Site Search:

 

Conceptually Avoiding Concepts

05/16/2018
Seek The Truth Blog

Conceptually Avoiding Concepts:

While there are some issues with the interpretation of the Bible because of text variance among hyper-fundamentalist groups, conflicts often arise that are outside of the boundaries of textual accuracy. Especially among hyper-fundamentalist groups who appoint men or women as the ultimate authority over scriptural interpretation or application, many hyper-fundamentalist Christians base their faith on doctrines that are not found in the text of the Bible. These extra-biblical "revelations" are sometimes the result of doctrine that developed through misunderstanding or misinterpreting the text, but often include opinions, "spiritual" experiences, and even politically or financially motivated agenda.

The early Christian Church argued for the importance of a variety of translations to better understand the concepts described by the authors of the Bible scrolls. One single translation, though good enough for casual reading, did not accurately describe the full meaning of overloaded words in the original language. One Greek word might require an entire paragraph to explain in English, while one English word might contain overloaded meanings that did not exist in the Greek language. The Greek word "logos", for instance, is highly complex. Translated to "Word" in the prologue to the Gospel of John in John 1:1, the Christian usage of Jesus Christ as the "Logos" implies "Divine Word", "Divine Discourse" or "Divine Reason". The Greek word was also used, however, for "ground", "plea", "opinion", "expectation", "speech", "account", "reason", and "proportion". Logos was used as the "logic" behind an argument, as a term of persuasion, especially by Ancient Greek philosophers.

This problem of enforcing the literal interpretation of a different translation of the ancient text becomes progressively worse as the phrases and meanings of words in the 1611 English language have shifted over time. An example of this is found in Isaiah 11:5. The King James Version translated the Hebrew word describing "loins" with "reins", which has no modern usage. Newer versions have adapted this text to use "waist", which has a better modern understanding. In some cases, such as the KJV usage of the word "conversation", the instruction to the reader significantly changes. In Ephesians 4:22-24, the KJV translators instruct readers to avoid their former "conversation", which at the time was a word describing "conduct or behavior". Newer translations, such as the English Standard Version, correctly translate the word as "manner of life".

Hyper-fundamentalist groups which militantly defend the text of language used centuries in our past effectively build doctrines around their ignorance how the multiple languages have changed over time. Worse, by giving such significant importance to words of specific sentences rather than the concept being presented by the author, many of these doctrines conflict with the author's overall message to the reader or concepts being presented by other authors of other books of the Bible. As a result, many hyper-fundamentalist groups avoid studying the Bible conceptually; the themes presented by the authors are sometimes in direct opposition to doctrinal positions of hyper-fundamentalist groups. Those who leave these groups must learn to recognize overloaded words or phrases they were taught and understand how they were misused. In many cases, the overloading was doctrinally or even morally incorrect. In the worst cases, they are destructive or dangerous.

More about changes to the language used in the KJV:
https://www.gotquestions.org/KJV-words.html