Victor Alexander and the Ancient Aramaic Bible
April 12, 2014
I just read Mr. Alexander's latest introduction at v-a.com/bible . I completely and absolutely agree with him that the Bible we have is not the original. It is not original in text, doctrine or interpretation. There is a major tweak, a bend in what it says and means.
As a seminary student I was perturbed by obvious mistranslation from the Greek, but I figured, okay, this makes understanding easier for the western mind. I did not approve of but understood the changes made by the Sopherim to accommodate Jewish philosophy and superstitions. But as I learned more of Christian philosophy and doctrine and of what the Bible actually says, I had to say to myself,
"Hey. How the heck did we get way out here? What the Bible is talking about is going that way, and we are going this way, to . . . "
. . . to derailment, to the nut-house, to disillusionment and disappointment. There became no connection. I couldn't invent enough excuses to reconcile Christian teachings with the intent of the prophetic word, which modern Christians now consider heretical.
Please think about that for a minute: prophetic wisdom supposedly from God himself, revelation from God of his personal intent for his creation, and it has been corrupted and its meaning bent enough that its body of believers say that the original is wrong, heretical, deceiving and the evil workings of the Devil.
No, Alexander's text is not perfect. In fact, it is about as humble as can be. There are typos, asterisk reference marks with no reference, Alexander's personal opinions and interpretations. And, having learned more about the ancient cultural milieu, I interpret the Bible in an entirely different fashion now; entirely different from how I used to interpret it and from how Alexander still interprets it. BUT AT LEAST VICTOR ALEXANDER'S TRANSLATION IS GOING THE RIGHT WAY.
In my opinion, Alexander's translation from the ancient Aramaic is not corrupted by doctrinal presumptions and theological priorities. What the ancient, biblical-era text says, as well as he can translate it, is what you get. I seldom get very far without a jaw-dropping insight from his translation or notes.
Like any other older Christian, I have a whole shelf of Bibles, none of which cost me as much as any one of Alexander's volumes (I love used book stores). But what I get out of his texts is a whole different matter. The unbent word of God is priceless to me, and the thrill of its revelations--ecstasy!
But that is me. I should hope, though, that if you love God and want to know him better, you will hear him talking to you while you read Alexander's translation. And read more of my posts. I truly think that esoteric Christianity is the way to go.
I just read Mr. Alexander's latest introduction at v-a.com/bible . I completely and absolutely agree with him that the Bible we have is not the original. It is not original in text, doctrine or interpretation. There is a major tweak, a bend in what it says and means.
As a seminary student I was perturbed by obvious mistranslation from the Greek, but I figured, okay, this makes understanding easier for the western mind. I did not approve of but understood the changes made by the Sopherim to accommodate Jewish philosophy and superstitions. But as I learned more of Christian philosophy and doctrine and of what the Bible actually says, I had to say to myself,
"Hey. How the heck did we get way out here? What the Bible is talking about is going that way, and we are going this way, to . . . "
. . . to derailment, to the nut-house, to disillusionment and disappointment. There became no connection. I couldn't invent enough excuses to reconcile Christian teachings with the intent of the prophetic word, which modern Christians now consider heretical.
Please think about that for a minute: prophetic wisdom supposedly from God himself, revelation from God of his personal intent for his creation, and it has been corrupted and its meaning bent enough that its body of believers say that the original is wrong, heretical, deceiving and the evil workings of the Devil.
No, Alexander's text is not perfect. In fact, it is about as humble as can be. There are typos, asterisk reference marks with no reference, Alexander's personal opinions and interpretations. And, having learned more about the ancient cultural milieu, I interpret the Bible in an entirely different fashion now; entirely different from how I used to interpret it and from how Alexander still interprets it. BUT AT LEAST VICTOR ALEXANDER'S TRANSLATION IS GOING THE RIGHT WAY.
In my opinion, Alexander's translation from the ancient Aramaic is not corrupted by doctrinal presumptions and theological priorities. What the ancient, biblical-era text says, as well as he can translate it, is what you get. I seldom get very far without a jaw-dropping insight from his translation or notes.
Like any other older Christian, I have a whole shelf of Bibles, none of which cost me as much as any one of Alexander's volumes (I love used book stores). But what I get out of his texts is a whole different matter. The unbent word of God is priceless to me, and the thrill of its revelations--ecstasy!
But that is me. I should hope, though, that if you love God and want to know him better, you will hear him talking to you while you read Alexander's translation. And read more of my posts. I truly think that esoteric Christianity is the way to go.
posted by Daniel C. Branham-Steele at
9:13 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home