Originally, Jesus' most important commandment wasn't to love God with all one's heart or with all one's soul. God was a warrior, not a shepherd. Men and women were supposed to be equal. And as with many other people, Adam's lifespan was symbolic.
But flawed translations conceal these biblical messages from modern readers by failing to convey the significance of images and metaphors. Here's what goes wrong.
Sometimes a word, in modern English or in the Bible, simply refers to something. For example, "Washington, DC" is a city and "blue" is a color.
But more often, words convey specific concepts that are associated with a thing. When "Washington comes out in favor of a plan," the word "Washington" means governmental leaders. When people "feel blue," they are sad or depressed, not blue in any sense related to color, just as "blue laws" and "blue states" have almost nothing in common beyond the word "blue." (Blue laws restrict sales on Sunday. Blue states tend to vote democratic.)
A particularly clear example comes from a captain who shouts the common nautical phrase, "all hands on deck." Presumably the captain wants the sailors in their entirety, and not just their hands, on the deck.
A word is usually connected to different images in different languages. For example, "blue" in German has to do with absenteeism, so the correct English translation for the German "to do blue" is "to skip work."
Unfortunately, Bible translations mangle this common kind of language, masking the original sense of the text from readers.
The most important commandment, according to Jesus in Matthew 22:37, Mark 12:30, and Luke 10:27 (quoting Deuteronomy 6:5) is commonly, if wrongly, translated as "love the Lord your God with all your heart and all your soul...."
The English word "heart" refers to emotion, and generally excludes intellect. This is why "thinking with your heart" in English means being irrational. But the Hebrew and Greek words translated as "heart" (levav in Hebrew and kardia in Greek) had a different metaphoric meaning. They were the seat of internal processes, including both feeling and thinking, as well as dreading, ruminating, aspiring, and so forth. The English translation "heart" therefore misses most of the original intent.
Worse, the English word "soul" usually indicates some non-tangible, ethereal part of a person that may even live on after the death of the body. But the words in the original languages (nephesh or nefesh in Hebrew and psuche in Greek) referred to the physical body itself, and, slightly more broadly, to the tangible aspects of human existence: the flesh, the blood, and the breath. So the English translation "soul" is practically the opposite of what the original meant.
Taken together, "heart and soul" in English form a narrow slice of human existence. But the original was all encompassing. The point was "love the Lord your God with everything that is intangible and everything that is tangible." (Learn more: "How to Love the Lord Your God.")
Similarly, Psalm 23 describes God metaphorically as a shepherd (ro'eh). Modern images of shepherds usually focus on kindness, guidance, tranquility, and even meekness. But the ancient shepherd was mighty and fierce, like a modern-day marine, firefighter, or even Rambo. The point was that the Psalmist had a great fighting force watching his back, so he had nothing to worry about. (Learn more: "The Lord isn't the Shepherd You Think.")
Likewise, in Song of Solomon's detailed description of romantic love, the man addresses the woman as "my sister, my bride" or "my sister, my spouse." The English word "sister" is used primarily for family relationships, and also more generally for familiarity. But the Hebrew word (achot) specifically referred to equality of power. The point was that the man and the woman in a relationship should be equal. (This presents a significant challenge for those who want Scripture to support the subservience of women.)
Numbers represent another kind of imagery. English readers know that 1,000 is a round number, often an approximation or an obvious exaggeration. Modern readers are less likely to know that 930 (the years of Adam's life) was a round number in antiquity, because ancient math was based on the Babylonian system of multiplying small numbers: the round numbers were 6, 12, 30, 60, etc. (This is why, to this day, there are 12 hours in a day and 60 seconds in a minute.) Nine-hundred and thirty is 30 times 30 plus 30, and an ancient reader would immediately have understood that it was a symbolic number.
Here and in many other places we get a better sense of the original beauty and intent of the Bible by moving past a naive understanding of the words to the metaphors that they represent.
Follow Dr. Joel Hoffman on Twitter: www.twitter.com/JoelMHoffman
Glad to see you have a Sony Reader version of your book too.
I also think we have to be careful with what we call "real." I think Adam really lived to be 930, even though historically he did not. I explain why here ("The Apostle Paul did not Believe in the Historical Adam"): http://blog.joelmhoffman.com/2012/05/10/the-apostle-paul-did-not-believe-in-the-historical-adam/
Unfortunately, it's much harder to get a good translation of the Bible than of most other texts.
I spent many hours in Hebrew classes, Greek classes, and Latin classes, translating scriptures. What F7 is suggesting is an impossibility. F7 is looking for a "fluency" to present itself which just can't happen.
I have read the "texts" in the original languages and the translations are only going to be as good as your lexicons. Unless, discoveries are made which prove beyond all doubt that certain "key" words, (i.e., nouns, adjectives, adverbs, and prepositions), in a particular time period or setting could only have one definition.
In a lot of other ancient texts which had a limited number of authors, sometimes only one, it is easier to translate simply because the writing style of that author is known. Whereas, the Bible having many authors the writing styles and vernacular changes often making translations more difficult. When, there isn't a common consensus as to who is even the author of a particular book, especially O.T., it is easy to understand "how" the translation might vary.
Keep up your good work!
Ongoing, present day, discoveries in Biblical archaeology confirm much of the historical content of the Bible. And, these discoveries have a way of separating fact from fiction which adds credence to interpreting or translating the written word.
Plus, it is fun to read how the atheists who post here have such a facination with the Bible. It seems like to me that if they were truly atheists that wouldn't waste their time so earnestly trying to disprove God. Naturally, they will claim it is for altruistic or political reasons...but, that's just their excuse. Maybe, it's an unseen force, which they don't believe in, which is compelling them to deny God. There has to be some explanation for their obsession. Nevertheless, the most insecure atheists will be the first to tag on to my post. They will resist it for awhile...then, bam something just forces them to reply.
"I perfer to believe"
Well .. God didn't love him enough to keep him alive and spear him another chance like many of you have,, today..
And becaused God Jehovah that he sent forth his beloved "Son" to restore man sin..We can have the blessing that only he will give to those that are belong to him..
There are many here that aren't and don't blame me for your belief and mistakes!
As irrelevant as SCOTUS (Scalia) saying all s/b interpreted based on the world as it was in the 1700's - when slavery was an integral part of the US constitution.