Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There no end to the messiness found in Biblical translations. Take for example Genesis 3:15 which Christians love to tout as the first promise God made to send Jesus to save mankind. But does it really refer to Jesus, or is it just some vague obscure mumbo-jumbo that nobody but a Hebrew scribe could dream up?
Here are three translations:
A fourth translation which I found quoted but cannot get a reference to reads:
So we have three and possibly four different pronouns for who the offspring of the woman is. Any experts in Hebrew in here? What Hebrew word is used for the bolded pronoun referring to the woman's offspring? Is it properly translated as "he", "she", "it" or "they"?
It is because one child is Adam's, one is Eve's, and one is of the creature. That's what we are. Should we go out and kill all the snakes? It's not speaking of snakes.
The snake is in your right hand with the woman, and the fallen seed of Adam in your left eye. The question is, who will you be?
Everyone will decide which son to feed like two wolves in a person, anger or kindness, hate or love, judgment or mercy.
There no end to the messiness found in Biblical translations. Take for example Genesis 3:15 which Christians love to tout as the first promise God made to send Jesus to save mankind. But does it really refer to Jesus, or is it just some vague obscure mumbo-jumbo that nobody but a Hebrew scribe could dream up?
Here are three translations:
A fourth translation which I found quoted but cannot get a reference to reads:
So we have three and possibly four different pronouns for who the offspring of the woman is. Any experts in Hebrew in here? What Hebrew word is used for the bolded pronoun referring to the woman's offspring? Is it properly translated as "he", "she", "it" or "they"?
- The Woman is Sarah whom God said would be The Mother Of Nations
and Kings Of Peoples would come from her.
Well, although Abraham is the father of nations and kings of people would come from him too?
The difference between the two is that Abraham had two sons.
Sarah had only one son who became Israel.
So The Woman of Gen.3:15 is Sarah. Not Eve nor even Mary.
- The Woman is Sarah whom God said would be The Mother Of Nations
and Kings Of Peoples would come from her.
Well, although Abraham is the father of nations and kings of people would come from him too?
The difference between the two is that Abraham had two sons.
Sarah had only one son who became Israel.
So The Woman of Gen.3:15 is Sarah. Not Eve nor even Mary.
In rabbinical Judaism the contrasting groups of "seed of the woman" and "seed of the serpent" are generally taken as plural, and the promise "he will bruise your head" applied to Adam / mankind bruising the serpent's head.
Although a possible Jewish messianic interpretation of Genesis 3:15 in some schools of Judaism during the Second Temple Period has been suggested by some Christian scholars, no evidence of such an interpretation has yet come to light. - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seed_of_the_woman#Judaism
Identification of the "seed of the woman" with Christ goes back at least as far as Irenaeus and the phrase "Seed of the woman" is sometimes counted as one of the titles of Jesus in the Bible. A tradition found in some old eastern Christian sources (including the Kitab al-Magall and the Cave of Treasures) holds that the serpent's head was crushed at Golgotha, described as a skull-shaped hill at the centre of the Earth, where Shem and Melchizedek had placed the body of Adam. More commonly, as in Victorian homilies, "It was on Golgotha that the old serpent gave the Saviour the deadly bite in his heel, which went quite through his foot, fastening it to the cross with iron nails."
Luther's view
Luther, in his commentary on Genesis (Luther's Works, vol. 1, pp. 192–193, American Edition), identifies the "seed of the woman" as the coming Messiah, Jesus, and not Mary: "When we are given instruction in this passage concerning the enmity between the serpent and woman--such an enmity that the Seed of the woman will crush the serpent with all his powers--this is a revelation of the depths of God's goodness...[who] clearly declares that the male Seed of the woman would prostrate this enemy."
In a derived sense, Luther in his Lectures on Romans identifies the seed of the woman with the word of God in the church.
