The NT manuscripts are full of mistakes

[IndianaRob]

Stephen’s Speech and Abraham's Land Promise
Stephen, in Acts 7:5, affirms that Abraham did not receive any inheritance in the land, not even a foot of it, while God had promised it to him and his descendants:

"And He gave him no inheritance in it, not even enough to set his foot on. But even when Abraham had no child, He promised to give it to him for a possession, and to his descendants after him." (Acts 7:5 NKJV)

This reflects the tension between the promise and the fulfillment. The Hebrew Scriptures clarify that Abraham lived in the land as a foreigner:

Genesis 17:8 says:
וְנָתַתִּי לְךָ וּלְזַרְעֲךָ אַחֲרֶיךָ אֵת אֶרֶץ מְגֻרֶיךָ אֵת כָּל־אֶרֶץ כְּנָעַן לַאֲחֻזַּת עוֹלָם וְהָיִיתִי לָהֶם לֵאלֹהִים
("And I will give to you and to your descendants after you the land in which you are a stranger, all the land of Canaan, as an everlasting possession; and I will be their God.")
Here, the term used for "everlasting possession" is אֲחֻזַּת עוֹלָם (achuzzat olam). While "עוֹלָם" (olam) is often translated as "forever," its meaning can also refer to an indefinite period that extends beyond the foreseeable future but not necessarily an unending span of time.

The Nature of "Forever" (עוֹלָם)
The Hebrew term עוֹלָם can be more nuanced than simply "forever" in the absolute sense. It often means a long, indefinite period of time, particularly one where the end is not clearly visible or known. We see this understanding in various places:

Exodus 21:6 (in reference to the servant who chooses to stay with his master):
וַעֲבָדוֹ לְעֹלָם (ve-avad-o le-olam) – "He will serve him for ever (עוֹלָם)," but this obviously means for the duration of his lifetime, not literally forever.

Psalm 73:12 speaks of the prosperity of the wicked:
לָבַטַח עוֹלָם (la-vatach olam), "secure forever," but we know this is temporal as well.

Thus, your understanding that the word can refer to a period "beyond their ability to comprehend" is accurate. In the case of the promise of the Land of Canaan, while it is described as an everlasting inheritance, this doesn't preclude conditional aspects, as God’s warnings in Deuteronomy and later Scriptures show.

God’s Warnings About the Land
The covenantal relationship between God and Israel was conditioned on obedience. While God promises the land, there are also warnings if Israel does not remain faithful:

Leviticus 26:33:
וְאֶתְכֶם אֲזָרֶה בַּגּוֹיִם וַהֲרִיקֹתִי אַחֲרֵיכֶם חָרֶב
("And I will scatter you among the nations and draw out a sword after you; your land shall be desolate and your cities waste.")

2 Chronicles 7:19-20 repeats this, warning that if Israel turns from God:
וַאֲשַׁלֵּחֲךָ מֵעַל פָּנַי וַאֲתֵּן לָהֶם אֶרֶץ זָבַת חָלָב וּדְבַשׁ
("I will uproot them from My land which I have given them.")

This shows that although the land was an everlasting possession, its enjoyment was contingent upon Israel’s covenant faithfulness.

Regathering and Restoration
Regarding regathering, many passages prophesy that God will bring Israel back from exile, but this too is framed with a theological purpose rather than simply political restoration:

Jeremiah 24:6-7 emphasizes not just return to the land, but a spiritual restoration:
וְנָתַתִּי לָהֶם לֵב לָדַעַת אֹתִי כִּי־אֲנִי ה'
("I will give them a heart to know Me, that I am the Lord... and they shall return to Me with their whole heart.")

Ezekiel 36:24-28 speaks not just of physical return, but also the cleansing and renewal of the people:
וְנָתַתִּי לָכֶם לֵב חָדָשׁ וְרוּחַ חֲדָשָׁה אֶתֵּן בְּקִרְבְּכֶם
("I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit within you.")

God’s Promised Restoration in Christ


Isaiah 49:6 speaks of God’s servant being a light to the Gentiles:
וּנְתַתִּיךָ לְאוֹר גּוֹיִם לִהְיוֹת יְשׁוּעָתִי עַד־קְצֵה הָאָרֶץ
("I will also give You as a light to the Gentiles, that You should be My salvation to the ends of the earth.")

John 4:23 introduces the spiritual aspect of worship in Christ’s kingdom:
וְהָעוֹבְדִים יַעַבְדוּ בְרוּחַ וֶאֱמֶת
("The true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth.")

In conclusion, while the land promises are clear and tied to Israel’s history, they also have a spiritual dimension that transcends mere geography. God’s ultimate goal is not just restoring a nation to a specific land, but drawing people into a covenantal relationship with Himself, fulfilled through the Messiah.

This balance between physical promises and spiritual fulfillment captures the heart of God’s plan, as Israel’s role as His people is fulfilled not only in physical inheritance but through the promise of the New Covenant found in Christ.

