Truth Found in the King James Bible

originally posted by: CabablancaHizb

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: hounddoghowlie
a reply to: chr0naut

i hate to say this but in thinking about Genesis 32:22-32, wrestles with God make more sense.
i mean why would God/angle/ or a man call Jacob a son of God after wrestling with him all night.
even if it means God prevails, it was Jacob whose named was changed and he prevailed.

Yes, that is one of the definitions of the name "Israel".

But the word existed before it was used as a name.

That is a total assumption you can't back up.

Many believe the word derives from 'sarar' (to rule, be strong or to judge over) and 'El', a word meaning God.

Outside of the Genesis 32 story, the word had the meanings of: "God rules", "God judges", "God prevails" or "God triumphs".

In the context of the Genesis story the meaning is generally agreed to be: "Triumphant with God" or "who prevails with God".

"The Jewish Study Bible" of Oxford University Press says "The scientific etymology of Israel is uncertain, a good guess being '[The God] El rules.'"

Yeah it means wrestles with God. It is FIRST mentioned after Jacob wrestles with God.

It retains that meaning as a nation and certainly "wrestles" with God to this day. A perfect reason to alter the definition.

But the Biblical definition is what I said.

The account is about Jacob wrestling with God but the name refers to the outcome.

Re-read Genesis 32:28 it says: "He said, “Your name shall no longer be Jacob, but Israel (Heb : 'Yisra El'); for you have striven (Heb: 'sarah') with God (Heb: 'Elohim') and with humans (Heb: 'enosh') and have prevailed (Heb: 'yakol').” NRSV with added Hebrew words.

'Israel' means 'God prevails'.

a reply to: chr0naut

Like I said, as long as you learned something I'm happy.

a reply to: chr0naut

But you already said you know it means wrestles with God and now you are refusing to accept what even you said.

It means wrestles with God, if you are so obsessed with being right that you can't admit it I still know you know because you said so yourself, your own links too, and I suspect one of those complexes people who can't accept being corrected is the real issue.

After all, you admit it means wrestles with God but won't admit that the passage where he actually wrestles God is the source.

I have never seen anything like it, honestly.

Not many people make a big deal about having the wrong definition, they usually say oh, I was wrong or something like that.

But some people take being corrected as an attack on their intelligence which only happens to the insecure and I would recommend pondering that if you want to learn vs. be right all the time.

What evs

originally posted by: hounddoghowlie
a reply to: chr0naut

every one of the links on the first page pretty much says, wrestles with God.
none say Sons of God. there are a couple that say could mean God prevails, but seem to lean towards wrestles with God.

I didn't say that Israel means "sons of God". The "sons of God" reference was from several posts ago in regarding differing translations of Deuteronomy 32:8.

I am not denying that 'Israel' has been taken to mean "wrestles with God". I was just pointing out what it means in Hebrew, rather than tradition and padawan Wormwoody (whatever he calls himself at this moment) took offense.

originally posted by: CabablancaHizb
a reply to: chr0naut

But you already said you know it means wrestles with God and now you are refusing to accept what even you said.

It means wrestles with God, if you are so obsessed with being right that you can't admit it I still know you know because you said so yourself, your own links too, and I suspect one of those complexes people who can't accept being corrected is the real issue.

After all, you admit it means wrestles with God but won't admit that the passage where he actually wrestles God is the source.

I have never seen anything like it, honestly.

Not many people make a big deal about having the wrong definition, they usually say oh, I was wrong or something like that.

But some people take being corrected as an attack on their intelligence which only happens to the insecure and I would recommend pondering that if you want to learn vs. be right all the time.

What evs

Honestly, I know that people say that 'Israel' means 'wrestles with God' and I haven't ever denied that.

People also say there are three wise men (the Bible doesn't say how many there were).

People also say that Jesus cannot possibly be born on Christmas day and usually come up with invalid reasons that they have heard elsewhere (like it would be too cold for shepherds to be out in the fields in December - BS).

People also say that the doors of the upper room at Pentecost were locked (there's nothing about that in the Bible).

People often say stuff that isn't true, with full belief that it is. Stuff they may have heard in their youth, perhaps, but have never questioned.

