*Memory MatrixWritings, notes, and data PagesCategories
Tags
|
Check the source textOne problem that a person studying the Bible will encounter rears its ugly head in this example. That is the false word. In this case, the word is gentiles. The screenshot below of a website shows a Greek text and an English text of Amos 9:12. The English text presented uses the word gentiles. The Greek word highlighted on the right is ἔθνος. The word means something like a province, tribe, class of men, caste, trade association, guild, or race. The key component being that is an aggregate body. The plural of it would then be something like nations or peoples. E.g. the peoples of the Levant, or the nations of the Orient. It refers to flocks of bees, flies, and birds. The word gentiles is a Latin word that become an egregore.
The following example (emphasis mine) shows another difference where ethnos does not mean others in a binary ideological sense of the ideologue’s self and the abstracted other. It means preached unto the tribes, nations, or groups of people. The following is from 1st Timothy, Chapter 3.
The thought form that develops from the cultic use implies that Jesus was preached to a solitary outgroup as opposed to a ideology based ingroup. It posits the existence of two groups only when the meaning of the word covers multiple groups rather than an ideological binary. ἔθνος appears in the Wiktionary with a useful analysis. The 1885 English Revised version uses the word nations.
This is from the Geneva Bible.
Young’s Literal Translation of 1863 renders the verse beautifully. While looking at the verse is notable to see the phrase "seen by messengers" as opposed to "seen by angels" which appears in many versions. Angels is another word that became an egregore but that is a topic for another memo.
All of these versions add punction that is not present in the original scriptures. The original scriptures contain no commas and semi-colons. The Geneva Bible contains an incredible amount of commentary in the margin. The Interlinear from George Ricker Berry, PH.D. includes many punctuation marks that do not appear on images of original manuscripts. They appear even in the Greek portion of his interlinear text. The following shows 1 Timothy, Chapter 3. The word the shows the placement in the later work where the same word appears in brackets to indicate the modern translator/scribe added it to the text. Three versions appear below. The top version is the one in the authorized version and the second is the English translation that appears under the words in Greek in this book.
The Oxford University Press’s version incorporating the Scrivener text of 1881 has the following on page 909.
1 I Saw the Lord Standing on the Altar: And He Said, Smite the Mercy-Seat, and … AMOS / ΑΜΩΣ9 – Bilingual Septuagint.” Accessed July 6, 2025. https://www.ellopos.net/elpenor/greek-texts/septuagint/chapter.asp?book=32&page=9. 2. "Ch 3 – To Timothy 1 – The New Testament.” Accessed July 12, 2025. https://www.ellopos.net/elpenor/greek-texts/new-testament/timothy_1/3.asp. 3. “Revised Version with Apocrypha (1895) 1 Timothy 3.” Accessed July 12, 2025. http://memorymatrix.cloud/rv/1TI03.htm. 4. http://memorymatrix.cloud/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/Holy-Bible-Geneva-Bible-1579.pdf#page=1181 7. The_New_Testament_of_Our_Lord_and_Saviour-Oxford-University-Press-1896.pdf#page=909 The king as god in the KJVA discrepancy appears in the King James’ Version and other Masoretic Text bibles relative to the Septuagint version in the book of Jeremiah (ΙΕΡΕΜΙΑΣ). The Masoretic Text derived bibles equate the king with the deity. The term LORD of hosts supposedly represents a place in the original language texts where the divine name appears. That may not always be the case. There is a popular online Bible translation which lists the papyrus from which it derives each translation. One can check the papyrus for the divine name in places where that translation says LORD and there is no instance of the divine name on the original document. For this particular instance, the difference appears in these three quotations.
The King James’ Version is similar to the English Revised Version.
The Septuagint version does not equate the king with the deity.
This question particularly interests me. Perhaps twenty years or more ago, an exposition on the subject of the old testament included someone explaining that old testament religion was an abstraction of the king, and essentially a form of worshipping the king as a military commander. That description really inspired me to research and study more. Amos 4:13 negates the concept of a king occupying the conceptual space of the deity as does the three angels’ message in the book of Revelation.
1. Revised Version with Apocrypha (1895) Jeremiah 48 |