My apologies for the late response, but you probably would not agree @Jay Ross.
J.

Mull this one over.

Heb 11:8 By faith Abraham, when he was called to go out into a place which he should after receive for an inheritance, obeyed; and he went out, not knowing whither he went.

Heb 11:9 By faith he sojourned in the land of promise, as in a strange country, dwelling in tabernacles with Isaac and Jacob, the heirs with him of the same promise:

 

[IndianaRob]

How many Covenants were there in the Old Testament?
J.

As far as inheritance goes two - Grace (Abraham) and Works (Mt Sinai).

 

[Johann]

Mull this one over.

Heb 11:8 By faith Abraham, when he was called to go out into a place which he should after receive for an inheritance, obeyed; and he went out, not knowing whither he went.

Heb 11:9 By faith he sojourned in the land of promise, as in a strange country, dwelling in tabernacles with Isaac and Jacob, the heirs with him of the same promise:

I asked you how many covenants were ratified in the Old Testament?
How is it you cannot answer a straight question? Have you read Romans 9&10?
How can you say Israel is NOT YHVH's chosen Ammi?

In the context of Israel being God’s chosen people, another common phrase is עַם סְגֻלָּה (Am Segullah), which means "a treasured people" or "a special possession." This is seen in passages like Deuteronomy 7:6 where God speaks of Israel as a holy people set apart for Himself:

J.

 

[Johann]

As far as inheritance goes two - Grace (Abraham) and Works (Mt Sinai).

This is yet another error-

YOUR statement mentioning only two covenants, "Grace (Abraham)" and "Works (Mt Sinai)," while touching on key theological distinctions, does not fully capture the breadth of covenants present in the Old Testament (Hebrew Bible). The Bible actually contains several covenants between God and His people, not just two, and each has its distinct features and purposes.

The Key Covenants in the Old Testament:
Noahic Covenant (בְּרִית נֹחַ, B'rit Noach):
This covenant was made with Noah and all of humanity after the flood. God promises never to destroy the earth by a flood again. The sign of this covenant is the rainbow. It applies to all living creatures, not just Israel (Genesis 9:8–17).

Abrahamic Covenant (בְּרִית אַבְרָהָם, B'rit Avraham):
God promises Abraham land, descendants, and a blessing to all nations through him. This covenant is one of grace and is seen as the foundation of Israel’s election. The sign of the covenant is circumcision (Genesis 12, 15, 17).

Mosaic Covenant (בְּרִית סִינַי, B'rit Sinai):
Also called the Sinaitic Covenant, this covenant was made with Moses and Israel at Mount Sinai. It includes the Law (Torah), which governs Israel's relationship with God, establishing blessings for obedience and curses for disobedience. The Ten Commandments are a key part of this covenant, which is seen as a covenant of works (Exodus 19-24).

Priestly Covenant (בְּרִית כֹּהֲנִים, B'rit Kohanim):
This covenant was made with Phinehas and his descendants, ensuring the perpetuity of the priesthood in his line. God promises an eternal priesthood to Phinehas for his zeal in defending God's holiness (Numbers 25:10-13).

Davidic Covenant (בְּרִית דָּוִד, B'rit David):
God makes a covenant with King David, promising that his descendants will reign on the throne of Israel forever, establishing an eternal dynasty. This covenant also foreshadows the coming of the Messiah from David’s line (2 Samuel 7, 1 Chronicles 17).

New Covenant (בְּרִית חֲדָשָׁה, B'rit Chadasha):
Prophesied in Jeremiah 31:31–34, this covenant promises a new, transformative relationship with God where the law will be written on the hearts of the people and their sins will be forgiven. This is later fulfilled in the New Testament through Christ.

Clarification on "Grace" and "Works":
The two categories of "Grace" (Abrahamic) and "Works" (Sinaitic) are often used in theological discussions to contrast the unconditional nature of the Abrahamic Covenant (God’s promise of land and blessing, based on faith) with the conditional nature of the Mosaic Covenant (blessings tied to obedience to the Law). However, these are theological categories that highlight the differing modes of relating to God but do not encompass the full biblical presentation of the covenants.

The Abrahamic Covenant is often seen as the covenant of grace because God’s promises are unconditional and based on His sovereign will (Genesis 15:6). Abraham’s faith is counted as righteousness, a key principle later picked up in the New Testament (Romans 4:3).

The Mosaic Covenant is sometimes viewed as a covenant of works because it introduces the law, requiring Israel’s obedience for blessings in the Promised Land (Exodus 19:5-6).


While it is helpful to think in terms of grace (Abraham) and works (Sinai), the Old Testament includes more than just these two covenants. The Noahic, Priestly, and Davidic covenants, along with the New Covenant promised in Jeremiah, are also crucial parts of the biblical narrative. These covenants interact with one another and form a larger theological picture of God's unfolding plan for His people.

This is just touching the surface.
J.