Do some research and disregard stuff that doesn't have sufficient cred. A definition heard while you are a youth, from a source that is probably no better versed to comment than yourself, is not particularly credible.

On my side I have the BDB Lexicon, Wikipedia, the NOBSE Study Bible Name List, the Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names by Alfred Jones, The Jewish Encyclopedia and Strong's Concordance which all support my assertion. You have something you heard when you were 12.

Here's a particularly thorough page from Abarim Publications' online Biblical Hebrew Dictionary, on the meaning of the name and how it derives. Please take the time to read it, especially the conclusion at the end of the page.

I want to apologize to the OP for allowing myself to be taken so off topic over the definition of a word. I was originally just kindly correcting someone as I would want someone to do to me were I mistaken.

The only issues I have with the KJ Bible are my previous statement about the alteration of Sons of God (DSS, oldest known texts) or Angels of God (Septuagint, second oldest) to sons of Israel (Masoretic only, MUCH younger) which is obvious to most a deliberate attempt to conceal the truth. No reasonable explanation could possibly exist to think that God was mistralated to Israel by accident.

And no logically thinking person would assume that the newest text that disagrees with the 2 oldest texts is the correct one and that every Bible before the Masoretic text was wrong. Someone even tried saying it was an "obvious mistranslation" In the Greek. Evidently this person hasn't a clue that the Hebrew Dead Sea Scrolls agree with the Greek making what they thought an "obvious mistranslation" the original and correct wording.

The Masoretic text was produced around 1200 AD (I think but either way it is the newest) and the Greek and Hebrew DSS are ancient by comparison. It is not even reasonable to think that the youngest and lone version with "sons of Israel", the Masoretic, is the correct version.

It's one of those things that are obvious to any rational person and I find it dubious to change the word God to Israel in the Masoretic.

But the problem was that the text read in context makes no mistake that the god (YHVH) was originally a Son of the Most High God or El Elyon.

And as an inheritance from El Elyon received the nation of Israel as his people. Every Son of El (70 in number) was given a nation and Yahweh got Israel.

70 and 72 are so important in the Bible because of the 70 Sons of El and Asherah (72).

If you want proof of deliberate alterations of the original meaning then follow the original Hebrew to the King James and it becomes clear that the truth has been fudged to preserve the image of a monotheistic religion in ancient Canaan/Israel.

But Asherah was worshipped in the Second Temple with no issues for a long time and she has also been demonized by the uneducated as a pagan goddess (as if paganism were evil) when she was the consort of El and then Yahweh/Baal before her demonization.

If all of this is startling to you it is OK. Everyone has a similar reaction upon learning this. Some will find a way to ignore or dismiss it and never look into it.

Some will look into it and return with misleading arguments after they have, with bias, spent a half hour on the internet looking not for the truth, but the standard apologetic argument that I guarantee has already been concocted for this purpose.

I have researched it from every angle and can state that what I say is true and any academic knowledgeable in this topic will confirm it.

A few who prefer the hard truth instead of a pleasant lie will look into it and discover that much of the Hebrew religion comes from the Gods of Canaan. El is El and the early Israelites worshipped El, Baal, Asherah etc.

Yahweh is not El. Baal is more like Yahweh in ancient Canaanite mythology. I believe that Yahweh is Baal under a different name.

Baal means Lord (or prince) and that is a clue.

originally posted by: CabablancaHizb
... I was originally just kindly correcting someone as I would want someone to do to me were I mistaken.

You were demonstrably mistaken.

The only issues I have with the KJ Bible are my previous statement about the alteration of Sons of God (DSS, oldest known texts) or Angels of God (Septuagint, second oldest) to sons of Israel (Masoretic only, MUCH younger) which is obvious to most a deliberate attempt to conceal the truth.
...

"ben" in Hebrew does not mean "Son of", it is not gender specific. So translating "ben Elohim" to "Sons of God" is invalid grammatically. "Children of God" would be a better translation and also it is used elsewhere to refer to the Israelites.

But the problem was that the text read in context makes no mistake that the god (YHVH) was originally a Son of the Most High God or El Elyon.

No it doesn't. The text is about God granting sufficient land for all Israel, even a future Israel with greater population.

