Why the Bible is misunderstood

[Tanakh Keeper]

Adapted from Rabbi Adam Jacobs

2200 years ago, Ptolemy, King of Egypt, forced 70 rabbis to translate the text of the Torah into Greek, creating a document that would come to be known as the Septuagint. This forced translation just covered the five books of Moses. While a diluted version of the actual text was made, Ptolemy did not get the methodology that is required to make sense of it. This led to succeeding mistranslations and faulty comprehension of the bible by non-Jews.

Karl Heinrich Graf and Julius Wellhausen first theorized the Documentary Hypothesis, which stated that the Torah is a redacted patchwork of ancient myths and folklore penned by numerous authors. One of their proofs is that duplicative and repetitious words and passages were evidence of multiple authorship. Later bible scholars like Robert Alter and R. N. Whybray held that the text was more a unified whole than not. Mr. Alter expressed dismay that earlier scholars didn’t take the classical Jewish approach more seriously. To Talmudic scholars, the Torah's repetitions, multiple Divine names, textual divergences and variations of language and style contain a wealth of information. To treat them as mere editorial mishaps is nothing less than tragic. Jewish sages 1) knew that the text was Divinely authored 2) had deep familiarity with the material 3) spoke and read Hebrew as their native tongue 4) had generations of scholarship to consult. Therefore they were in the best position to comprehend the bible. Instead of extra or missing words or variant spelling being used as proof of error, these literary devices acted as both markers and tools to reveal divine information. There are thirteen rules that govern this exegesis and without them the bible is opaque.

Additionally, without the oral tradition to explain them, what are we to make of commandments such as "slaughter the animal in the way that I have shown you" with no hint as to how that is to be done? What does it mean to "guard the Sabbath and keep it holy?" There are penalties for not doing it right but no description as to how to do it. How exactly are parents supposed to be "honored," and in a practical sense what constitutes "loving one's fellow as oneself?" The oral tradition that crystallized into the Talmud, the Midrashim and the Kabbalah is the only tool available to successfully decode the massive amount of legal, ethical and spiritual information that is embedded in the bible.

Attempting to read and interpret the bible in English will lose the subtleties that exist in the Hebrew language. Especially since the English was translated from Latin, which was translated from Greek. No amount of personal spirituality will suffice to bridge the detail that is lost from multiple translations. It becomes the children’s game of ‘telephone’, but in textual format. Puzzingly, the fact that the books of the prophets are written in our native language (Hebrew) and were in our possession hundreds of years before others came into contact with them does not give pause to those who claim that they know what the verses mean better than we do. For example, most people think that the first words of the bible are “In the Beginning”. However, anyone with a basic comprehension of the Hebrew language will realize that is false. The true opening words are actually “In the beginning of…”. Add to this the fact that the fourth and sixth words have no translation and a third person past tense verb modifying a plural noun and we have, what appears to be a grammatical nightmare. Actually, the first sentence is structured to teach dozens of ideas with a maximum conservation of space. Three entire volumes of the Zohar are required to fully expound on it.

Many philosophies and religious systems have built themselves on top of the Torah's foundation. Though we didn’t consent to it, once Ptolemy forced a (bad) translation, anyone was free to manipulate and misinterpret the bible as they desired. All these issues have resulted in the huge variations of the bible and its' meaning that exist unto the present day.

[Andius]

A most interesting article, and one I can agree with.

When I am not to tired, and out of bed, I do have an inquiry or two in regards to it, I hope you can help me clarify.

[Andius]

Righto! So here it is.

My one inquiry is this one. I am surprised that Rabbi Adam Jacobs equates the Kabbalah with the same weight as the Talmud and the Midrashim.

No clue as to what flavor of Judaism you stick to, so I'll ask, in what ways does the Kabbalah help clarify the understanding of the Torah?

[Tanakh Keeper]

Rabbi Jacobs never says the Kabbalah has the same weight as the Talmud. He only said both those works are used to interpret the bible. No weighting is mentioned.