 

[IndianaRob]

I asked you how many covenants were ratified in the Old Testament?
How is it you cannot answer a straight question? Have you read Romans 9&10?
How can you say Israel is NOT YHVH's chosen Ammi?

In the context of Israel being God’s chosen people, another common phrase is עַם סְגֻלָּה (Am Segullah), which means "a treasured people" or "a special possession." This is seen in passages like Deuteronomy 7:6 where God speaks of Israel as a holy people set apart for Himself:

J.

God’s chosen people, his peculiar nation, has always been and always will be those who love God and keep his commandments.

The vast majority of the Jewish people did not love God and did not keep his commandments. These ARE NOT God’s chosen people.

The Jews like Israel, Joseph, David, Ruth etc. did love God and they did keep Gods commandments and they were God’s chosen people.

 

[IndianaRob]

This is yet another error-

YOUR statement mentioning only two covenants, "Grace (Abraham)" and "Works (Mt Sinai)," while touching on key theological distinctions, does not fully capture the breadth of covenants present in the Old Testament (Hebrew Bible). The Bible actually contains several covenants between God and His people, not just two, and each has its distinct features and purposes.

The Key Covenants in the Old Testament:
Noahic Covenant (בְּרִית נֹחַ, B'rit Noach):
This covenant was made with Noah and all of humanity after the flood. God promises never to destroy the earth by a flood again. The sign of this covenant is the rainbow. It applies to all living creatures, not just Israel (Genesis 9:8–17).

Abrahamic Covenant (בְּרִית אַבְרָהָם, B'rit Avraham):
God promises Abraham land, descendants, and a blessing to all nations through him. This covenant is one of grace and is seen as the foundation of Israel’s election. The sign of the covenant is circumcision (Genesis 12, 15, 17).

Mosaic Covenant (בְּרִית סִינַי, B'rit Sinai):
Also called the Sinaitic Covenant, this covenant was made with Moses and Israel at Mount Sinai. It includes the Law (Torah), which governs Israel's relationship with God, establishing blessings for obedience and curses for disobedience. The Ten Commandments are a key part of this covenant, which is seen as a covenant of works (Exodus 19-24).

Priestly Covenant (בְּרִית כֹּהֲנִים, B'rit Kohanim):
This covenant was made with Phinehas and his descendants, ensuring the perpetuity of the priesthood in his line. God promises an eternal priesthood to Phinehas for his zeal in defending God's holiness (Numbers 25:10-13).

Davidic Covenant (בְּרִית דָּוִד, B'rit David):
God makes a covenant with King David, promising that his descendants will reign on the throne of Israel forever, establishing an eternal dynasty. This covenant also foreshadows the coming of the Messiah from David’s line (2 Samuel 7, 1 Chronicles 17).

New Covenant (בְּרִית חֲדָשָׁה, B'rit Chadasha):
Prophesied in Jeremiah 31:31–34, this covenant promises a new, transformative relationship with God where the law will be written on the hearts of the people and their sins will be forgiven. This is later fulfilled in the New Testament through Christ.

Clarification on "Grace" and "Works":
The two categories of "Grace" (Abrahamic) and "Works" (Sinaitic) are often used in theological discussions to contrast the unconditional nature of the Abrahamic Covenant (God’s promise of land and blessing, based on faith) with the conditional nature of the Mosaic Covenant (blessings tied to obedience to the Law). However, these are theological categories that highlight the differing modes of relating to God but do not encompass the full biblical presentation of the covenants.

The Abrahamic Covenant is often seen as the covenant of grace because God’s promises are unconditional and based on His sovereign will (Genesis 15:6). Abraham’s faith is counted as righteousness, a key principle later picked up in the New Testament (Romans 4:3).

The Mosaic Covenant is sometimes viewed as a covenant of works because it introduces the law, requiring Israel’s obedience for blessings in the Promised Land (Exodus 19:5-6).


While it is helpful to think in terms of grace (Abraham) and works (Sinai), the Old Testament includes more than just these two covenants. The Noahic, Priestly, and Davidic covenants, along with the New Covenant promised in Jeremiah, are also crucial parts of the biblical narrative. These covenants interact with one another and form a larger theological picture of God's unfolding plan for His people.

This is just touching the surface.
J.

I think my statement was that there were two covenants that applied to an inheritance.

 

[Johann]

The vast majority of the Jewish people did not love God and did not keep his commandments. These ARE NOT God’s chosen people.

Another error-can't you see it?

Your statement that "the vast majority of the Jewish people did not love God and did not keep his commandments" and that "these are not God's chosen people" requires careful examination, especially in light of biblical teaching regarding God's covenant relationship with Israel.

1. Israel as God's Chosen People
The Bible clearly affirms that Israel is God's chosen people. In Deuteronomy 7:6, God speaks to Israel, saying:

כִּי עַם קָדוֹשׁ אַתָּה לַיהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ
("For you are a holy people to the Lord your God; the Lord your God has chosen you to be a people for Himself, a special treasure above all the peoples on the face of the earth.")

