- May 3, 2022
- 181
- 89
- 64
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Calvinist
- Marital Status
- Divorced
Another example of how different translations phrase verses differently is 1Pet 3:20. The last part of this verse will read either,
"...that is, eight souls were saved by water."
"...that is, eight souls were saved through the water."
Which is correct? How do you determine which is the more accurate?
Another example of how English translations contradict Scripture is 1Pet 3:21. Regardless of how this verse is phrased, all of the translations state that believers are saved by water baptism! Is that true? Are people saved because they physically perform "work" and get baptized in water? In the "Evangelical/Christian" world, if a particular Gentile Pharisee decided that "water baptism is how a person "gets" saved, 1Pet 3:21 would be his "proof text." The only other verses he would use in his "sermon" would only be specific verses that seem to "validate" his teaching, Mark 16:16, Acts 2:38, 22:16, etc. He would ignore any other verse that mentions baptism and he would ignore all of the verses that teach that salvation is through believing in/on Jesus. All of those who follow and believe this particular Gentile Pharisee would also believe that water baptism is how a person gets saved. They will tell others this "fact" and use the same exact verses this Gentile Pharisee uses. They will repeat whatever the Gentile Pharisee says, and they will post the teaching. They will be firmly convinced that this is a "doctrine," will "dig in their heels" about this, and will always be ready to argue with anyone who believes differently. In their mind, this "doctrine" is what Scripture teaches.
As a rule, someone who is not a brain surgeon does not go around telling others they are a brain surgeon. Someone who cannot sing does not go around telling people that they have recorded three number-one hits. Someone who has never traveled out of their home country usually will not proclaim that they climbed Mount Everest. Ironically, we have tens of millions of people in this country who are "self-proclaimed" bible "experts!" Not in words, but in how they present themselves. People who are clueless and completely ignorant about 99% of Scripture or what Scripture teaches, people who do not study nor know how to study, people who have not even bothered to look up and define even one original in the original languages, whose "knowledge" of Scripture is restricted to knowing a few verses and how the verses are phrased in some English translation, pretend to "know" what the bible teaches! It is so ludicrous!
If you want to read something very "eye-opening," and will further enhance how dangerous English translations are and how they are used to promote false teaching, type in your browser, "80 Mistranslations in the Bible," an article written by Frank W Nelte. This article will blow your mind! When you read it, notice how the article shows how many of the Hebrew and Greek words, in the original text, have different definitions. When the translators did their work, how many of them, rather than choosing the best definition, based on context and logic, choose words that fit their personal beliefs and bias. When the wrong English word(s) is put into a translation, it gives the verse the wrong meaning! Wouldn't you agree that if Scripture could be summed up by one word, the number one word would be TRUTH?
There is a phenome known as "semantic change" or "semantic shift," where there is a change in a language regarding the evolution of word meanings, usually to the point that a newer meaning or modern meaning of a word is radically different from the original meaning. This explains the phrase that "modern languages are fluid," i.e., that new words are created and the meaning of words change.
Bible study, getting to the truth of Scripture requires word study. Here is a classic example of how, not a verse, but a single word gave birth to huge lies. In the KJV, Gen 1:28 reads, "And God blessed them and spoke unto them, saying, 'Be fruitful, and multiply, and REPLENISH the earth.'" The Hebrew word translated into "replenish" is "mala," which in the proper context here means, "to fill," as Adam and Eve were the only humans on the earth at that time. The English word "replenish" has two main definitions, the first, is "to fill with persons or animals, stock. At the time of the KJV translation, this was the only definition of the word, accepted by all as the correct definition. So, the KJV translators were correct in using the English word "replenish," in the translation. Either during those days or shortly thereafter, there was a popular movement afoot concerning the English language and the meaning of words. Many words took on new meanings. "Replenish" was one of those words. Instead of meaning "to stock with people or animals," the new definition assigned to the word was, "to refill, fill up again." A completely different meaning. If you look this word up in a dictionary today, you will find both definitions listed.
