By Gary Konecky
On Saturday, December 26, 2009 / Tevet 9, 5770, Jews across the world read the Torah portion of Vayigash during morning services. Vayigash consists of Genesis 44:18 – 47:26. Among other things it recounts Jacob’s family moving to Egypt. Starting in Genesis 46:8, we are given a name by name account of who in Jacob’s family went to Egypt. It is interesting to note that wives of Jacob’s son’s mentioned as going to Egypt in Genesis 46:5 are not named nor counted in this lengthy list.
As bible literalists insist that the plain, literal meaning of the text is all that matters as it is G-d’s word, why this significant omission? Surely, the infallible, all knowing G-d, did not slip up in editing; so my first challenge to you is to explain the literal meaning of this apparent contradiction.
We now come to Genesis 46:26-27: “All the souls coming to Egypt with Jacob, those descended from him, excluding the wives of Jacob's sons, all the souls were sixty six. And Joseph's sons, who were born to him in Egypt, two souls; all the souls of the house of Jacob who came to Egypt were seventy.” - http://www.chabad.org/library/bible_cdo/aid/8241
All the souls were sixty-six plus Joseph’s two sons equals sixty-eight, yet we are told “all the souls of the house of Jacob who came to Egypt were seventy.” Since 68 does not equal 70, and an all knowing, infallible G-d would know basic arithmetic, your second challenge is to explain this math error using a literal meaning of the text. As you are restricted to a literal reading of the text, as it is your position that only a literal meaning of the text is the appropriate way to understand scripture, you cannot use names or people other than the sixty-eight mentioned in the Hebrew Bible.
For those who do not believe in the bible literalism, there are extensive commentaries by learned Jewish sages that explain these seeming contradictions. Such explanations draw on the oral Torah, and the Jewish tradition to search for meaning in the word of G-d. For we are taught in:
· Leviticus Rabbah 22:1: “He who loves the study of G-d’s words will not be satisfied with the written Torah, but will go on to the Mishnah and Talmud.”
· Baba Metzia 33: “The Rabbis have taught: ‘Those who study Scripture are scholars of degree, but not a high degree. Those who study Mishnah are scholars of higher degree. Those who study Talmud are scholars of the highest degree.’”
· Sopherim 16: “We read: ‘The L-rd spoke with you faces to faces.’ (Deut. 5:4) The passage does not read ‘pan to pan,’ face to face, but ‘panim le-panim,’ faces to faces. This teaches there are four faces or kinds of Torah: Scripture, Mishnah, Halakah, and Aggadah.” (note 1)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note 1: The source of the quotes from Leviticus Rabbah, Baba Metzia, and Sopherim is page 467 of The Talmudic Anthology, Tales & Teachings of the Rabbis, edited by Louis I. Newman in collaboration with Samuel Spitz, copyright 1945, published by Behrman House, Inc.
Showing posts with label Bible misinterpretation. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bible misinterpretation. Show all posts
Sunday, December 27, 2009
Monday, December 21, 2009
The Bible: The Word of G-d?
By Gary Konecky
There are those who believe the bible is the word of G-d. There is no doubt in my mind that the Torah (the first five books of the Hebrew Bible) is the word of G-d. That said, I believe Joshua may have written the account of Moses’ death at the end of Deuteronomy.
The problem is that many of those who say the bible is the word of G-d, then cite a fundamentalist, literalist interpretation of the bible as authority for their beliefs and prejudices. They then act on those beliefs and prejudices to impose their will upon others. There are several scriptural problems with this approach, in addition to the lack of respect for those of differing faith traditions.
The first scriptural problem is that G-d no longer sends us prophets. No one today can speak for G-d, as no one today is a prophet.
Second, I have yet to see an accurate translation of the Hebrew Bible into English. The reason for this is very simple. It is impossible to translate Hebrew into English accurately. Hebrew is a very nuanced language in regard to scriptural matters. For example, there are different names for G-d used in the Hebrew Bible. These different names all indicate different attributes of G-d. If we are to properly understand the Almighty and his intent, it would be useful to know what attribute the original Hebrew text is mentioning; just as it is useful to understand the difference between a drizzle and a thunderstorm if one has to go out in the rain.
