Things that were changed in Christian Bible translations

[Grailhunter]

The Garden of Eden….actually Paradise of Delights. Why was it changed? Maybe because Adam and Eve were naked Paradise of Delights seemed too sensual? And Garden of Eden implied work?
The words Satan or devil does not appear in Genesis. And what Adam and Eve ate was called fruit not an apple.

The Jews do not believe in a devil or hell. But maybe because Christians could not understand why the devil or hell was not in the Old Testament….they chose to put them there. The word hell or its equivalent is not anywhere in the Bible. The word hell first appears in the 8th century in Anglo Saxon and old English. And Hades does not mean a fiery place of eternal punishment. Hades is a Greek god that reigned over an underworld of the same name.

Actually hell and the devil are new information for the New Testament. Because the word hell is not there Christ and the Apostles used examples and explanations. Of course this causes confusion and some use it to try to say hell is not real.

And Satan as a devil and demons were well represented in the New Testament. Why did these thing change? The Bible does not give an explanation.

The Old Testament described the Messiah as a warlord king….a human. So the Jews were looking for a human warlord king. In fact the Jews during the various revolts were looking at military leaders as possible Messiahs. They were expecting a warlord not the Lord. This is one of reasons the Jews rejected Yeshua then and today. What changed between the testaments? The scriptures do not explain. Maybe, in the Old Testament Yahweh and the Jews were against the Jewish oppressors and those that worshipped false gods. But in the New Testament Satan becomes a big problem and attacks the faithful spiritually. So to address this and to reconcile Yahweh with humanity and open the gates of heaven to humanity the Messiah had to be a God? And in the New Testament the Messiah does not take on the Jewish oppressors….the Romans.

Magi" (μάγοι) is the plural form of "magus" which means witch or sorcerer. And is used else where in the New Testament in reference to a sorcerer. But apparently Christian translators did not like the word or understand why witches were interested in Yeshua? So in the scriptures the word Magi was replaced with “wise men” or kings. And in traditions “Oh three kings of orient are…”

The Star of the Nativity was never over the Nativity and was it a star? The Magi known to be “based” around Alexandria Egypt saw the star in the east and followed it northeast around the Mediterranean Sea and entered Jerusalem from the east.

The light went on to guide the Magi to the home of Yeshua in Nazareth where it stopped. A star would not move and guide the Magi around the Mediterranean Sea and stop. So it was some sort of hovering moving light.

Then the Magi worshipped Yeshua and gave him a treasure not trinkets. And the scriptures do not number them as 3.

Old Testament names a lot of times have descriptive meanings. For example the name Miriam from the verb מרה (mara) means to be rebellious or disobedient:. Which was actually the name of Christ's mother and translators found that offensive so they changed it to Mary.

Prophecy is a complex topic….the great and dreadful day of the Lord and its ties to the Messiah.

What is the “great and dreadful day of the Lord” (Malachi 4:5)? | GotQuestions.org

 

[David Lamb]

The Garden of Eden….actually Paradise of Delights. Why was it changed? Maybe because Adam and Eve were naked Paradise of Delights seemed too sensual? And Garden of Eden implied work?
The words Satan or devil does not appear in Genesis. And what Adam and Eve ate was called fruit not an apple.

The word translated "garden" is given this entry in Strong's Concordance:

01588. gan [gan;] from 01598; a garden (as fenced): garden.

"Eden" has this entry:

05731. Eden [ay -den;] the same as 05730 (masculine); Eden, the region of Adam's home: Eden.

The words Satan and devil do not appear in Genesis. Nevertheless, the bible as a whole tells us that the serpent, the devil and Satan are the same being:

“He laid hold of the dragon, that serpent of old, who is [the] Devil and Satan, and bound him for a thousand years;” (Re 20:2 NKJV)

I am not sure why you mention the apple. Which bible translation says that the fruit Adam and Eve ate was an apple? I gather the mistake came about because of a similarity between the Latin words for "apple" and "evil."