They will strike…at their heel: the antecedent for “they” and “their” is the collective noun “offspring,” i.e., all the descendants of the woman. Christian tradition has seen in this passage, however, more than unending hostility between snakes and human beings. The snake was identified with the devil (Wis 2:24; Jn 8:44; Rev 12:9; 20:2), whose eventual defeat seemed implied in the verse. Because “the Son of God was revealed to destroy the works of the devil” (1 Jn 3:8), the passage was understood as the first promise of a redeemer for fallen humankind, the protoevangelium. Irenaeus of Lyons (ca. A.D. 130–200), in his Against Heresies 5.21.1, followed by several other Fathers of the Church, interpreted the verse as referring to Christ, and cited Gal 3:19 and 4:4 to support the reference
15And I shall place hatred between you and between the woman, and between your seed and between her seed. He will crush your head, and you will bite his heel."
Rashi's Commentary:
And I shall place hatred: You intended that the man should die when he would eat first, and you would marry Eve, and you came to Eve first only because women are easily enticed, and they know how to entice their husbands. Therefore, “I shall place hatred.”
He will crush your head: יְשׁוּפְךָ רֹאשׁ, lit. he will crush you the head. He will crush you, like (Deut. 9:21): “And I crushed it,” which is translated by the Targum as
וְשָׁפִית יָתֵיהּ and you will bite his heel: Heb. תְּשׁוּפֶנוּ. You will not stand upright and you will bite him on the heel, and even from there you will kill him. The expression תְּשׁוּפֶנוּ is like (Isa. 40:24): “He blew (נָשַׁף) on them.” When a snake comes to bite, it blows with a sort of hiss, and since the two expressions coincide [i.e., they sound alike], Scripture used the expression of נְשִׁיפָה in both cases.
If it's written prophetically, human author's intention is no longer important, and you can only make guesses.
A prophecy serves the basic purpose of allowing who believed to get the abundance and the disbelieved to get none.
And yet Genghis Khan had abundance, Ancient Egypt had abundance, Rome, Babylon,
"abundance of the message" = to chosen as he see fits without further questions?
Those who believe in any Holy Text can pretend themselves to "get the abundance."
It's simple unthoughtful, unvetted, uneducated Bibliolatry.
Apart from the errors of translation from the Hebrew, the Bible has been rewritten many times, google Pope Sixtus V he was not able to sleep during the night in six months he completely rewrote the Bible as his will wonted, during the period of the Borgias they have combined all .. in any colors , it is said but not confirmed that in the period of Gregory VII several office secretaries were former street walkers.
In any case Bible is not a religious book, in fact, the mystery of the dogma gives to the context a driven inner meaning, the book does not prove the existence of a universal God, it talks about genetic manipulation of hominids by aliens.
Did you know .. Apollonius of Tyana was the equivalent of Jesus just he lived a prosperous situation, as you can well understand dear reader a poor prophet would have had more success in the hearts of the multitudes
When priests talk they use to say.... to the the poor ppl
It's just an opinion do not believe to me ... follow your spiritual path.. ahhh devil demons all that evil stuff.. are bull s... the biblic sense of guilty is driven and manipolated
So it seems we have a two-fold "cancer" growing here. The passage starts out as gibberish---totally unintelligible far as trying to attach something meaningful. I mean God could have simply said, "And I will send you my servant, a man born of a virgin who will be God incarnate, and he shall free mankind from the sin you have inflicted on all future generations." I mean true? Is that too much to ask of God so that we can get an unmistakable interpretation of whatever the hell he was supposed to be telling us?
But NOOOO! God has to word it so obscurely that rabbis have been scratching their heads for a millennia reading that saying, "What the f..........?" until some Einstein during the Babylonian captivity comes along and says, "I've got it! This has to refer to a Messiah, a savior who will free us from the Babylonians."
