse, John 1:1, with alternative meanings:


In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.


In the beginning was Reason, and Reason was with God, and Reason was God.

In the beginning was the Standard, and the Standard was with God, and the Standard was God.

(and a well known one

In the beginning was the Logic, and the Logic was with God, and the Logic was God.



posted on Sep, 9 2005 @ 04:41 PM
link   
Hi IsisRaven:

I think you are confusing the opening verse of Bere#h (Genesis) with John's gospel opening in Greek.

Heb. "Bere#h Elohim bara hashamayim vehaaretz"

= (In the beginning when Elohim was creating the Heavens and the earth..")

which is taken from the first book of the Old Testament Torah (Genesis 1:1):

The unknown writer of the paleo Hebrew in Genesis chapter 1:1 to Genesis chapter 2:4a (same writer re-appears in chapter 5:1) was written in a curiously repetitious unpointed paleo Hebrew, from around BC 480, by the same writer/group of people who wrote the prophetic book of Hezekiel---whereas the opening Greek words of the Gospel of John, the socalled 4th gospel in the NT canon (dating from around AD 115) can be translated into Modern English as:

e.g. "In the Beginning was the Word, and the Word was with Theos, and the Word was a Theos (lit. "a god"): the Same was in the Beginning with Theos..all things were created through (him) and without (him) was not anything made that was made..."

which is a direct (translated from the Sanskrit) quote from a Hymn to VAC (from around BC 1200) from the Hindu Scriptures called the Rg-Veda: (VAC was the god of Voice or Sound, like the Latin VOX):

"In the beginning was VAC (lit. Voice), and VAC was with Brahma, and VAC was a deva (a god): VAC was in the Beginning with Brahma, and without VAC was not anything made that was made..."

Either way, the writer of the Greek gospel of John adapted the VAC hymn and mixed it in with images found in Genesis chapter 1:1-2 to show that the WORD was "made flesh and dwelt among us..." i.e. that the Messiah was created at the time of creation and was to be identified with Wisdom (Chochmah) in Proverbs chapter 8 ("I was with him in the beginning of his ways....and his delight" etc.)...

The idea that creation began as thought-voice and then matter appeared e.g. "let there be light, and there was light" as a result of a sort of divine "fiat" (Lat. "let there be...").

In terms of Earth/Age/Land/World/Cosmos/Aion, even the common Hebrew old testament word ERETZ can mean "land of Israel" (i.e. specific narrower sense) or "dry land/world" (generic sense) and the Greek LXX translation of the OT sometimes used various guesses to try and approximate its meaning in any given context.

e.g. Blessed are the humble ones, for they shall inherit the land (of Israel) i.e. in the last days--speaking to a group of exiles who were "dis-inherited" living scattered amongst the gentiles. It has nothing to do with inheriting the whole world.

In the NT we read of passages like "the prince of this world" (Gk. Aion) which might well be better read as "the ruler of this Age" etc. as well as phrases like "neither in this Age nor in the Age to come" i.e. neither in this wicked time, nor in the blessed time after Judgement Day when all the wicked would be destroyed, but the righteous ones would "inherit the land of Israel for 40 generations..." (as in the Pesher to select Psalms amongst the Dead Sea Scrolls)...

Clear as mud?



posted on Sep, 9 2005 @ 04:45 PM
link   
Its' always amazing what a correct translation, in context can yield. Though, in keeping with ancient allegory and thought, in this socio-religious context, I think maybe the translation of "principle" might be a better fit.

In the beginning was the Principle, and the Principle was with God, and the Principle was God.

I know, I'm splitting hairs!!!


Thanks Fortimus. Great information.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join