From the time the word "replenish" gained a new meaning and the new meaning was culturally accepted by the majority, every time people read the word "replenish," Gen 1:28 in the KJV, they thought it meant to refill or repopulate. At some point in time, some self-deluded fools who thought they were brilliant, began to ponder, "Why did God command Adam and Eve to "repopulate" the world?" Their conclusion? "Well, this must mean that there were people on the earth before Adam and Eve were created!" Or, that Satan and his demonic hoards were populating the earth before Adam and Eve were created, due to Satan being "cast" out of "Heaven," (Lk 10:18 and Rev 12:4 are the proof text for this belief) Or that there were entire civilizations on the earth before Adam and Eve were created. Did that satisfy these brilliant fools? Oh, no. Because Gen 1:2 reads, "And the earth was without form, and void," must mean that Satan and his hordes, or the people on the earth before Adam and Eve, had destroyed what God had originally created in Gen 1:1, so God had to "repair" the damage and "fix" what had been destroyed! Thus, the "Gap Theory" was born!
Sigh, We see the same Hebrew word used in Gen 9:1 when God commanded Noah and his sons to "replenish" the earth. But to the Jews, based on the meaning of "mala," did not think that God meant "to repopulate" the earth. It was simply God giving the same command that He gave to Adam and Eve.
How many people today believe one or more of the things I listed above? And they are as convinced in their beliefs as sure as "the sun rises in the East." And all of this because the meaning of one English word used in a translation was changed! God gave us His word in a written form, in Biblical Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek, not English! The very first step in learning Scripture is learning what the words mean, based on the proper context!
The three most important things that must be applied to the honest study of Scripture is Truth, Context, and Logic. From the pulpits, much will be said about truth, and context will be mentioned, but you will never hear the word "logic." How important is logic to determining the truth of things? I believe that at the entrance to every church building there is an invisible sign that can only be seen by the subconscious that reads, "leave your ability to think and reason outside. Logic is not used here. The "pastor" will tell you what to believe." There is a phrase that while not familiar to most, is a phrase I have heard on the radio a number of times, "We have to tell people what to think and what to believe."
Truth equals fact. Context equals correct meaning. Logic enables one to come to the correct conclusion. There is no concept of "take a leap of faith" in Scripture! Logic is a gift from God, not a tool of the devil!
Nowhere in Scripture do you find the phrase "fallen angels." You won't find the word "demon" in Scripture. You won't find any teaching in Scripture that states that the "fallen angels" turned into "evil" or "unclean" spirits. Do you choose to believe Scripture or what the "Gentile Pharisees" teach? Nowhere in Scripture is there any teaching of the "impact" one person has on another's life. I had to throw that in because I just heard a Gentile Pharisee say on the radio about how his wife has had an "impact" on his life, and how she has "changed" his life. I'm confused, the "Gentile Pharisees" are always going on about how God, Jesus or the Holy Spirit are the ones that "change" people's lives, right? Oh, and let's not forget how "prayer changes things." In this same "sermon," this "Gentile Pharisee" managed to slip in something about "how have you used your money to influence people for the gospel?"
One last thing about Gen 6 before I give the correct understanding. This uses truth, context, and logic. One of the most effective ways to promote false teaching is to isolate a certain verse(s) and ignore other parts of Scripture that deal with a subject, topic, or doctrine.
In the first chapter of Genesis, God clearly established how reproduction happens.
Gen 1:11, "And God said, 'Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed after its kind, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after its kind, whose seed is in itself...' "
Gen 1:12, "And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after its kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after its kind..."
Gen 1:21, "And God created great whales and every living creature that moves...after their kind, and every winged fowl after its kind...
Gen 1:24, "And God said,' Let the earth bring forth the living creature after its kind, cattle, creeping thing, and beast of the earth after its kind...
Gen 1:25, "And God made the beast of the earth after its kind, and cattle after its kind, and everything that creeps upon the earth after its kind...
Gen 1:29, "And God said, 'Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed...and every tree in which is the fruit of the of a tree yielding seed...' "
In every case, kind is the Hebrew word, "meen:" a species. Seed is the Hebrew word, "zera:" offspring, sperm. By the way, the word "seed" in Scripture is only used to indicate "God's word," or "offspring, descendants," NEVER IS IT USED TO INDICATE MONEY OR GIVING MONEY!
A German Shepherd can mate with a Collie and offspring will result. Why? because they are both the same species! They are of a different "genus," a subgroup within a species, but still the same species. A German Shepherd cannot mate with a horse and produce offspring. Why? Because they are different species! They might be able to have sex, but the union will never result in a birth. What did God establish as the natural order in Genesis? That kind can only reproduce with the same kind. That the offspring of a kind lies strictly within the kind! The male of a species must breed with the female of the same species in order to produce offspring. Period, end of story! No exceptions! No breaking of the rules! No breaking or altering the natural order God established can ever happen, now or then!