And as an inheritance from El Elyon received the nation of Israel as his people. Every Son of El (70 in number) was given a nation and Yahweh got Israel.

There are 70 names in the "table of nations" in Genesis 10 and 11. Each is a human nation. According to Hittite texts, El and Asherah had either 77 or 88 sons. Wikipedia - El (deity), Proto-Sinaitic, Phoenician, Aramaic, and Hittite texts. To the best of my knowledge, there are no other Caananite or other texts giving specific number or a complete list of names of the sons of El and Asherah. If I am wrong on this, please provide a link to support your assertion. Until then, you got your numbers wrong.

If you want proof of deliberate alterations of the original meaning then follow the original Hebrew to the King James and it becomes clear that the truth has been fudged to preserve the image of a monotheistic religion in ancient Canaan/Israel.

All through the Bible, the Israelites were warned and encountered dire consequences for worshiping the false gods of Asherah and the Baals.

Some will look into it and return with misleading arguments after they have, with bias, spent a half hour on the internet looking not for the truth, but the standard apologetic argument that I guarantee has already been concocted for this purpose.

Most will find by either actually reading the Bible or browsing the Internet, that what you say is untrue.

A few who prefer the hard truth instead of a pleasant lie will look into it and discover that much of the Hebrew religion comes from the Gods of Canaan. El is El and the early Israelites worshipped El, Baal, Asherah etc.

No, the religion of the Bible is by direct revelation. In Hebrew El is a contraction of Elohim, which is the word for 'God', not his name which is YHWH (as identified very clearly in Exodus 6:2-3). El as used in the Bible does not refer to El the Caananite god.

Yahweh is not El. ... I believe that Yahweh is Baal under a different name.

Elijah clearly identified that Baal (plural) was not YHWH and that the Baals were false gods and YHWH the true God, at Mt Carmel:

'Elijah then came near to all the people, and said, “How long will you go limping with two different opinions? If the Lord is God, follow him; but if Baal, then follow him.” The people did not answer him a word. Then Elijah said to the people, “I, even I only, am left a prophet of the Lord; but Baal’s prophets number four hundred fifty. Let two bulls be given to us; let them choose one bull for themselves, cut it in pieces, and lay it on the wood, but put no fire to it; I will prepare the other bull and lay it on the wood, but put no fire to it. Then you call on the name of your god and I will call on the name of the Lord; the god who answers by fire is indeed God.” All the people answered, “Well spoken!” Then Elijah said to the prophets of Baal, “Choose for yourselves one bull and prepare it first, for you are many; then call on the name of your god, but put no fire to it.” So they took the bull that was given them, prepared it, and called on the name of Baal from morning until noon, crying, “O Baal, answer us!” But there was no voice, and no answer. They limped about the altar that they had made. At noon Elijah mocked them, saying, “Cry aloud! Surely he is a god; either he is meditating, or he has wandered away, or he is on a journey, or perhaps he is asleep and must be awakened.” Then they cried aloud and, as was their custom, they cut themselves with swords and lances until the blood gushed out over them. As midday passed, they raved on until the time of the offering of the oblation, but there was no voice, no answer, and no response.

Then Elijah said to all the people, “Come closer to me”; and all the people came closer to him. First he repaired the altar of the Lord that had been thrown down; Elijah took twelve stones, according to the number of the tribes of the sons of Jacob, to whom the word of the Lord came, saying, “Israel shall be your name”; with the stones he built an altar in the name of the Lord. Then he made a trench around the altar, large enough to contain two measures of seed. Next he put the wood in order, cut the bull in pieces, and laid it on the wood. He said, “Fill four jars with water and pour it on the burnt offering and on the wood.” Then he said, “Do it a second time”; and they did it a second time. Again he said, “Do it a third time”; and they did it a third time, so that the water ran all around the altar, and filled the trench also with water.