This idea is reinforced throughout the Old Testament, where Israel is identified as God’s elect, not based on their merits but on God’s promise to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (Exodus 19:5-6, Deuteronomy 14:2).

Being chosen doesn’t imply perfect obedience; rather, it means that Israel has a unique role and relationship with God. The Abrahamic Covenant (Genesis 12, 15, 17) and the Mosaic Covenant (Exodus 19-24) set the terms of this relationship. However, this covenantal election does not mean that every Israelite was faithful to God at all times, nor that they were all guaranteed to experience His blessings, particularly when disobedience occurred.

2. Obedience and Disobedience in Israel
It is true that many times in Israel’s history a large portion of the people did not keep God’s commandments and fell into idolatry, as the prophets frequently lament:

Jeremiah 7:23-24

"But this is what I commanded them, saying, ‘Obey My voice, and I will be your God, and you shall be My people... Yet they did not obey or incline their ear, but followed the counsels and the dictates of their evil hearts."

Ezekiel 20:8

"But they rebelled against Me and would not obey Me; they did not all cast away the abominations which were before their eyes, nor did they forsake the idols of Egypt."

Despite this disobedience, God’s covenantal relationship with Israel remained intact. In fact, the covenant included provisions for Israel’s sin and disobedience, including discipline and exile (Deuteronomy 28), as well as the promise of restoration (Deuteronomy 30:1-5).

3. The Remnant of Faithful Israel
While many in Israel were unfaithful, the Bible speaks of a faithful remnant who loved God and kept His commandments. This concept is central to understanding how God’s promises are fulfilled. For example:

Isaiah 10:21-22 speaks of a remnant:

"The remnant will return, the remnant of Jacob, to the Mighty God. For though your people, O Israel, be as the sand of the sea, only a remnant of them will return."

Elijah's lament in 1 Kings 19:10, 18 about being the only faithful one left, and God’s response that He had reserved 7,000 who had not bowed to Baal, reflects that not all Israel was unfaithful.

This remnant theology is crucial because it shows that while many in Israel turned away from God, there was always a group of faithful individuals. Importantly, God’s covenant faithfulness did not depend on Israel’s perfect obedience but on His promise.

4. Are the Disobedient "Not God’s Chosen People"?
The idea that disobedient Israelites were not God’s chosen people oversimplifies the covenant relationship. Even when Israel was disobedient, God still considered them His people, though He would discipline them:

Amos 3:2:
"You only have I known of all the families of the earth; therefore I will punish you for all your iniquities."

God’s choice of Israel is rooted in His covenant with the patriarchs, and their status as His chosen people does not depend solely on their obedience. Instead, their disobedience brought about discipline and exile, but not a complete rejection of their identity as His people. Romans 11:1-2 echoes this truth, where Paul, referring to the Jewish people, says:

"Has God cast away His people? Certainly not! For I also am an Israelite... God has not cast away His people whom He foreknew."

5. Fulfillment in the Messiah
The promises to Israel ultimately find their fulfillment in the Messiah, Jesus (Yeshua). In Jeremiah 31:31-34, the New Covenant is introduced, promising a renewed relationship with God where He would write His law on their hearts. This covenant would be extended to all, both Jews and Gentiles, through Christ.

However, even in this new era, Israel's special role in salvation history is affirmed. Paul in Romans 9-11 carefully explains that although many Jews were disobedient, God still has a purpose for them, and “all Israel will be saved” (Romans 11:26), referring to the eventual turning of the Jewish people back to their Messiah.


Your statement that the Jewish people who disobeyed God are not His chosen people is incorrect from a biblical perspective. While many in Israel did not love God or keep His commandments, their covenantal status as God’s chosen people remained. God’s discipline, their exile, and the existence of a faithful remnant all point to the complexity of the relationship between God and Israel. The New Testament confirms that God’s covenant with Israel is not nullified by their disobedience, and He continues to work through them, particularly through the remnant of faith and ultimately through the fulfillment of His promises in Christ.

God’s faithfulness to His covenant people is based on His promises, not solely on their actions, though disobedience brings about consequences. The concept of election and remnant theology ensures that even in times of widespread unfaithfulness, God’s purposes remain intact.

Don't you see it?
J.

 

[Johann]

I think my statement was that there were two covenants that applied to an inheritance.

Abrahamic Covenant (בְּרִית אַבְרָהָם, B'rit Avraham) – Covenant of Grace
Inheritance: Land and blessing.
Unconditional promise: Based on God’s grace, not Abraham’s actions.
Scripture: Genesis 12:1-3, Genesis 15:18-21, Genesis 17:1-8.

The Abrahamic Covenant focuses on the inheritance of the Promised Land (Canaan) and the promise of numerous descendants. God promises Abraham that his descendants will inherit the land, and He commits Himself to fulfilling this without requiring specific conditions of obedience at that time. In Genesis 15:18, God says:

"To your descendants I have given this land, from the river of Egypt to the great river, the River Euphrates..."

