A one word mistranslation can be misleading

[EarsToHear]

For example,


Genesis 1:2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.


The word was in above verse (KJV) should have been:


From the Strong’s:


H1961
היה
hâ?yâ?h
haw-yaw'
A primitive root (compare H1933); to exist, that is, be or become, come to pass (always emphatic, and not a mere copula or auxiliary): - beacon, X altogether, be (-come, accomplished, committed, like), break, cause, come (to pass), continue, do, faint, fall, + follow, happen, X have, last, pertain, quit (one-) self, require, X use.


Therefore, Genesis 1:2 should have been:


Genesis 1:2 And the earth became without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.


So what’s your take away from this? If you do not understand the beginning, you’ll never understand the end.

 

[Willie-T]

There are so many hundreds and hundreds of things like this throughout the Bible that you will remain very effectively distracted chasing grammatical rabbits for the rest of your life, if you give in to the temtation.

 

[royalscot]

1 In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earthGenesis 1: The Creation of the World

this is the beginning,
how god did this or what raw material god used, has baffled the wisest minds of mankind.

so unless you can copy god, and make your own world, you cannot understand the beginning, is this what you are trying to say. lol

given the first verse said, god made the world, etc

 

[John146]

For example,


Genesis 1:2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.


The word was in above verse (KJV) should have been:


From the Strong’s:


H1961
היה
hâ?yâ?h
haw-yaw'
A primitive root (compare H1933); to exist, that is, be or become, come to pass (always emphatic, and not a mere copula or auxiliary): - beacon, X altogether, be (-come, accomplished, committed, like), break, cause, come (to pass), continue, do, faint, fall, + follow, happen, X have, last, pertain, quit (one-) self, require, X use.


Therefore, Genesis 1:2 should have been:


Genesis 1:2 And the earth became without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.


So what’s your take away from this? If you do not understand the beginning, you’ll never understand the end.

I had hopes for this thread until I found out it's a Bible correcting thread.

 

[Depleted]

For example,


Genesis 1:2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.


The word was in above verse (KJV) should have been:


From the Strong’s:


H1961
היה
hâ?yâ?h
haw-yaw'
A primitive root (compare H1933); to exist, that is, be or become, come to pass (always emphatic, and not a mere copula or auxiliary): - beacon, X altogether, be (-come, accomplished, committed, like), break, cause, come (to pass), continue, do, faint, fall, + follow, happen, X have, last, pertain, quit (one-) self, require, X use.


Therefore, Genesis 1:2 should have been:


Genesis 1:2 And the earth became without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.


So what’s your take away from this? If you do not understand the beginning, you’ll never understand the end.

I think this is a popular rabbit hole to jump into. You can spend hours, days, even years talking around God without ever dealing with GOD.

You are, literally avoiding The Beginning, and jumping onto the first subject that preempts the God of that beginning.

I'm not a bunny. Not big on rabbit holes.

 

[Ugly]

Why does not understanding the beginning mean someone can't understand their salvation? Or understand going to heaven? While I agree accurate translation is important this idea that other, important, things can't be grasped if the first part isn't, is foolish. The most essential and important understanding in all of the bible is God's love, grace and salvation. A misunderstanding of a single word in the creation of the earth isn't going to negate that.

 

[Laish]

For example,


Genesis 1:2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.


The word was in above verse (KJV) should have been:


From the Strong’s:


H1961
היה
hâ?yâ?h
haw-yaw'
A primitive root (compare H1933); to exist, that is, be or become, come to pass (always emphatic, and not a mere copula or auxiliary): - beacon, X altogether, be (-come, accomplished, committed, like), break, cause, come (to pass), continue, do, faint, fall, + follow, happen, X have, last, pertain, quit (one-) self, require, X use.


Therefore, Genesis 1:2 should have been:


Genesis 1:2 And the earth became without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.


So what’s your take away from this? If you do not understand the beginning, you’ll never understand the end.

Ok so look at the previous verse Genesis “1 In the a beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.”
God had made all of creation then fashioned the earth from that . So the grammar used by translations is fitting .
So we don't have a a one word mistranslation but a one verse miss understanding. It's about context read up and down in scripture before you try to understand what's in front of you .
Blessings
Bill

 

[trofimus]

For example,


Genesis 1:2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.


The word was in above verse (KJV) should have been:


From the Strong’s:


H1961
היה
hâ?yâ?h
haw-yaw'
A primitive root (compare H1933); to exist, that is, be or become, come to pass (always emphatic, and not a mere copula or auxiliary): - beacon, X altogether, be (-come, accomplished, committed, like), break, cause, come (to pass), continue, do, faint, fall, + follow, happen, X have, last, pertain, quit (one-) self, require, X use.