Another example involves the Hebrew word “et” (also transliterated as “es” or “eth”). Et appears many times in the Hebrew Bible. Et is a word that has no meaning. Yet every time et appears, it alludes to something important, something important yet unspoken. Et is so important it is discussed in the Talmud (Kiddushin 57a). The Talmud is second only to the Bible in the Jewish tradition. This important word, this word so full of meaning that it appears numerous times in the bible as well as being discussed in the Talmud, is not translated into English. How can one know the will of G-d when not all the words of G-d are present?
Third, is the issue of mistranslation. An example of this can be found in the English name for one of the books of the bible, Deuteronomy. Deuteronomy comes from ancient Greek via Latin, with the Greek being a mistranslation of the original Hebrew (note 1). Deuteronomy “literally means 'second law' coming from the Greek words nomos (law) and deutero (second).” (note 2) The problem is not only is this word mistranslated, but its meaning is incorrect as Moses did not merely retell the law in Deuteronomy. In Deuteronomy, Moses also discussed commandments that are given only in Deuteronomy (and that are not given in any of the other books of the Hebrew Bible). If you are giving additional commandments, then you are not merely retelling the law, which is what the name Deuteronomy means.
The Hebrew name for Deuteronomy is “Devarim” meaning “events” and “which can also be translated as ‘words.’” (note 3) It is interesting to note that the Hebrew name provides a very accurate insight into the content of this book of the bible, as this book consists of Moses’ final address to the Jewish people (words); with the address consisting of Moses; explaining the law, recounting the wondering in the desert (events), and providing final instructions for the Jewish people as they enter the Land of Israel upon his passing.
Fourth, there are three different versions of the Ten Commandments. There is the Jewish version, the Protestant version, and the Catholic version. Surely, if the English translation of the bible that is being used were an accurate translation of the word of G-d there would be only one version. It is also worth noting that there are subtle differences in the text of the Hebrew Bible, as the two sets of tablets were slightly different. This raises the question; what is G-d telling us with these two slightly different versions?
Lastly, the Hebrew Bible is filled with instances that cry out for explanation. For example in the account of creation; day and night is created on the first day, yet the sun and moon are not created until the fourth day. We also have the example of chapter one of Genesis telling us that G-d created man and woman. Yet chapter two of Genesis seemingly contradicts this when the account of the creation of woman is given, thereby implying that woman was not created as stated in chapter one. Another example would be the unusual word choice in Genesis 1:26 which states: “And G-d said: ‘Let us make man.’” Who is the us? Did G-d create man or was it a group undertaking? If creating man was a group undertaking, who are the other members of the group? If G-d created man, why is us used? These few examples are all from the biblical account of creation. In addition to these examples, there are numerous other examples like this throughout the Hebrew Bible.
In conclusion, I believe that part of the Bible is the word of G-d. I also believe only an arrogant fool would think that he or she has the knowledge and the wisdom of the Almighty, and can therefore state with absolute certainty G-d’s intent based upon a literalist reading of a text filled with ambiguity, mistranslations, missing words, and seeming contradictions.
Note 1: http://www.answers.com/main/ntquery?s=Deuteronomy&gwp=13
Note 2: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_meaning_of_the_Bible_word_Deuteronomy
Note 3: Page 319 of The Torah Anthology / Me’Am Lo’Ez, Book Two, The Patriarchs by Rabbi Yaakov Culi, translated by Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan, Moznaim Publishing Corp., copyright 1989
There are those who believe the bible is the word of G-d. There is no doubt in my mind that the Torah (the first five books of the Hebrew Bible) is the word of G-d. That said, I believe Joshua may have written the account of Moses’ death at the end of Deuteronomy.
The problem is that many of those who say the bible is the word of G-d, then cite a fundamentalist, literalist interpretation of the bible as authority for their beliefs and prejudices. They then act on those beliefs and prejudices to impose their will upon others. There are several scriptural problems with this approach, in addition to the lack of respect for those of differing faith traditions.