What about DNA? A male, with a certain type of DNA, can only biologically reproduce with a female that has the same type of DNA, a human with a human, a dog with a dog, an eagle with an eagle. Is it possible that a spiritual being has DNA? If so, the DNA of a spiritual being would be different from a human and would never mix with the DNA of a human!
Angels, spiritual beings, are of a different species than humans. Angels do not have the ability to procreate nor need to. Gen 6:2 states that the "sons of God" took wives..." What does it mean when a man "takes a wife?" It only means one thing, marriage! Some try to say that the "sons of God" raped the daughters of men. There is no historical or linguistic proof that this is the meaning of Gen 6:2. That is just another "man-made tradition" created to twist Scripture, to promote a lie. Angels do not marry, nor have they ever married! Angels are not tied to a lifespan, they don't die. If humans quit procreating, the human race would die out.
Mat 22:30 "In the resurrection, they (people) will neither marry nor be given in marriage, instead they will be like the angels in heaven."
Mk 12:25, "For when they shall rise from the dead, they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels in heaven."
Lk 20:34-36, "The children of this world marry and are given in marriage. But those which shall be accounted worthy to obtain the world of eternal life, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry nor are given in marriage. Neither can they die anymore for they are equal to the angels..."
And the final false teaching about this subject is that some believe that the "demons," "fallen angels," "possessed" the bodies of the "sons of God," and then had sex with the daughters of men. A couple of problems with this, this is not taught anywhere in Scripture, nor do the Hebrew words used in Gen 6:2,4, in any way teach or imply anything about the "sons of God" being possessed by spirit beings. Even if such a thing had happened, being possessed/inhabited by a spirit being would in no way change the physical make-up of a human male. His reproductive organ would remain a human male reproductive organ. His sperm would remain human sperm. A spirit being inhabiting a human male body, having sex with a human female, would never, not once, produce some hybrid, half angel/half human offspring! One last question, can a spiritual being create physical, human sperm?
Ok, I only have to do one more part in this study, to explain the events described in Gen 6:2 and 6:4. I give you my word the next part will be the last, but I urge you to read it, and after you read it, things will become clear, I promise!
"...that is, eight souls were saved by water."
"...that is, eight souls were saved through the water."
Which is correct? How do you determine which is the more accurate?
Another example of how English translations contradict Scripture is 1Pet 3:21. Regardless of how this verse is phrased, all of the translations state that believers are saved by water baptism! Is that true? Are people saved because they physically perform "work" and get baptized in water? In the "Evangelical/Christian" world, if a particular Gentile Pharisee decided that "water baptism is how a person "gets" saved, 1Pet 3:21 would be his "proof text." The only other verses he would use in his "sermon" would only be specific verses that seem to "validate" his teaching, Mark 16:16, Acts 2:38, 22:16, etc. He would ignore any other verse that mentions baptism and he would ignore all of the verses that teach that salvation is through believing in/on Jesus. All of those who follow and believe this particular Gentile Pharisee would also believe that water baptism is how a person gets saved. They will tell others this "fact" and use the same exact verses this Gentile Pharisee uses. They will repeat whatever the Gentile Pharisee says, and they will post the teaching. They will be firmly convinced that this is a "doctrine," will "dig in their heels" about this, and will always be ready to argue with anyone who believes differently. In their mind, this "doctrine" is what Scripture teaches.
As a rule, someone who is not a brain surgeon does not go around telling others they are a brain surgeon. Someone who cannot sing does not go around telling people that they have recorded three number-one hits. Someone who has never traveled out of their home country usually will not proclaim that they climbed Mount Everest. Ironically, we have tens of millions of people in this country who are "self-proclaimed" bible "experts!" Not in words, but in how they present themselves. People who are clueless and completely ignorant about 99% of Scripture or what Scripture teaches, people who do not study nor know how to study, people who have not even bothered to look up and define even one original in the original languages, whose "knowledge" of Scripture is restricted to knowing a few verses and how the verses are phrased in some English translation, pretend to "know" what the bible teaches! It is so ludicrous!