This promise is based on faith. Abraham believed God’s promise, and his faith was counted as righteousness (Genesis 15:6). The inheritance here is granted by grace and is based on God’s sovereign election of Abraham and his descendants.

Hebrew term: The term for inheritance here is נַחֲלָה (nachalah), which means "an inheritance" or "possession." In this case, it refers to the Promised Land.

2. Mosaic Covenant (בְּרִית סִינַי, B'rit Sinai) – Covenant of Works
Inheritance: Enjoyment of the land.
Conditional: Based on Israel’s obedience to the Law.
Scripture: Exodus 19-24, Deuteronomy 28-30.

The Mosaic Covenant, established at Mount Sinai, governs the relationship between God and Israel once they entered the Promised Land. It details the conditions under which Israel would enjoy or be dispossessed of the land. In contrast to the Abrahamic Covenant, which was unconditional, the Mosaic Covenant required obedience to the Law in order for Israel to remain in the land and enjoy the blessings of the covenant.

In Deuteronomy 28:1-2, God promises:

"Now it shall come to pass, if you diligently obey the voice of the Lord your God... that the Lord your God will set you high above all nations of the earth. And all these blessings shall come upon you..."

However, if Israel disobeyed, there were curses, including exile from the land, as seen in Deuteronomy 28:63-64:

"Just as the Lord rejoiced over you to do you good and multiply you, so the Lord will rejoice over you to destroy you and bring you to nothing; and you shall be plucked from off the land which you go to possess."

The inheritance under the Mosaic Covenant was conditional—it depended on Israel’s obedience to God's commands. If they obeyed, they would enjoy the full benefits of the Promised Land. If they disobeyed, they would be exiled.

Distinction Between the Two Inheritance Covenants:
Abrahamic Covenant (Grace):

The inheritance of the land was an unconditional promise made to Abraham and his descendants. This covenant was fulfilled in the sense that God gave Israel the land, but it was not dependent on their obedience.
Key idea: The land as an eternal possession (Genesis 17:8) is guaranteed because of God’s promise, not because of Israel’s actions.
Mosaic Covenant (Works):

The enjoyment of the land and the blessings of living in it were conditional on Israel’s obedience to the Law. While the land was given to them, their ability to remain and thrive in it required covenant faithfulness.
Key idea: The blessings of the land are tied to obedience, and failure to keep the covenant could result in exile.

The Abrahamic Covenant grants the inheritance of the land of Canaan to Abraham’s descendants unconditionally and by God’s grace (Genesis 12, 15, 17). This covenant focuses on God’s promise and His election of Abraham.

The Mosaic Covenant, while related to the same land, governs the conditions under which Israel could enjoy the land. If they obeyed, they would be blessed and enjoy the inheritance. If they disobeyed, they would face curses and exile (Deuteronomy 28). This covenant involves works and obedience to the Law.
Thus, in terms of inheritance, the Abrahamic Covenant is about the promise of land, and the Mosaic Covenant is about the conditions for enjoying and retaining that inheritance. Both covenants are significant in understanding God’s plan for Israel.

Then you should agree with me here-right?

 

[Jay Ross]

2 Chronicles 7:19-20 repeats this, warning that if Israel turns from God:
וַאֲשַׁלֵּחֲךָ מֵעַל פָּנַי וַאֲתֵּן לָהֶם אֶרֶץ זָבַת חָלָב וּדְבַשׁ
("I will uproot them from My land which I have given them.")

This is where we diverge in our understanding of the Hebrew. The Root word H:0127, which has the meaning of soil, i.e. a fertile field, is wrongly translated as "Land." The context of this is that if Israel continued in their idolatrous worship, that God would stop Israel from drawing any nourishment from His fertile soil. In Ex 20:4-6 we are told that the iniquities of the fathers, their continual idolatrous worship during the first and second ages of their existence from the time of the birth of Isaac, would be visited upon their children and the children's children during the third and the fourth age of Israel's existence. 2 Chron 7:12ff goes on to tell us that God would cause Israel to be scattered to the four corners of the earth.

In Ez 34, God tells us that when He gathers Israel once more to Himself that He will plant them in the fertile field of Israel and teach them on the religion of Israel, where the "mountains of Israel" is a metaphor for the places where people gather to worship their "gods"/idols and in the case of Israel, God is promising to teach the Israelites on His theological understanding that He wants them to abide by, where they are living at that time scattered throughout all of the earth.

Because of this lack of understanding of the fervent evangelicals in the USA, they have pushed the political agenda that Israel must return to the Land of Canaan, i.e. the "Promised Land of Israel" so that the end times could unfold as time rolled on.

With a few corrections to our existing translations, we discover a very different context of God's purposes for all of mankind.

Another example is the Greek word G:4578 'Seismos' which is wrongly translated as "earthquake" whereas it is my contention that it is better understood to have the meaning of "turmoil."