The Jews do not believe in a devil or hell. But maybe because Christians could not understand why the devil or hell was not in the Old Testament….they chose to put them there. The word hell or its equivalent is not anywhere in the Bible. The word hell first appears in the 8th century in Anglo Saxon and old English. And Hades does not mean a fiery place of eternal punishment. Hades is a Greek god that reigned over an underworld of the same name.

That just is not so. Granted the word "devil" does not occur in the Old Testament, but "Satan" does several times, so does "hell."

 

[Grailhunter]

The word translated "garden" is given this entry in Strong's Concordance:

The word translated "garden" is given this entry in Strong's Concordance:

The Strong’s is great but in this case wrong.

The words Satan and devil do not appear in Genesis. Nevertheless, the bible as a whole tells us that the serpent, the devil and Satan are the same being:

The Jews do not believe in the Devil because the Devil is never defined in the Old Testament.

The word/name Satan mostly appears in Job and there Satan seems to have a cordial relationship with Yahweh where he is the judge of righteousness.

Still yeap....Satan is the Devil as identified in the New Testament.

 

[Grailhunter]

The word translated "garden" is given this entry in Strong's Concordance:

01588. gan [gan;] from 01598; a garden (as fenced): garden.

"Eden" has this entry:

05731. Eden [ay -den;] the same as 05730 (masculine); Eden, the region of Adam's home: Eden.

The words Satan and devil do not appear in Genesis. Nevertheless, the bible as a whole tells us that the serpent, the devil and Satan are the same being:

“He laid hold of the dragon, that serpent of old, who is [the] Devil and Satan, and bound him for a thousand years;” (Re 20:2 NKJV)

I am not sure why you mention the apple. Which bible translation says that the fruit Adam and Eve ate was an apple? I gather the mistake came about because of a similarity between the Latin words for "apple" and "evil."

That just is not so. Granted the word "devil" does not occur in the Old Testament, but "Satan" does several times, so does "hell."

The Garden east of Eden

The phrase “Garden and Eden” does not actually appear in the original scriptures, or at least the oldest ones available. They replaced the phrase “the Paradise of Delights" with the phrase “Garden of Eden.” This is not new information, it has been known for a while. In plain sight but most do not care to consider it. Most scholars of Hebrew translate this in the plural as Paradise of Delights, but still these words remain mistranslated in both the Jewish and Christian translations of the text. A close look at these two Hebrew words indicates that the word paradise in the Hebrew implies a beautiful tropical area to live in, that is protected by a wall, or a hedge. The beauty and the wonder pertaining to much more than the vegetables and flora. The word Eden denotes a place of pleasure and delights and implies happiness, and fun to the extreme. For this reason some translate this as, Paradise of Earthly Delights. Eden can be the correct translation but few know what it means. Historically, at times the Hebrews used the word Eden to describe fancy brothels. Not that the Paradise was a brothel, just how the word was used at times. And the fact is that the word Eden meant a place of pleasure and delights.

When this phrase was translated the word paradise was changed to a more sterile word, that being garden. The word Garden was used to neutralize the phrase, because a garden involves work to maintain. Much more inline with medieval and even modern Christian concepts; in that we sustain ourselves through hard work, not through pleasure. Paradise of Eden would imply a topical area of pleasure and delights.

Now there was no need for extended research or secrets for this, because this is common knowledge among scholars of the Hebrew language and the Old Testament. Not that the scholars conspired to keep it from the public, it’s just that the public finds this stuff boring. It’s the reference material that carried on the deception. The Hebrew for paradise is “gan” There is a Hebrew word for garden, but it was not used here. The Hebrew word “gan” used in Geneses and only in Genesis, means paradise. It does not mean a plot of vegetables you toiled to plant in your backyard. It means paradise and implies a fenced or hedged area with perfect climate, water, and beautiful vegetation of all sorts. The Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance defines it only as a garden. Which is not the meaning of this word in Hebrew or the description of the area in the Bible. It is misleading and they know that. The word paradise, as in “gan” does not appear anywhere else in the Old Testament so most people would not have noticed the error.

