« AnteriorContinuar »
MISRENDERINGS OF THE ORIGINAL TEXT.
The misrenderings of the original texts are so numerous that we can only notice a few of the more important ones. The word (BTzLM), rendered image, is really shadow ; in Genesis i. 7, “ in his own image” ought to read “after their shadow "; and “in the image of God created he him, male and female,” ought to read “on the shadow of the gods they formed him, male and female."
We have already seen how the real meaning of the word elohim (aleim) in the first chapter of Genesis has been suppressed; we shall, therefore, not be surprised to find that references to other gods besides Yahuh have been altered so as to obscure their real meaning, for there is evidence that it has been the chief object of the translators to make it appear to the reader that the Hebrews were worshippers of one god only (monotheists). That Moses was interested in pushing the worship of the chief, tribal, or patron god, Yahuh, is pretty clear, for he had probably acquired a devotion to this god in Egypt. All who entered the temple of Serapis at Heliopolis, in which temple Moses was educated and instructed in science by Egyptian priests, wore the name I-ha-ho, or I-ha-hou. Serapis, Osiris, and Yahuh were one and the same, each a representative of the sungod, as Astarte, Isis, and Venus were the same; the former three representing the male powers of generation, and the latter representing the mother earth and the female powers of generation. And without the Pentateuch and the rest of the Hebrew sacred writings, with the former's “creation," “fall,” and “original sin,” the theory of the Saviour Jesus and his redemption by death would be useless ; and, without the so-called “prophecies ” of the latter to bolster up the story of Jesus, his death by the gibbet as a malefactor would have been fatal to his success as a messiah.
In Gen. iv. 8, a portion of the original was evidently obliterated or missing : “And Cain said to his brother Abel”; here is a blank, and we do not hear what Cain said to his brother; then follows: “And it came to pass while they were in the fields,” etc. Instead of rendering this correctly, and honestly stating the facts of the case in a note, the translators have rendered it : “And Cain talked with Abel, his brother.” Though this may appear unimportant and trivial, it shows want of correctness and desire to manipulate, and confidence is lost. Then in verse 18 “the Chief or Ram-god ” is rendered, to disguise the fact, “the most high god.” Psalm lxviii. opens with “Let God arise,” which ought to read : Let the mighty one [the sun-god] arise.” The word “ Lord,” so frequently met with in the 0. T., is universally wrong as a rendering. In Psalm x. 1, lxxxix. 46 and 52, the word “Lord” ought to read “Yahuh.” The word “Adonai,” when found alone, is in nearly all cases rendered “the Lord”; but, when met with in conjunction with Yahuh or elohim, is erroneously rendered “ Lord God,” as, for example, Psalm cx, 1:“The Lord said unto my Lord,” which is meaningless, and ought to read: “Yahuh saith unto Adonai for our Adonis”; Isaiah vii. 7, “ Thus saith the Lord God,” ought to read : “ Thus saith Yahuh our Adonis "; verse 14, “ Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign,” ought to read : “Therefore our Adonis himself shall give you a sign."
The god Amen, Ammon, or Amoun, is generally rendered “the god of truth"; this occurs twice in Isaiah lxv. 16. This name, in its shortened form, found its way later into the Greek language from Egypt, and was used in the sense of truly; but this is no excuse for the deliberate misrendering of the ancient Egyptian and Hebrew deities' name. In the Apocalypse or revelation this name is written with the Greek prefix Ho, and is rendered “The Amen,” which is ineaningless. In Rev. iii. 14 we ought to read : “These things saith Ammon, the true and faithful witness "; but, instead, we read : “These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness.”
The name “ El Shadai” is given in the A.V., where it first occurs, but is everywhere else rendered Almighty, which is the true rendering, it being the plural of SHD= mighty or powerful. “It was really a title of the Babylonian
god Bel, who is constantly invoked in inscriptions as 'Saddai Raba,' the great exalted one."*
The word Ashera, or Asherah, is admitted in the preface to the R. V. to be “uniformly and wrongly rendered grove" in the A. V. (see 1 Kings xiv. 15, 23; 2 Kings xxiii. 4-7). Why this deception? There can be only one answer—to conceal the gross character of the object. The Ashera was an upright or erect stone, the phallic or sexual emblem. In Ex. xxxiv. 13 we find : “But ye shall destroy their altars, break their images, and cut down their groves.” The reading in the R. V. is : “Ye shall break down their altars and dash in pieces their pillars, and ye shall cut down their Asherim.” The “pillars ” were the phallic emblems or Ashera. Josiah destroyed the worship of the sun, moon, planets, and the Ashera, and turns out of the Temple the “ Kadeshim ” (see p. 73).
The libidinous effusion called “Solomon's Song," from which verses are picked out by the Catholic Church, and palmed off upon her credulous followers as poetic allusions to the Virgin Mary, is simply a love song delivered by some devoted debauchee. In chapter v. 4 a dishonest interpolation is made, not only in the A. V., but in the R. V.; the words “ of the door” are inserted after the word ineaning opening, or vulva. And, to further disguise the real libidinous meaning of the text, the words meaning “ within me" are rendered “ for him.” The words of the two following verses have also been rendered so that the real meaning may be obscured. The “handle of the bolt” wss the phallus, the premature withdrawal of which was the subject of lament.
