All day long they twist my words; they are always plotting to harm me. Pslam 56 v5

Your Bible against Israel/the Jews ?

Surely the Word of God can’t be Anti-Semitic! (or to use a more accurate terminology; Anti Jew and Anti-Israel)

No; but....   The writing of the Bible was inspired by the Holy Spirit, and must be read in a similar manner in order for God to communicate to us.   Man can get in the way of this process, if we allow a translator or expositor to colour what the original revelation said.   

The translation you are reading might have been influenced by the prejudices of those brought up in traditions of Replacement Theology and dislike of Jews. You might also be reading your Bible through cultural spectacles.   Our friend Amnon observes that, "Reading the scriptures in a translation (from Hebrew) is like kissing your bride through a handkerchief."   Strive to get as close to the original as you can.

 There are several possible areas to consider.   Remember, most of the Bible (Old and New Testament) was written originally in Hebrew.   Even that which was written in Greek was written by Jews (and one proselyte) who thought in Hebrew idioms and word patterns (which can still be discerned in the Greek).   Church History shows that the Church wilfully rejected its Jewish roots and adopted Replacement Theology and Greek philosophy.

Here are a few problems which you may find in your Bible if you do not use it wisely.

"Palestine in the time of Christ" 

map from an RSV Bible – published in 1971.

This was relatively harmless nonsense when it was published, since there was no Palestine in Jesus’ time.   Jesus lived in Galilee, Judea and Samaria. The land was not given that name until the Romans coined it in 138CE, in order to deny the Jews’ roots in the land.  But, sadly, this error slips easily into belief in the present day myth created by the Palestine Authority, that the land historically belongs to the Arabs who, since 1967, have branded themselves "Palestinians.

The names of people and places

The first people to translate the Bible into English chose to change the Hebrew names of people and places into names which sounded English. (the same is probably true for other languages) This might sound harmless, but tends to mask the Jewish identity of the people in the Bible, and the location of the events in Jewish territory. It certainly obscures the connection between the Bible narrative and the people and places of present day Israel. Most unfortunate is the the conversion of Yeshua to Jesus, which hides his Jewish identity and takes the meaning out of Matthew 1 v21 and Luke 2 v30 .

When you read a Bible which uses transliterations of the Hebrew names, you will notice the continuity between the Bible and present day Israelis, who still use the same names. The characters in your Bible were Israelites; not Englishmen!

The same is true of the place names. It is much easier to deny the Jews’ connection to the land of the Bible if the place names have all been modified.

The name of Paul / Saul / Sha’ul

You may well have been taught that Saul of Tarsus changed his Hebrew name to the Greek name Paul.   This fits conveniently with replacement theology viewpoint that Paul ceased to be Jewish when he became a "Christian" and enables people to interpret Paul’s teachings in terms of Christ having done away with "the Law".

The truth, as explained by Dr David Stern, in his notes on the Complete Jewish Bible, is that Sha’ul (Hebrew name usually known as Saul) would have had two names, as did many Jews living outside Israel then as now. He had a Greek name for use in his Gentile home town, but he also had the Hebrew name which he received at his circumcision. Sha’ul never ceased to be a Jew – he merely became fulfilled in Yeshua.

James, the disciple of Jesus

If you look at the Greek text where James is mentioned, it is clear that he actually had the Hebrew name Jacob ( Jaakov ). His name was translated as James to flatter King James, the patron of the translation. James has been accepted since then.

"The Jews" opposing Jesus in John’s Gospel

A casual reading of John’s gospel will suggest that life was continual confrontation between Jesus and the Jews. Because Jesus is so clearly and approachably presented in the Gospels, and possibly because of Sunday School representations, we may feel Jesus is one of us, in conflict with "alien" or "foreign" Jews.   Anti-Semites can read this gospel whilst maintaining their identification with a Gentile Jesus who is battling against those wicked Jews. But this is nonsense, since Jesus and his followers were all Jews.  All the disputes in these gospels are between Jews and Jews, but they are between those open to God and the religious who were locked in legalism.   John’s labels (as we receive them in English) might not be very helpful to us, but would not have been an issue until his readership had been exposed to hellenisation and antipathy to Jews. David Stern devotes several pages to this issue in his Jewish New Testament Commentary. (pages 157-161)

You might hear people who can read Greek referring to "the original Greek texts", but actually they are referring to the oldest surviving manuscripts.   Nehemiah Gordon’s researches suggest that much of the New Testament was originally written in Hebrew.  Unfortunately it is possible that a Greek bias and prejudice had already crept in to this first translation.   Translators can only do their best to recapture the full meaning as penned by the (Jewish) author.   David Stern’s Complete Jewish Bible captures so much better the Jewish flavour and meaning, as well as steering clear of the anti-Jewish biases of many translators and expositors.

Just a comma

David Stern points out (Page 97 of his Jewish New Testament Commentary) that Mark 12 v38 is usually translated into English in a way that makes it appear that Jesus is condemning all teachers ot the Law.

NIV - As he taught, Jesus said, "Watch out for the teachers of the law. They like to walk around in flowing robes and be greeted in the marketplaces,

RSV - "Beware of the scribes, who like to go about in long robes....."

KJV - Beware of the scribes, which......

That comma after the word scribes makes the warning apply to all teachers, but if it was not there it would be clear that Jesus was only warning against the scribes that do these things. The construction of the Greek text does not support that comma! The NIV appears to have taken the error one step further by using a full stop and a new sentence. Notice how David Stern translates it. See the difference!

CJB - As he taught them, he said, "Watch out for the kind of Torah teachers who like to walk....."

 

N.I.V. biases

John 19 v19 & 20 in the NIV read,

Pilate had a notice prepared and fastened to the cross. It read: JESUS OF NAZARETH, THE KING OF THE JEWS. Many of the Jews read this sign, for the place where Jesus was crucified was near the city, and the sign was written in Aramaic, Latin and Greek.

Nearly all the european language translations render the Greek word Hebraisti as Hebrew. This seems the obvious translation, so why do the NIV, ESV, NIVRR and TNIV translations opt for Aramaic? Does someone have a problem with acknowledging the Jewish language?

While we are looking at the NIV, let's consider at its translation using "envy" and "envious" in Romans 11 vs11 and 14

Rather, because of their transgression, salvation has come to the Gentiles to make Israel envious.

.....in the hope that I may somehow arouse my own people to envy and save some of them.

David Pawson points out that if I look longingly at someone elses wife I am guilty of envy. But if someone stole away my wife I would be jealous. It is good to be jealous for what is my own but bad to be envious of what is someone elses. ( God is jealous )

Paul is speaking of making the Jews jealous because we Gentiles have now received the blessing that was originally theirs alone! To suggest the Jews will be envious of some special Gentile blessing that we have is arogant, and not what Paul was suggesting at all!

Man Made Additions

We all know we are not to add to God's word or subtract from it but .....

What about the section headings added in many translations?   They can be useful for finding a section but some folk read the headings as part of "the Word" in church services.   If these reflect prejudices held by the publishers they can seriously influence our understanding.   It is said that one early translation of Romans 11, which says,  "I ask then: Did God reject his people?", was headed "Israel rejected."

David Pawson points out the problems with having a commentary built into your Bible in parallel with the text (or at the foot of the page).  He found that some people quoted from commentaries, but didn't realise they were only quoting the opinions of a man; they thought they were quoting scripture.

This author prefers not to even underline in his Bible, since this action connects a passage to a truth revealed on one particular occasion.   What if God wanted to reveal something else nearby at some future occasion?

Updated 9/2/08

Click the banner below to go to the site map and choose another page