If you want to read something very "eye-opening," and will further enhance how dangerous English translations are and how they are used to promote false teaching, type in your browser, "80 Mistranslations in the Bible," an article written by Frank W Nelte. This article will blow your mind! When you read it, notice how the article shows how many of the Hebrew and Greek words, in the original text, have different definitions. When the translators did their work, how many of them, rather than choosing the best definition, based on context and logic, choose words that fit their personal beliefs and bias. When the wrong English word(s) is put into a translation, it gives the verse the wrong meaning! Wouldn't you agree that if Scripture could be summed up by one word, the number one word would be TRUTH?
There is a phenome known as "semantic change" or "semantic shift," where there is a change in a language regarding the evolution of word meanings, usually to the point that a newer meaning or modern meaning of a word is radically different from the original meaning. This explains the phrase that "modern languages are fluid," i.e., that new words are created and the meaning of words change.
Bible study, getting to the truth of Scripture requires word study. Here is a classic example of how, not a verse, but a single word gave birth to huge lies. In the KJV, Gen 1:28 reads, "And God blessed them and spoke unto them, saying, 'Be fruitful, and multiply, and REPLENISH the earth.'" The Hebrew word translated into "replenish" is "mala," which in the proper context here means, "to fill," as Adam and Eve were the only humans on the earth at that time. The English word "replenish" has two main definitions, the first, is "to fill with persons or animals, stock. At the time of the KJV translation, this was the only definition of the word, accepted by all as the correct definition. So, the KJV translators were correct in using the English word "replenish," in the translation. Either during those days or shortly thereafter, there was a popular movement afoot concerning the English language and the meaning of words. Many words took on new meanings. "Replenish" was one of those words. Instead of meaning "to stock with people or animals," the new definition assigned to the word was, "to refill, fill up again." A completely different meaning. If you look this word up in a dictionary today, you will find both definitions listed.
From the time the word "replenish" gained a new meaning and the new meaning was culturally accepted by the majority, every time people read the word "replenish," Gen 1:28 in the KJV, they thought it meant to refill or repopulate. At some point in time, some self-deluded fools who thought they were brilliant, began to ponder, "Why did God command Adam and Eve to "repopulate" the world?" Their conclusion? "Well, this must mean that there were people on the earth before Adam and Eve were created!" Or, that Satan and his demonic hoards were populating the earth before Adam and Eve were created, due to Satan being "cast" out of "Heaven," (Lk 10:18 and Rev 12:4 are the proof text for this belief) Or that there were entire civilizations on the earth before Adam and Eve were created. Did that satisfy these brilliant fools? Oh, no. Because Gen 1:2 reads, "And the earth was without form, and void," must mean that Satan and his hordes, or the people on the earth before Adam and Eve, had destroyed what God had originally created in Gen 1:1, so God had to "repair" the damage and "fix" what had been destroyed! Thus, the "Gap Theory" was born!
Sigh, We see the same Hebrew word used in Gen 9:1 when God commanded Noah and his sons to "replenish" the earth. But to the Jews, based on the meaning of "mala," did not think that God meant "to repopulate" the earth. It was simply God giving the same command that He gave to Adam and Eve.
How many people today believe one or more of the things I listed above? And they are as convinced in their beliefs as sure as "the sun rises in the East." And all of this because the meaning of one English word used in a translation was changed! God gave us His word in a written form, in Biblical Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek, not English! The very first step in learning Scripture is learning what the words mean, based on the proper context!
The three most important things that must be applied to the honest study of Scripture is Truth, Context, and Logic. From the pulpits, much will be said about truth, and context will be mentioned, but you will never hear the word "logic." How important is logic to determining the truth of things? I believe that at the entrance to every church building there is an invisible sign that can only be seen by the subconscious that reads, "leave your ability to think and reason outside. Logic is not used here. The "pastor" will tell you what to believe." There is a phrase that while not familiar to most, is a phrase I have heard on the radio a number of times, "We have to tell people what to think and what to believe."
Truth equals fact. Context equals correct meaning. Logic enables one to come to the correct conclusion. There is no concept of "take a leap of faith" in Scripture! Logic is a gift from God, not a tool of the devil!