For example, in Matt 8:24, what is being described is the turmoil of the standing waves in the Sea of Galilee which was threatening to flood the boat so that it would sink. Other Gospels describing the same event describe the turmoil in the waves. If G:4578 is consistently translated as 'earthquake' for the other 13 occurrences of this Greek word, then one would have expected it too to be translated as "earthquake" to be consistent, however an earthquake cannot occur in water. The other example is found in Matt 28:2 where an angel coming down from heaven to roll away the stone over the tomb's entrance is also claimed to cause an earthquake, but it is impossible to have an earthquake occurring in the air.

However, it is my understanding that all 14 occurrences of G:4578 should be translated as "turmoil" or its variance in all 14 cases.

When G:4578 is translated as turmoil, it presents a very different context and understanding. To come to this understanding, it requires much mediation and consideration of what the original context was attempting to convey.

Sadly, many Christians today are looking for signs in the natural earthquakes that are occurring presently as an indicator of the events that will be associated with the end times. However, if they consider the turmoil that surrounds war, particularly global wars that every nation becomes a part of, then they will see for instance that Rev 16:17-21 has already been completed from a prophecy perspective.

Shalom

 

[Johann]

This is where we diverge in our understanding of the Hebrew. The Root word H:0127, which has the meaning of soil, i.e. a fertile field, is wrongly translated as "Land." The context of this is that if Israel continued in their idolatrous worship, that God would stop Israel from drawing any nourishment from His fertile soil. In Ex 20:4-6 we are told that the iniquities of the fathers, their continual idolatrous worship during the first and second ages of their existence from the time of the birth of Isaac, would be visited upon their children and the children's children during the third and the fourth age of Israel's existence. 2 Chron 7:12ff goes on to tell us that God would cause Israel to be scattered to the four corners of the earth.

Not really a divergence-

The Hebrew word you're referring to, אֲדָמָה (adamah), Strong’s H127, indeed means "soil" or "ground," and it is closely tied to the concept of fertility and sustenance in an agricultural context. However, its translation as "land" in various places in Scripture is appropriate in many cases due to its broad semantic range, which can refer to the territory or domain associated with a people.

In 2 Chronicles 7:19-20,
2Ch 7:20 Then will I uproot them out of My Adamah which I have given them; and HaBeis HaZeh, which I have set apart as kodesh for Shmi, will I cast out of My sight, and will make it to be a Mashal (byword) and an object of ridicule among Kol haAmim.
2Ch 7:21 And HaBeis HaZeh, which is elyon, shall be an astonishment to every one that passeth by it; so that he shall say, Why hath Hashem done thus unto HaAretz HaZot, and unto HaBeis Hazeh?

where God warns about uprooting Israel from the land He has given them, the use of adamah emphasizes more than just geographical land-it is symbolically tied to divine provision and sustenance. The imagery of uprooting suggests the loss of not only the physical territory but also the nourishment, blessings, and inheritance God provided through the land. Your interpretation aligns with the idea that disobedience would result in Israel being cut off from the "fertile soil," meaning they would no longer draw from God’s provision and blessings that were tied to their covenant with Him.

This understanding of adamah connects deeply with Israel’s covenantal relationship with God, where the land is both a physical inheritance and a symbol of their spiritual flourishing under God’s provision.

In Ez 34, God tells us that when He gathers Israel once more to Himself that He will plant them in the fertile field of Israel and teach them on the religion of Israel, where the "mountains of Israel" is a metaphor for the places where people gather to worship their "gods"/idols and in the case of Israel, God is promising to teach the Israelites on His theological understanding that He wants them to abide by, where they are living at that time scattered throughout all of the earth.

In Ezekiel 34, God speaks through the prophet to rebuke the "shepherds" of Israel (its leaders) who have neglected their responsibilities, leading to the scattering of the people. The chapter transitions to God's promise that He Himself will act as the true Shepherd, gathering His scattered people and tending to them. This gathering is described in Ezekiel 34:13-14:

"I will bring them out from the peoples and gather them from the countries and will bring them to their own land. I will feed them on the mountains of Israel, by the streams, and in all the inhabited places of the land."

The metaphor of the "mountains of Israel" in Ezekiel's prophecy is significant, especially in light of your question. The "mountains" often symbolize places of strength, stability, and authority, but in biblical contexts, they also served as high places where people often engaged in idolatrous worship (as you noted). The phrase "fertile field" reflects the restored land as a place of spiritual nourishment and prosperity, contrasting with the land being unfruitful or barren due to sin and exile.

Now, regarding your interpretation:

The gathering of Israel: God’s promise to gather Israel in Ezekiel 34 is clearly a message of restoration. After the people had been scattered due to their disobedience (as Ezekiel's prophecy frequently highlights), God promises to bring them back not only to a physical land but into a place of spiritual renewal. This resonates with other prophetic passages, such as Deuteronomy 30:3-5 and Isaiah 11:11-12, where God promises to restore His people from exile.

The "fertile field": If we understand "fertile field" as both literal and metaphorical, God is speaking about more than just agricultural abundance. He is offering Israel a place of sustenance, both physically and spiritually. The imagery of planting implies that they will be rooted and established in a relationship with Him, no longer wavering or idolatrous.