At the time of the offering of the oblation, the prophet Elijah came near and said, “O Lord, God of Abraham, Isaac, and Israel, let it be known this day that you are God in Israel, that I am your servant, and that I have done all these things at your bidding. Answer me, O Lord, answer me, so that this people may know that you, O Lord, are God, and that you have turned their hearts back.” Then the fire of the Lord fell and consumed the burnt offering, the wood, the stones, and the dust, and even licked up the water that was in the trench. When all the people saw it, they fell on their faces and said, “The Lord indeed is God; the Lord indeed is God.”' (1 Kings 18:21-39 - NRSV).

originally posted by: chr0naut

"ben" in Hebrew does not mean "Son of", it is not gender specific. So translating "ben Elohim" to "Sons of God" is invalid grammatically. "Children of God" would be a better translation and also it is used elsewhere to refer to the Israelites.

בן - Son (ben)
בת - Daughter (bet)

They are both very gender-specific.

Anyway, maybe the correct translation is (not saying it is, just wondering is all)...

אישבעל

Actually, speaking of Ashera... this makes more sense.

A man did ask of two wanderers, “Who is your God?”
Moses replied, “That which is the land of Assyria.”

And hence: עיר אשור

Thus, Asher (beech) and Ashera (queen) are pretty much synonymous with Assyria.

The Egyptian form seems to be important here: en.wiktionary.org...

Since “Yisra” seems so close to “Ashera” I can only assume that it is of a feminine form.

And so, it could mean “The Queen”, “Queen of God” or the “Queen of Queens”.

I personally see little connection to either “son(s)” or “son(s) of” in “Israel”.

originally posted by: CabablancaHizb
Sons of God (Sons of El)

Lol. That includes many angels that end in 'el' like Michael, Gabriel, Anael, Raphael who are all sons of haSatan.

So many people trust angels and demons not realizing that they all work for the horned god - the bull - Satan - Saturn.

i wonder how many Christians could handle the fact that the Cube of Mecca is the same as the Cross (3D cube unfolded) that also matches the hexagon (silhouette of a cube) that rotates at Saturn's North Pole.

a reply to: chr0naut

Finally someone who understands.
Though not a religious person myself, I cringe at every new bible translation aimed to make it more modern. It would at least have a big disclaimer that it is an interpretation of the original text.
My uncle, who is a religious person professionally, told me there are words in the original text that have many different meanings. Making it very difficult to translate also because the words or expressions could have specific significance in that culture and time.

I am not very familiar with the different versions of scripture.
So I am afraid I can't really add to the statement posed in the OP other than stating the obvious: what is " the truth"?

originally posted by: IllegalName
originally posted by: chr0naut

"ben" in Hebrew does not mean "Son of", it is not gender specific. So translating "ben Elohim" to "Sons of God" is invalid grammatically. "Children of God" would be a better translation and also it is used elsewhere to refer to the Israelites.

בן - Son (ben)
בת - Daughter (bet)

They are both very gender-specific.

Anyway, maybe the correct translation is (not saying it is, just wondering is all)...

אישבעל

Actually, speaking of Ashera... this makes more sense.

A man did ask of two wanderers, “Who is your God?”
Moses replied, “That which is the land of Assyria.”

And hence: עיר אשור

Thus, Asher (beech) and Ashera (queen) are pretty much synonymous with Assyria.

The Egyptian form seems to be important here: en.wiktionary.org...

Since “Yisra” seems so close to “Ashera” I can only assume that it is of a feminine form.

And so, it could mean “The Queen”, “Queen of God” or the “Queen of Queens”.

I personally see little connection to either “son(s)” or “son(s) of” in “Israel”.

You are right but...

'Ben' is used as the preferential form when describing a mixed gender group.

Instances of this usage are in: Genesis 32:32, Genesis 36:31, Genesis 37:3, Genesis 45:21, Genesis 46:8, Genesis 50:25, 2 Kings 17:34, Exodus 1:1, Exodus 1:7 and so on for hundreds of references.

Of course, this usage could be due to the strong gender bias of most cultures.

However, in ALL these references, 'ben' is translated to 'children', in English.

Here's a Wiktionary entry for בן

a reply to: chr0naut

I see, I suppose there is no neuter (like with English). Makes sense then.

a reply to: hounddoghowlie

those Names are actually transliterations not translations.

Hmmmm, can't say I'm convinced.

But I think you need to do a little more research.

I may be wrong but I thought ninjas were not supposed to be seen.

a reply to: z00mster

Remember Christ said : I am the Truth