Nowhere in Scripture do you find the phrase "fallen angels." You won't find the word "demon" in Scripture. You won't find any teaching in Scripture that states that the "fallen angels" turned into "evil" or "unclean" spirits. Do you choose to believe Scripture or what the "Gentile Pharisees" teach? Nowhere in Scripture is there any teaching of the "impact" one person has on another's life. I had to throw that in because I just heard a Gentile Pharisee say on the radio about how his wife has had an "impact" on his life, and how she has "changed" his life. I'm confused, the "Gentile Pharisees" are always going on about how God, Jesus or the Holy Spirit are the ones that "change" people's lives, right? Oh, and let's not forget how "prayer changes things." In this same "sermon," this "Gentile Pharisee" managed to slip in something about "how have you used your money to influence people for the gospel?"
One last thing about Gen 6 before I give the correct understanding. This uses truth, context, and logic. One of the most effective ways to promote false teaching is to isolate a certain verse(s) and ignore other parts of Scripture that deal with a subject, topic, or doctrine.
In the first chapter of Genesis, God clearly established how reproduction happens.
Gen 1:11, "And God said, 'Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed after its kind, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after its kind, whose seed is in itself...' "
Gen 1:12, "And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after its kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after its kind..."
Gen 1:21, "And God created great whales and every living creature that moves...after their kind, and every winged fowl after its kind...
Gen 1:24, "And God said,' Let the earth bring forth the living creature after its kind, cattle, creeping thing, and beast of the earth after its kind...
Gen 1:25, "And God made the beast of the earth after its kind, and cattle after its kind, and everything that creeps upon the earth after its kind...
Gen 1:29, "And God said, 'Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed...and every tree in which is the fruit of the of a tree yielding seed...' "
In every case, kind is the Hebrew word, "meen:" a species. Seed is the Hebrew word, "zera:" offspring, sperm. By the way, the word "seed" in Scripture is only used to indicate "God's word," or "offspring, descendants," NEVER IS IT USED TO INDICATE MONEY OR GIVING MONEY!
A German Shepherd can mate with a Collie and offspring will result. Why? because they are both the same species! They are of a different "genus," a subgroup within a species, but still the same species. A German Shepherd cannot mate with a horse and produce offspring. Why? Because they are different species! They might be able to have sex, but the union will never result in a birth. What did God establish as the natural order in Genesis? That kind can only reproduce with the same kind. That the offspring of a kind lies strictly within the kind! The male of a species must breed with the female of the same species in order to produce offspring. Period, end of story! No exceptions! No breaking of the rules! No breaking or altering the natural order God established can ever happen, now or then!
What about DNA? A male, with a certain type of DNA, can only biologically reproduce with a female that has the same type of DNA, a human with a human, a dog with a dog, an eagle with an eagle. Is it possible that a spiritual being has DNA? If so, the DNA of a spiritual being would be different from a human and would never mix with the DNA of a human!
Angels, spiritual beings, are of a different species than humans. Angels do not have the ability to procreate nor need to. Gen 6:2 states that the "sons of God" took wives..." What does it mean when a man "takes a wife?" It only means one thing, marriage! Some try to say that the "sons of God" raped the daughters of men. There is no historical or linguistic proof that this is the meaning of Gen 6:2. That is just another "man-made tradition" created to twist Scripture, to promote a lie. Angels do not marry, nor have they ever married! Angels are not tied to a lifespan, they don't die. If humans quit procreating, the human race would die out.
Mat 22:30 "In the resurrection, they (people) will neither marry nor be given in marriage, instead they will be like the angels in heaven."
Mk 12:25, "For when they shall rise from the dead, they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels in heaven."
Lk 20:34-36, "The children of this world marry and are given in marriage. But those which shall be accounted worthy to obtain the world of eternal life, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry nor are given in marriage. Neither can they die anymore for they are equal to the angels..."
And the final false teaching about this subject is that some believe that the "demons," "fallen angels," "possessed" the bodies of the "sons of God," and then had sex with the daughters of men. A couple of problems with this, this is not taught anywhere in Scripture, nor do the Hebrew words used in Gen 6:2,4, in any way teach or imply anything about the "sons of God" being possessed by spirit beings. Even if such a thing had happened, being possessed/inhabited by a spirit being would in no way change the physical make-up of a human male. His reproductive organ would remain a human male reproductive organ. His sperm would remain human sperm. A spirit being inhabiting a human male body, having sex with a human female, would never, not once, produce some hybrid, half angel/half human offspring! One last question, can a spiritual being create physical, human sperm?
Ok, I only have to do one more part in this study, to explain the events described in Gen 6:2 and 6:4. I give you my word the next part will be the last, but I urge you to read it, and after you read it, things will become clear, I promise!