Mountains of Israel as a metaphor: Your insight that the "mountains of Israel" could represent places of worship is valid. Historically, these were often the sites where both idolatry and legitimate worship occurred. In Ezekiel 34, God promises to feed His people in these places, which symbolically may indicate that He will reclaim these areas of false worship, purifying them and turning them into places where His people can truly learn His ways. This aligns with Ezekiel 36:1-12, where God speaks of redeeming the mountains of Israel from the shame of idolatry and bringing life back to them.

Teaching Israel: The idea that God will teach Israel His ways where they are scattered is implicit in His promise to shepherd them. In Ezekiel 34:23-24, God says He will set up "one shepherd" (a reference often understood as a messianic promise), under whom the people will live securely and be taught God's ways. This implies a future time when God’s people, though scattered among the nations, will live in accordance with His covenant as He shepherds them directly.

In conclusion, Ezekiel 34 portrays God's promise to not only regather His people physically but also to spiritually restore them by bringing them back into covenant faithfulness. The "mountains of Israel" in this prophecy likely symbolize places that will be reclaimed for true worship, while the "fertile field" reflects the abundant spiritual and physical blessings that will accompany this restoration. The scattered Israelites, once removed from God’s nourishing presence due to their idolatry, will be brought back into His care and taught to follow Him faithfully.

With a few corrections to our existing translations, we discover a very different context of God's purposes for all of mankind.

Another example is the Greek word G:4578 'Seismos' which is wrongly translated as "earthquake" whereas it is my contention that it is better understood to have the meaning of "turmoil."

For example, in Matt 8:24, what is being described is the turmoil of the standing waves in the Sea of Galilee which was threatening to flood the boat so that it would sink. Other Gospels describing the same event describe the turmoil in the waves. If G:4578 is consistently translated as 'earthquake' for the other 13 occurrences of this Greek word, then one would have expected it too to be translated as "earthquake" to be consistent, however an earthquake cannot occur in water. The other example is found in Matt 28:2 where an angel coming down from heaven to roll away the stone over the tomb's entrance is also claimed to cause an earthquake, but it is impossible to have an earthquake occurring in the air.

Your argument regarding the translation of G:4578 (σεισμός) as "turmoil" rather than "earthquake" in certain contexts has some merit, but there are a few nuances to consider when understanding how this term is used in the New Testament.

Lexical Range of 'Seismos': The Greek word σεισμός (seismos) does indeed primarily refer to an earthquake or shaking. It is derived from the verb σείω (seio), which means "to shake" or "to stir up." While its common usage refers to geological phenomena like earthquakes, the word can also describe more general disturbances or upheavals, which could include violent shaking or agitation beyond just the earth.

Matthew 8:24: In the account of the storm on the Sea of Galilee, Matthew 8:24 uses seismos to describe a "great tempest in the sea" (NKJV). Your interpretation that this refers to "turmoil" in the water, rather than a literal earthquake, is consistent with the context. Here, seismos may be referring to the violent motion of the waves and the overall chaotic conditions, making "turmoil" an acceptable interpretation. The parallel accounts in Mark 4:37 and Luke 8:23 use different Greek words like λαιλαπς (lailaps), meaning "storm" or "tempest," reinforcing the idea of violent, stormy conditions rather than a geological earthquake.

Matthew 28:2: The passage about the angel descending from heaven mentions that "there was a great earthquake" when the stone was rolled away from the tomb (NKJV). While it is described as a seismos, you suggest that it cannot refer to a literal earthquake, as it is caused by an angelic presence in the air. However, this could be understood as a supernatural shaking of the ground upon the angel's arrival. In this context, it is possible that the term refers to the physical shaking of the earth as a sign of divine intervention rather than merely an emotional or atmospheric "turmoil."


Shalom

J.

 

[Johann]

This is where we diverge in our understanding of the Hebrew.

Maybe a divergence in our modes of interpretation given that Revelation is a highly symbolic letter.
We need to stay humble and tread carefully.

J.

 

[Jay Ross]

Matthew 28:2: The passage about the angel descending from heaven mentions that "there was a great earthquake" when the stone was rolled away from the tomb (NKJV). While it is described as a seismos, you suggest that it cannot refer to a literal earthquake, as it is caused by an angelic presence in the air. However, this could be understood as a supernatural shaking of the ground upon the angel's arrival. In this context, it is possible that the term refers to the physical shaking of the earth as a sign of divine intervention rather than merely an emotional or atmospheric "turmoil."

Have you considered that the descent of the angel to roll the stone away from the tomb caused great turmoil among the guard at the tomb site. While the Angel descended to roll the stone away from the opening into the tomb, the Temple Guard would have been in great turmoil at the sight of the angel descending from heaven. It is impossible to cause and "earthquake in air," an earthquake can only occur is a solid material and not in a fluid like air or water as these fluids have no ability to resist shearing forces which can only occur in solids.