The same is true of the word delight. If you look up the word “delight” in the Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance, #5730 the word is “Ay-den” from a word that means “live voluptuously” The word Ayden itself meaning delicate-pleasure-delight. If you look up the word “Eden” in the Strong’s, it sends you right back here to #5731, referencing the same word “Ay-den” and saying the same as #5730. Another use of the word sends you to the word Beth-Eden, #1040, meaning house of pleasure...Amos 1:5...a brothel. Whether it was a conspiracy and or a cover-up originally, it does not matter, functionally it is the same thing, because they have known the truth for years and they did not correct it. They intentionally carried on the deception. The deception did not work all that well because most people understood this to be a paradise, not a plot of vegetables and Adam and Eve with hoes in their hands. So what was God’s intent?

Beyond the commandment to be fruitful and multiply, there is Genesis 2:24-25 “Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh and they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed.” If God intended that there would be people with mothers and fathers in the Paradise of Delights, then God intended that there would be mothers and fathers having sex....in the Paradise of Delights, and the scripture certainly implies the concept of a mate versus a mere companion. Even though all this is true, the early doctrine makers were not going to allow this. Having a place called Paradise of Delights where Yahweh commanded them to be fruitful and multiply and so Adam and Eve were naked and having sex was not going to be the founding scenarios of their religion. So they played god and changed it, and translated the scriptures to say what they wanted them to say. As a point of humor the old Geneva Bible translated Adam and Eve sewing themselves breeches….The Breeches Bible.

 

[Behold]

of the Lord

The reason that bible translations, many, are corrupted, is becasue Satan is doing His work.
He's been redefining "what God said".. since Eve fell under His spell.

 

[ElieG12]

In Zech. 3:1, 2, Satan is spoken of as a real, personal spirit being. His identity is contrasted with an angel of Jehovah, and they have a direct dialogue like two real people.

The same thing happens in the Book of Job, where, in addition to the rest of the angels, this spirit appears before God and has a direct dialogue with him.

If that isn't clear evidence in the OT that Satan is a real being, what is?

 

[Grailhunter]

In Zech. 3:1, 2, Satan is spoken of as a real, personal spirit being. His identity is contrasted with an angel of Jehovah, and they have a direct dialogue like two real people.

The same thing happens in the Book of Job, where, in addition to the rest of the angels, this spirit appears before God and has a direct dialogue with him.

If that isn't clear evidence in the OT that Satan is a real being, what is?

I did not say that Satan is not a real being. I am saying Satan is not defined as a devil in the Old Testament. So the Jews do not believe in a devil. The word Satan mostly appears in the Old Testament in the book of Job. Where he appears in the Court of God to report on righteousness. Now when this all changed is hard to say.
















I did not say that Satan was not a real being.

 

[Behold]

If that isn't clear evidence in the OT that Satan is a real being, what is?

Yes.

Also, Jesus spoke of Him personally, more then once.

 

[ElieG12]

...I am saying Satan is not defined as a devil in the Old Testament. So the Jews do not believe in a devil. ...

"Satan is not defined as a devil" ... What are you trying to say with that?

And why would that be necessary for the Jews to "believe in a devil"?

The Devil and Satan are the same spirit person: the leader of the rebelion against God in heaven ... who took that rebelion to earth. What more "devil" than that?

 

[ElieG12]

This individual spirit is called Satan and Devil because of the meaning of those words, not because that's his name.

In reality, we don't know from the Bible what name identified this spirit when it was created perfect and didn't yet challenge the Creator or tempt God's other servants to separate themselves from the loyal family of God.

 

[Grailhunter]

"Satan is not defined as a devil" ... What are you trying to say with that?

And why would that be necessary for the Jews to "believe in a devil"?

The Devil and Satan are the same spirit person: the leader of the rebelion against God in heaven ... who took that rebelion to earth. What more "devil" than that?

Read post 7 I think you will get it.

At one time Satan was an "important angel" Being the leader of angels that is why some consider him as an archangel. But then there was the fall....not defined in the Bible when that occurred. But in the New Testament Satan is definitely defined as a devil.