We have noticed before that the word rendered “angels” in the visit to Lot in the city of Sodom ought to be gods. In Isaiah xxxiv. 14 Adam's demon wife Lilith has been suppressed, and the meaningless expression, “the screech owl,” substituted; but the rendering in the R.V. is "the night monster.” The hideous long nose which the Hebrew god Yahuh was represented with, and the horns of Moses (of Aries, the ram), have both been suppressed. “And the Lord passed by before him, and proclaimed the Lord, the Lord God, merciful and gracious, long suffering, and
* C. Edwards, The Witness of Assyria.
abundant in goodness and truth” (Ex. xxxiv. 6), ought to read : “And Yahuh passed by before his face, and Yahuh proclaimed : The supreme god Yahuh is merciful and gracious, has a long nose [or nostrils], and much zeal and firmness.” The plural of the Hebrew word meaning nasal openings may be rendered in the singular as the whole organ or nose, just as the singular. form is rendered nostrils in Gen. ii. 7. And if this word means nose in Genesis, it means the same in Exodus. The explanation is that the long nose was a sign of great wisdom, and the Theban Yahuh was depicted with this characteristic. We are informed (Ex. xxxiv. 28–30, 35) that Moses was forty days and nights with Yahuh on Mount Sin-ai ; that during that time he neither ate nor drank; that he carved out the Ten
Commandments on stone from Yahuh's dictation; and that "! when he came down from the mountain at the end of that
period he appeared with horns. Now the horns of Moses rota are deliberately suppressed in three instances, and the word a shone substituted : “And Moses wist not sor did not know] vetelt that the skin of his face shone while he talked with dist him” (29). In the R. V. a marginal note, slightly E more honest than the A. V., says : “or sent forth beams the (Heb.), horns.” But why this wish to suppress the literal orui rendering, horns ? The translators have the audacity to o meu admit that in Hebrew the word means horns ; but is it not dić Hebrew they were translating, and no other language? The
the fact is patent, that this is an attempt to square the two "the" renderings, shone and horns, and to deceive the uninformed whick with the belief that either rendering may be given. The
same deception is practised in verses 30 and 35. The true por que rendering is : “And Moses wist not that a horn or horns Che divided the skin of his forehead (or face]." The L. V. has has the true rendering. The horns of Aries formed the symbol he site of the Egyptian god Ammon or Amen. The text shows Ti that Moses and Bacchus were identical, being personificaha Hi tions of the sun in the sign “ Aries ”; both were known by behoeften the name Mises or Moses, which signified drawn from water, Hide and both performed similar feats, possessed magic rods
changeable into serpents, by which they performed miracles
-leading an army through the Red Sea, dividing the rivers Orontes and Hydaspes, drawing water from rocks, and causing lands through which they passed to flow with wine, milk, and honey. Bacchus (son of Jupiter and Semele) was born on Mount Nyssa (Sin-ai), and was the same with the Greek Dionysos, and the Hebrew Yahuh-nissi. Jupiter and Bacchus were also horned. In Judges (xviii. 31) the fact is suppressed that the descendants of Moses worshipped other gods than Yahuh; the name Manasseh is substituted for Moses. In Ex. (xxxiii. 9), where the cloud talks to Moses, the words, "the Lord,” which are not in the original, have been interpolated. In Gen. (xxxvi. 24) the Hebrew word meaning “hot springs” is rendered mules. What object the translators could have had in misrendering this word it is difficult to conceive. This mistake is corrected in the R. V.
We see frequent mention in Christian writings of a third person in their “Trinity,” or tri-une god, sometimes spoken of as the “Holy Spirit,” “Holy Ghost,” “Spirit of God;" etc. We have searched through the Bible, and fail to discover any such person mentioned. But we find frequent mention of a certain wind and holy wind in the N. T., which words in the original Greek have no capitals, nor were there any marks to designate proper names in the Hebrew of the 0. T., for all the Hebrew letters were capitals, and without stops or breathing sounds. The word rendered ghost and spirit is the Greek word pneuma, which is the equivalent of roue or urove in the Hebrew of the 0. T.: both mean air in motion, wind, or breath ; and it is evident from the absence of capitals that they were not originally intended to represent a person, as was probably suggested later, when the ghost or holy wind was introduced as a person into the Christian “ Trinity.” The Greek word for holy is agion when in conjunction with pneuma, and this in the original has no capital. Now, the Hebrew word meaning wind is rendered in Gen. iii. 8,“ in the cool of the day,” with the greatest audacity ; in viïi. 1, as “wind”; and in i. 2, urove aleim is rendered “the spirit of god,” but it ought to be “the wind for breath] of the gods.” In the D.V. pneuma is rendered spiritus,” from spiro, I breathe. And we shall see the connection between spirit and ghost when we know that, when the Bible was translated from the Latin into Anglo-Saxon, spiritus was rendered gāst, which word became goost and gost, approaching very near to, and probably derived from, the old German geist, which is the present