Therefore, Genesis 1:2 should have been:


Genesis 1:2 And the earth became without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.


So what’s your take away from this? If you do not understand the beginning, you’ll never understand the end.

Actually, "was" is the right one.

ἡ δὲ γῆ ἦν ἀόρατος καὶ ἀκατασκεύαστος, καὶ σκότος ἐπάνω τῆς ἀβύσσου, καὶ πνεῦμα Θεοῦ ἐπεφέρετο ἐπάνω τοῦ ὕδατος.
The earth was unseen and unfurnished, and darkness was over the deep, and the Spirit of God moved over the water.

----

On the other hand, it changes nothing. When something "was", it is logical that it first became to be so.

 

[Dino246]

For example, Genesis 1:2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

The verse (KJV) should have been:
...Genesis 1:2 And the earth became without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
... If you do not understand the beginning, you’ll never understand the end.

By your last sentence, it appears to me that your mind is made up. Therefore, I see little point in trying to discuss the matter.

 

[EarsToHear]

The correct Hebrew translation from the Masoretic Hebrew text for the words, "without form" is "tohu-va bohu" in the Hebrew Strong's dictionary. So we see that the earth was not "created without form", but it "became [tohu] without form and void". Let's go to Strong's Hebrew dictionary, reference number 1961 to verify the word "was", that we read in this verse. "Yahah, haw-yaw; a prime root, to exit; to become, or come to pass." [#1961]


Excerpt from The Companion Bible Appendix 8:


The word "without form" (Hebrew tohu) is used of a subsequent event which, we know not how long after the Creation, befell the primitive creation of Genesis 1:1. It occurs in Genesis 1:2. Deuteronomy 32:10. 1Samuel 12:21 (twice). Job 6:18; 12:24; 26:7. Psalm 107:40. Isaiah 24:10; 29:21; 34:11; 40:17, 23; 41:29; 44:9; 45:18, 19; 49:4; 59:4. Jeremiah 4:23.

The Hebrew bohu, rendered "void", means desolate, and occurs in Genesis 1:2. Isaiah 34:11. Jeremiah 4:23. The two words together occur in Genesis 1:2. Isaiah 34:11. Jeremiah 4:23.


end Companion Bible excerpt


"Tohu" of the earth, then means that total destruction had come to pass upon the earth. The second "was" in the verse is in italics type because there is no verb "to be" in the Hebrew language. One of the problems in translating the Hebrew into English is that the verb, "to be" is not distinguished from the verb, "to become".


At the end of Genesis 1:1 the first earth age ceased to exist in its previous form. God created the earth to be inhabited, and then He destroyed it. There was an entire earth age that existed between verses one and two of Genesis. This first earth age is spoken of in II Peter, Jeremiah, Proverbs, and Jude. We will look into these Scripture passages and try to understand the deeper meaning of our Father's Word.


If you don't understand that there was a first earth age, you will not understand why God would say in Malachi 1:3; "And I hated Esau...". God hated Esau even while he was in his mother's womb. It was in the first earth age that God hated Esau, because of what Esau did in that first earth age. It was what Esau's soul did in that age that so angered God; and that anger passed on to the embryo of Esau when his soul entered into this earth age. See also Romans 9:13.


This verse, then, does verify the fact that our earth is older than 6,000 years old. To be more exact, it's probably many millions of years old. However, no matter how old this earth is, it is the only place we can live on in the flesh and survive. We do not worship God's creation; we are to worship the creator, our Heavenly Father. God is in control of all of His creation, and He destroyed all forms of life that lived on the earth from the first earth age.


In Isaiah 45:18; "For thus saith the Lord That created the heavens; God Himself That formed the earth and made it; He hath established it He created it not in vain, He formed it to be inhabited: "I am the Lord; and there is none else."


This is God speaking as Isaiah is writing it down, and He is telling us that when He created the earth, it was not in vain. "Vain" is the same Hebrew word that we saw in Genesis 1:2, which was given as "void". God created this earth to be lived on, and to be inhabited. Genesis 1:1 told us that God created the earth to be inhabited. The "Tohu", the "destruction", was not part of the creation plan of verse one, but came after the fall of Satan when one-third of all the souls followed Satan in the first earth age, in verse two.

 

[trofimus]

The correct Hebrew translation from the Masoretic Hebrew text for the words....