 

[ElieG12]

Did you check Zech. 3:1, 2? There, Satan is shown as a clear "opponent" to God's angel.

The word satan means opponent, resister. What do you think a resister of God's purpose is? A confused person or an enemy?

 

[Grailhunter]

This individual spirit is called Satan and Devil because of the meaning of those words, not because that's his name.

In reality, we don't know from the Bible what name identified this spirit when it was created perfect and didn't yet challenge the Creator or tempt God's other servants to separate themselves from the loyal family of God.

Old Testament names a lot of times have descriptive meanings. For example the name Miriam from the verb מרה (mara) means to be rebellious or disobedient:. Which was actually the name of Christ's mother and translators found that offensive so they changed it to Mary.

Like wise Satan can mean accuser or adversary. As a being reporting to Yahweh in Job on the righteousness of earth he could be an accuser. In numbers referring to King David the word could be speaking of his adversaries.

 

[ElieG12]

... Satan can mean accuser or adversary.

Devil means accuser, slanderer.
Satan means resister, opposer, adversary.

As a being reporting to Yahweh in Job on the righteousness of earth he could be an accuser. In numbers referring to King David the word could be speaking of his adversaries.

You're confusing the words.

The word "satan" is used in the Old Testament to describe anyone who acts as a resister of another.

As a direct appellation, it describes a particular spirit that is clearly presented in the OT, in Job, and in Zechariah. Evidently, this appellation didn't describe him when this spirit was created.

 

[Grailhunter]

Devil means accuser.
Satan means resister, opposer, adversary.

You're confusing the words.

The word "satan" is used in the Old Testament to describe anyone who acts as a resister of another.

As a direct appellation, it describes a particular spirit that is clearly presented in the OT, in Job, and in Zechariah; obviously, this appellation didn't describe him when this spirit was created.

Incorrect. Look it up.
The figure of Satan, or “the satan” (Hebrew: הַשָּׂטָן), appears in the Hebrew Bible primarily as an accuser or adversary, rather than the fully developed devil figure seen in later Christian theology. The term “satan” is derived from a Hebrew verb meaning “to obstruct” or “to oppose.” In the Old Testament, it is typically used with the definite article “the,” indicating a role rather than a personal name.

 

[ElieG12]

The Greek word διάβολος was used as a translation of the word Satan in the book of Job in the LXX, two centuries before Jesus, not because it was its literal translation, but because it describes the same spirit person.

The translators of the LXX were Jewish and were very familiar with the character who in the NT continued to be called by both names: Satan, the Devil.

 

[Grailhunter]

The Greek word διάβολος was used as a translation of the word Satan in the book of Job in the LXX, two centuries before Jesus, not because it was its literal translation, but because it describes the same spirit person.

The translators of the LXX were Jewish and were very familiar with the character who in the NT continued to be called by both names: Satan, the Devil.

Again the Jews then and today do not beleive in a hell or the devil.
The devil and hell was new information for the New Testament. See post 1

 

[ElieG12]

Incorrect. Look it up.
The figure of Satan, or “the satan” (Hebrew: הַשָּׂטָן), appears in the Hebrew Bible primarily as an accuser or adversary, rather than the fully developed devil figure seen in later Christian theology. The term “satan” is derived from a Hebrew verb meaning “to obstruct” or “to oppose.” In the Old Testament...

As you rightly say, just like me, "satan" means opposer, resister
... but "satan" doesn't mean "accuser" in Hebrew. Why do you insist on that?

satan and devil are two different direct appelations to the same individual.

We both agree that besides that both words have a normal common use.

 

[ElieG12]

Again the Jews then and today do not beleive in a hell or the devil.
The devil and hell was new information for the New Testament. See post 1

"hell" has nothing to do with what we are talking about:

Could the Jews know who Satan, the Devil, is directly from the OT?

Definitely YES, they could.

 

[Grailhunter]

"hell" has nothing to do with what we are talking about:

Could the Jews know who Satan, the Devil, is directly from the OT?

Definitely YES, they could.

Incorrct again. See post 1