[Andius]

Oh. Understood.

Righto. Soo yeah, I still stand by my inquiry. Any idea how the Kabbalah aids in interpretation of the Torah?

[Tanakh Keeper]

I'm no expert on it. From what I know, the kabbalah provides additional insights into the text. But it doesn't supersede anything in the bible.

[Andius]

Ah, I see. Fair enough.

[shunyadragon]

To understand the context of Jesus as a Jew and the world he live in, as well as the parables, in the NT I like the writing of Geza Vermes. Your post and references are interesting for the Jewish perspective

[shunyadragon]

I'm no expert on it. From what I know, the kabbalah provides additional insights into the text. But it doesn't supersede anything in the bible.

I took some classes on the Kabbalah at a Jewish center and I agree.

I do not think that all Jews have a positive view on the Kabbalah.

[Xru]

Attempting to read and interpret the bible in English will lose the subtleties that exist in the Hebrew language. Especially since the English was translated from Latin, which was translated from Greek. No amount of personal spirituality will suffice to bridge the detail that is lost from multiple translations. It becomes the children’s game of ‘telephone’, but in textual format. Puzzingly, the fact that the books of the prophets are written in our native language (Hebrew) and were in our possession hundreds of years before others came into contact with them does not give pause to those who claim that they know what the verses mean better than we do. For example, most people think that the first words of the bible are “In the Beginning”. However, anyone with a basic comprehension of the Hebrew language will realize that is false. The true opening words are actually “In the beginning of…”. Add to this the fact that the fourth and sixth words have no translation and a third person past tense verb modifying a plural noun and we have, what appears to be a grammatical nightmare. Actually, the first sentence is structured to teach dozens of ideas with a maximum conservation of space. Three entire volumes of the Zohar are required to fully expound on it.

Well this is troubling. Exactly why can we have any confidence in the English translation of the Bible being substantially correct?

[shunyadragon]

Well this is troubling. Exactly why can we have any confidence in the English translation of the Bible being substantially correct?

From my perspective, the main problem is the historic translation and interpretation of the OT, which has lead to the traditional understanding of prophesy and doctrine. Though some progress has been made in recent years based on the Dead Sea Scrolls and Ugarit texts, but the old interpretations based on old translations remain.

[Xru]

I found this so troubling that I started a new thread specifically about this under Theology 201 I think it is.

http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/sh...roubling-.-.-.

[Tanakh Keeper]

Yes, it is troubling to any religion that purports to come from Judaism. Many converts to Judaism did their own research on the texts that they were taught versus the Original Text of the Hebrew bible, and found significant divergencies.

The most accurate English biblical text nowadays are the English translations made directly from the Hebrew bible.

[Andius]

Well this is troubling. Exactly why can we have any confidence in the English translation of the Bible being substantially correct?

Oh come now Xru, just because in cannot be understood in English serves little to reason to start a panic attack about it.

The Writ found in Bible, like any other document that makes the jump to a radically different language and context, will not always be able to transfer the context and conceptual framework from one language to another. That doesn't mean that it is an impossible thing to do. since there are methods of discovering the context that the text comes from. Wether it be commentaries, anthropological research, semitical studies etc.

If it can be concieved conceptually, it can be described, regardless of language.

[shunyadragon]

Yes, it is troubling to any religion that purports to come from Judaism. Many converts to Judaism did their own research on the texts that they were taught versus the Original Text of the Hebrew bible, and found significant divergencies.

The most accurate English biblical text nowadays are the English translations made directly from the Hebrew bible.

I believe the Vulgate was translated to Latin from Hebrew, and then to other languages. There subtle differences regardless of what other language the scripture ends up. I believe the next key is the interpretation, lets say the Hebrew directly, which scholars have readily available in better form than available for centuries. The translation issues have not changed the traditional Christian interpretations, because of traditional doctrinal beliefs and prophecy beliefs that predetermine the interpretations. Just translating from Hebrew to English does not really resolve the problems