1. How can you prove that the Massoretic Hebrew text is the correct one?

 

[KJV1611]

For example,


Genesis 1:2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.


The word was in above verse (KJV) should have been:


From the Strong’s:


H1961
היה
hâ?yâ?h
haw-yaw'
A primitive root (compare H1933); to exist, that is, be or become, come to pass (always emphatic, and not a mere copula or auxiliary): - beacon, X altogether, be (-come, accomplished, committed, like), break, cause, come (to pass), continue, do, faint, fall, + follow, happen, X have, last, pertain, quit (one-) self, require, X use.


Therefore, Genesis 1:2 should have been:


Genesis 1:2 And the earth became without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.


So what’s your take away from this? If you do not understand the beginning, you’ll never understand the end.

Are you saying that in the beginning the God created the elements and used those elements to form a circular earth and then later the elements disappeared and the earth became void - completely empty?

 

[wademach1977]

I always use more than one translation and sometimes I will even read references to the text. The greek or the hebrew old testament that is another interesting question.

 

[Awakened]

When it comes to translation, the most important thing to me is the name of my God and Savior.

Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.

 

[Adstar]

For example,


Genesis 1:2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.


The word was in above verse (KJV) should have been:


From the Strong’s:


H1961
היה
hâ?yâ?h
haw-yaw'
A primitive root (compare H1933); to exist, that is, be or become, come to pass (always emphatic, and not a mere copula or auxiliary): - beacon, X altogether, be (-come, accomplished, committed, like), break, cause, come (to pass), continue, do, faint, fall, + follow, happen, X have, last, pertain, quit (one-) self, require, X use.


Therefore, Genesis 1:2 should have been:


Genesis 1:2 And the earth became without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.


So what’s your take away from this? If you do not understand the beginning, you’ll never understand the end.

So you worship the gospel of strong's?

The ones who complied strong where equal to Paul Peter and John in inspiration?

I don't think so..

You can place your eternal security on the book of stong's if you like..

But i will not..

 

[GaryA]

I had hopes for this thread until I found out it's a Bible correcting thread.

"Me thinks that the OP - like a lot of people [ do ] - does not understand ( and will not accept ) the words as they are - so therefore finds it necessary to change the wording to something that is more-in-line-with-what-they-were-thinking - instead of continuing to study the words as they are - trusting that they are what God intended - and that, if they continue to study in faith - that, God will show them the true meaning..."

( What-a-mouthful! )

 

[EarsToHear]

It all comes down to:


Fixed mindset


Or


Growth mindset.


God’s Word never stops growing for those Christians with growth mindsets. For example, when I restudy a book, I always expand my understanding, gain tidbits of knowledge, and hunger to learn more.


The beauty of His Word is that It never stops growing for those who sincerely seek more.


Those who think they know it all have stopped growing.

 

[posthuman]

From the Strong’s:


H1961
היה
hâ?yâ?h
haw-yaw'
A primitive root (compare H1933); to exist, that is, be or become, come to pass (always emphatic, and not a mere copula or auxiliary): - beacon, X altogether, be (-come, accomplished, committed, like), break, cause, come (to pass), continue, do, faint, fall, + follow, happen, X have, last, pertain, quit (one-) self, require, X use.

would you change Genesis 3:1 too?

Now the serpent was [SUP]H1961[/SUP] more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made.
​

it's the past-tense of "to exist" -- the very first definition in what you cited.

having access to such things as Strong's and BDB and interlinear Bibles does not make us expert translators any more than having a shop manual for your car makes a person a certified mechanic or being able to log on to WebMD makes a person a doctor.

 

[posthuman]

God’s Word never stops growing for those Christians with growth mindsets.

not all change is "growth"

if you think changing the text makes you more spiritually mature, you might consider that your own corporeal body is "changing" by way of decaying, i.e. "growing" into dust

 

[dcontroversal]

would you change Genesis 3:1 too?

Now the serpent was [SUP]H1961[/SUP] more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made.
​

it's the past-tense of "to exist" -- the very first definition in what you cited.

having access to such things as Strong's and BDB and interlinear Bibles does not make us expert translators any more than having a shop manual for your car makes a person a certified mechanic or being able to log on to WebMD makes a person a doctor.

AHAH yes so true....but.....it is obvious the serpent is in reference to Satan.....was Satan created that way or was he created as the SUM of ALL wisdom as Lucifer who fell and "came to be" the serpent after his fall? HAHAHHAHAH

Just playing the advocate HAHAH