Did God create evil? (A look at Isaiah 45:7)

[choir loft]

On 7/7/2022 at 5:27 PM, BeyondET said:

Just goes to show the KJV and few others don't always have a proper translation for every word in the Bible.

Sometimes those 'proper' translations result in strange passages in Holy Writ.

For instance, open your KJV to the gospel of Matthew.   

It's been assumed in recent years that the books of the NT were translated from Greek.   Indeed most were.....except for Matthew.   Matthew was originally written in Hebrew and the KJV translation seems to prove it.  (Other more 'modern' translations smooth out the rough edges and one doesn't see them so much in those versions.)

We've been told the KJV was the second best effort of English translators to convert both the OT and NT to English.   KJV did so, at least where Matthew is concerned, by way of a word for word translation.   The problem with translation is that some of the passages are difficult to read in English.

IDIOMS are methods of speaking and writing in a language that are unique to that culture.  For instance, the American phrases "easy as pie" or "a piece of cake" are idioms that do not translate well into other languages.  

An idiomatic translation of the gospel of Matthew Hebrew into English may be clearly seen in the use of the word 'AND'.  Many sentences in KJV's gospel of Matthew begin with AND.   And this....and that....and something else.   The use of AND is so prolific as to make reading of the gospel almost annoying to the English eye.   This is because Hebrew grammar was typically constructed as an addition to the previous line.  English uses a period to signify the end of one line and the beginning of another.  Hebrew used the word AND to indicate the beginning of a new line or thought.

This in no way detracts from the intent and 'spirit' of the information being conveyed.  

Idiomatic differences simply make the reading rather difficult for the English reader.  Subsequent translations of Matthew attempted to smooth over the annoyance without losing the substance of what is written.   That such translations did so quite well is testimony of the skill of modern wordsmiths.

Some other variations in translation are not so simple and result in major false doctrines.   This post does not intend to address those rabbit trails.  

Hope this helps a bit.

that's me, hollering from the choir loft...

[BeyondET]

On 8/28/2022 at 9:58 AM, choir loft said:

Sometimes those 'proper' translations result in strange passages in Holy Writ.

For instance, open your KJV to the gospel of Matthew.   

It's been assumed in recent years that the books of the NT were translated from Greek.   Indeed most were.....except for Matthew.   Matthew was originally written in Hebrew and the KJV translation seems to prove it.  (Other more 'modern' translations smooth out the rough edges and one doesn't see them so much in those versions.)

We've been told the KJV was the second best effort of English translators to convert both the OT and NT to English.   KJV did so, at least where Matthew is concerned, by way of a word for word translation.   The problem with translation is that some of the passages are difficult to read in English.

IDIOMS are methods of speaking and writing in a language that are unique to that culture.  For instance, the American phrases "easy as pie" or "a piece of cake" are idioms that do not translate well into other languages.  

An idiomatic translation of the gospel of Matthew Hebrew into English may be clearly seen in the use of the word 'AND'.  Many sentences in KJV's gospel of Matthew begin with AND.   And this....and that....and something else.   The use of AND is so prolific as to make reading of the gospel almost annoying to the English eye.   This is because Hebrew grammar was typically constructed as an addition to the previous line.  English uses a period to signify the end of one line and the beginning of another.  Hebrew used the word AND to indicate the beginning of a new line or thought.

This in no way detracts from the intent and 'spirit' of the information being conveyed.  

Idiomatic differences simply make the reading rather difficult for the English reader.  Subsequent translations of Matthew attempted to smooth over the annoyance without losing the substance of what is written.   That such translations did so quite well is testimony of the skill of modern wordsmiths.

Some other variations in translation are not so simple and result in major false doctrines.   This post does not intend to address those rabbit trails.  

Hope this helps a bit.

that's me, hollering from the choir loft...

The first addition KJV was scrapped and reissued it was a bit of humor for the people, they called it the she bible.

Edited September 24, 2022 by BeyondET

[BeyondET]

On 8/10/2022 at 10:31 AM, David1701 said:

There was no death until Adam fell.  Animals did not kill and eat each other, until sin entered the world through one man.

Land animals nothing is said about sea creatures, sharks have sharp teeth to cut through skin not kelp. And whales eat plankton, ocean predators keep the ocean healthy which is good.

Edited September 24, 2022 by BeyondET

[BeyondET]

God planted a garden meaning He created every tree within it, the knowledge tree of good and evil is included in the garden He planted.

[David1701]

9 hours ago, BeyondET said:

Land animals nothing is said about sea creatures, sharks have sharp teeth to cut through skin not kelp. And whales eat plankton, ocean predators keep the ocean healthy which is good.

Death came by sin...

[BeyondET]

4 minutes ago, David1701 said:

Death came by sin...

Who sinned?

[David1701]

2 hours ago, BeyondET said:

Who sinned?

Adam and Eve.

[BeyondET]

On 7/8/2022 at 2:40 AM, BeyondET said:

I agree didn't create evil.

Only a handful of translations use it though kjv being one and why was that.

Is it even translated properly 

Or a verse that was added,

 

I was wrong, the knowledge tree of good and evil was created and planted.

[Dave-regenerated]

On 9/24/2022 at 10:41 AM, BeyondET said:

Land animals nothing is said about sea creatures, sharks have sharp teeth to cut through skin not kelp. And whales eat plankton, ocean predators keep the ocean healthy which is good.

Having sharp teeth could be post fall evolution, not a change of species from one animal into a different animal that cannot reproduce with previous ancestors.  Even then, having sharp teeth does not tell us what type of food any animal is supposed to eat naturally.  But plants and similar things in the sea are food for sea creatures before the fall.  Plankton are really more like micro-organisms and they aren't classified as a type of living creature though they may well contain life, just like plants do.

[choir loft]

On 9/24/2022 at 3:56 AM, BeyondET said:

The first addition KJV was scrapped and reissued it was a bit of humor for the people, they called it the she bible.

I'm not familiar with that particular accusation.  The 'she' Bible?

I think the claim the KJV was scrapped is a bit of a stretch.  There are many today who believe it to be the absolute true version.   Problems with translation and idiomatic constructions aren't considered at all, though they are eminently obvious to even the most casual reader.

What is meant by 'she' Bible?   Thanks ahead of time for expanding on this.....

that's me, hollering from the choir loft...