The first scriptural problem is that G-d no longer sends us prophets. No one today can speak for G-d, as no one today is a prophet.
Second, I have yet to see an accurate translation of the Hebrew Bible into English. The reason for this is very simple. It is impossible to translate Hebrew into English accurately. Hebrew is a very nuanced language in regard to scriptural matters. For example, there are different names for G-d used in the Hebrew Bible. These different names all indicate different attributes of G-d. If we are to properly understand the Almighty and his intent, it would be useful to know what attribute the original Hebrew text is mentioning; just as it is useful to understand the difference between a drizzle and a thunderstorm if one has to go out in the rain.
Another example involves the Hebrew word “et” (also transliterated as “es” or “eth”). Et appears many times in the Hebrew Bible. Et is a word that has no meaning. Yet every time et appears, it alludes to something important, something important yet unspoken. Et is so important it is discussed in the Talmud (Kiddushin 57a). The Talmud is second only to the Bible in the Jewish tradition. This important word, this word so full of meaning that it appears numerous times in the bible as well as being discussed in the Talmud, is not translated into English. How can one know the will of G-d when not all the words of G-d are present?
Third, is the issue of mistranslation. An example of this can be found in the English name for one of the books of the bible, Deuteronomy. Deuteronomy comes from ancient Greek via Latin, with the Greek being a mistranslation of the original Hebrew (note 1). Deuteronomy “literally means 'second law' coming from the Greek words nomos (law) and deutero (second).” (note 2) The problem is not only is this word mistranslated, but its meaning is incorrect as Moses did not merely retell the law in Deuteronomy. In Deuteronomy, Moses also discussed commandments that are given only in Deuteronomy (and that are not given in any of the other books of the Hebrew Bible). If you are giving additional commandments, then you are not merely retelling the law, which is what the name Deuteronomy means.
The Hebrew name for Deuteronomy is “Devarim” meaning “events” and “which can also be translated as ‘words.’” (note 3) It is interesting to note that the Hebrew name provides a very accurate insight into the content of this book of the bible, as this book consists of Moses’ final address to the Jewish people (words); with the address consisting of Moses; explaining the law, recounting the wondering in the desert (events), and providing final instructions for the Jewish people as they enter the Land of Israel upon his passing.
Fourth, there are three different versions of the Ten Commandments. There is the Jewish version, the Protestant version, and the Catholic version. Surely, if the English translation of the bible that is being used were an accurate translation of the word of G-d there would be only one version. It is also worth noting that there are subtle differences in the text of the Hebrew Bible, as the two sets of tablets were slightly different. This raises the question; what is G-d telling us with these two slightly different versions?
Lastly, the Hebrew Bible is filled with instances that cry out for explanation. For example in the account of creation; day and night is created on the first day, yet the sun and moon are not created until the fourth day. We also have the example of chapter one of Genesis telling us that G-d created man and woman. Yet chapter two of Genesis seemingly contradicts this when the account of the creation of woman is given, thereby implying that woman was not created as stated in chapter one. Another example would be the unusual word choice in Genesis 1:26 which states: “And G-d said: ‘Let us make man.’” Who is the us? Did G-d create man or was it a group undertaking? If creating man was a group undertaking, who are the other members of the group? If G-d created man, why is us used? These few examples are all from the biblical account of creation. In addition to these examples, there are numerous other examples like this throughout the Hebrew Bible.
In conclusion, I believe that part of the Bible is the word of G-d. I also believe only an arrogant fool would think that he or she has the knowledge and the wisdom of the Almighty, and can therefore state with absolute certainty G-d’s intent based upon a literalist reading of a text filled with ambiguity, mistranslations, missing words, and seeming contradictions.
Note 1: http://www.answers.com/main/ntquery?s=Deuteronomy&gwp=13
Note 2: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_meaning_of_the_Bible_word_Deuteronomy
Note 3: Page 319 of The Torah Anthology / Me’Am Lo’Ez, Book Two, The Patriarchs by Rabbi Yaakov Culi, translated by Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan, Moznaim Publishing Corp., copyright 1989
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