That anointed turned out to be Cyrus, I suppose but the idea had to have reignited when Israel fell under Roman rule. Then after the Romans demolished Jerusalem in 70 AD the early Christians needed to attach a savior label to Jesus and make him a god, although Paul rebelled against calling Jesus God with 1 Timothy 2:5
although we have Philippians 2:6
So once again we have Paul talking out of both sides of his mouth, which I suppose is what left the Council of Nicaea with one big headache. So they invented the concept of the Trinity to resolve the issue. Jesus was a man AND he was God. How?
"It's a divine mystery!" they replied. "Who can know the ways of the Almighty?"
I love the analogy every minister under the sun uses to wiggle out of this conundrum. "Well, I am a husband, a father, and a son. I'm three separate people even though I'm only one man."
No need to go to two books\letters to feign contradiction between them - they are rather harmonious.
Phil 2:5 In your relationships with one another, have the same mindset as Christ Jesus:
6 Who, being in very nature God,
did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage;
7 rather, he made himself nothing
by taking the very nature of a servant,
being made in human likeness.
8 And being found in appearance as a man,
he humbled himself
by becoming obedient to death—
even death on a cross!
9 Therefore God exalted him to the highest place
and gave him the name that is above every name,
10 that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow,
in heaven and on earth and under the earth,
11 and every tongue acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord,
to the glory of God the Father."
Yeah I don't care much for the husband, Father Son analogy for they are just titles and it supports the modalistic view better. The verses posted above pretty much negate that position - for a person to be equal with another there must be at least two persons. I have been thinking in terms of the 3d cartesian coordinate system x,y,z these days. All three occupy the same space at the same time yet are unique to one another and only in their togetherness do we have fullness. I think that Ephesians 3 gives us a glimpse of this: "17 so that Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith; and that you, being rooted and grounded in love, 18 may be able to comprehend with all the saints what is the breadth and length and height and depth, 19 and to know the love of Christ which surpasses knowledge, that you may be filled up to all the fullness of God." This love is endemic to relationship, we do see relationship within the Trinity. Relationship is what humans generally long for being created in God's image. My understanding of this is more like a nebula than a star, not fully formed nor fully understood but glorious for as much has been observed, were we to live long enough we will come to understand it in all its glory.
While the term Trinity, as you know, does not appear in the compiled letters and books we do have 3 persons interacting with one another each called God and the scripture says there is but one God and Savior whose arm is not too short to save.
There no end to the messiness found in Biblical translations. Take for example Genesis 3:15 which Christians love to tout as the first promise God made to send Jesus to save mankind. But does it really refer to Jesus, or is it just some vague obscure mumbo-jumbo that nobody but a Hebrew scribe could dream up?
So we have three and possibly four different pronouns for who the offspring of the woman is. Any experts in Hebrew in here? What Hebrew word is used for the bolded pronoun referring to the woman's offspring? Is it properly translated as "he", "she", "it" or "they"?
Verse 15: And I will put enmity (ill will, hatred, animosity) between thee (the serpent ) and the woman (Eve), and between thy (serpent) seed (children) and her (Eve) and her seed (Eve's [and Adam's] children. It (the ill-will of Eve and her generations) shall bruise thy head (the serpent's head will be on the ground [verse 14] and thou (the serpent) shalt bruise his heel (because the serpent's head will be on the ground and the heels of Eve and her children [generations] will be the easiest place to strike).
There isn't any hidden message here and this passage has nothing to do with a future Jesus.
There no end to the messiness found in Biblical translations. Take for example Genesis 3:15 which Christians love to tout as the first promise God made to send Jesus to save mankind. But does it really refer to Jesus, or is it just some vague obscure mumbo-jumbo that nobody but a Hebrew scribe could dream up?
Here are three translations:
A fourth translation which I found quoted but cannot get a reference to reads:
So we have three and possibly four different pronouns for who the offspring of the woman is. Any experts in Hebrew in here? What Hebrew word is used for the bolded pronoun referring to the woman's offspring? Is it properly translated as "he", "she", "it" or "they"?
The only thing I know is that I can't even get out of the book of Genesis before I call BS on the Bible.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