In Matt 27:51-54 it makes more sense for this verse to read as:

Matthew 27:51-54: - 51 Then, behold, the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom; and the earth quaked, and the rocks were split, 52 and the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised; 53 and coming out of the graves after His resurrection, they went into the holy city and appeared to many.​

​

54 So when the centurion and those with him, who were guarding Jesus, saw the turmoil and the things that had happened, they feared greatly, saying, “Truly this was the Son of God!”​

The centurion saw the turmoil in the people who had, during the Saturday twilight procession of Christ on the young ass into Jerusalem, had openly worshipped Christ as their Messiah, and now many of these same people were confused because this same Christ had been crucified on a cross and had died which had been orchestrated by the High Priest in league with the Scribes and Pharisees such that their Messiah was no more.

In the case of the small boat in a storm on the lake of Galilee, the wind caused the waves to rise up and with the reflections of the waves forming standing waves which would be capable of swamping the boat with water such that the boat would sink.

In the seventh bowl judgement prophecy, it speaks of two great earthquakes, but my recollection of the last century the level of large/great earthquakes were rare. However, the history of the twentieth century records two periods where there was great turmoil that impacted all of the nations of the earth in WW1 and WW2. Other evidence can be found in the historical record which confirms that Jerusalem was partitions into three parts in 1948 and the Land of Babylon was remembered once more by Britian and France in 1926 before God.

Also, the description of people hiding in caves underground because of the falling "hail" of bombs was terrifying the people such that they wished that the earth and the rocks would fall upon them as they cursed God for their circumstances and torment.

This then means that the Seventh Bowl Judgement has already been completed which then throws into question the understanding that the Bowl judgements have been recorded in the chronological order in which John recorded these events.

I would love it if people could prove my understanding is wrong, but even your justification as to why I might be wrong is not convincing at all.

Shalom

 

[Jay Ross]

"I will bring them out from the peoples and gather them from the countries and will bring them to their own land. I will feed them on the mountains of Israel, by the streams, and in all the inhabited places of the land."

In this verse there are two error in the translation where two different Hebrew words have been translated as "land."

The first Hebrew word which has the Hebrew Root Word H:0127 embedded within it is translated as "land" and the second Hebrew word which had the Hebrew Root word H:0766 embedded within it is also translated as "land."

I would paraphrase the quote from your post in this manner: -

"I will bring them out from the peoples and gather them from the countries where they have been scattered and will bring them to their own land/fertile field. I will feed them on the religion based on my faithful servant Israel, by the streams, and in all the inhabited places of the land/earth."​

The Parable of the Sower rings true in the Ezekiel 34 prophecy as the Sower in the final instance scatters his seed in the prepared fertile field.

Also, The Israelites will become a nation of priests, a holy nation and God's possession among all of the nations which is the Covenant that God will made like new again with the nation of Israel even though they had rejected this covenant some three and a half ages earlier at Mt Sinai.

For God's salvation plan to work for all the nations of the earth, then the Israelites will have to remain scattered among all of the nations scattered across the whole earth during the seventh age of mankind.

God has no replacement plan for Israel and we, the present-day church, need to graft ourselves onto the stump of Jessie to become a part of God's Salvation Plan for all of the peoples of the earth.

This is very different from what is being taught within the Church today. It is time that we, God's Saints, came to understand God's plan for the Salvation of the nations.

Shalom

 

[Johann]

Have you considered that the descent of the angel to roll the stone away from the tomb caused great turmoil among the guard at the tomb site. While the Angel descended to roll the stone away from the opening into the tomb, the Temple Guard would have been in great turmoil at the sight of the angel descending from heaven. It is impossible to cause and "earthquake in air," an earthquake can only occur is a solid material and not in a fluid like air or water as these fluids have no ability to resist shearing forces which can only occur in solids.

In Matt 27:51-54 it makes more sense for this verse to read as:

Matthew 27:51-54: - 51 Then, behold, the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom; and the earth quaked, and the rocks were split, 52 and the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised; 53 and coming out of the graves after His resurrection, they went into the holy city and appeared to many.​

​

54 So when the centurion and those with him, who were guarding Jesus, saw the turmoil and the things that had happened, they feared greatly, saying, “Truly this was the Son of God!”​

The centurion saw the turmoil in the people who had, during the Saturday twilight procession of Christ on the young ass into Jerusalem, had openly worshipped Christ as their Messiah, and now many of these same people were confused because this same Christ had been crucified on a cross and had died which had been orchestrated by the High Priest in league with the Scribes and Pharisees such that their Messiah was no more.

In the case of the small boat in a storm on the lake of Galilee, the wind caused the waves to rise up and with the reflections of the waves forming standing waves which would be capable of swamping the boat with water such that the boat would sink.

In the seventh bowl judgement prophecy, it speaks of two great earthquakes, but my recollection of the last century the level of large/great earthquakes were rare. However, the history of the twentieth century records two periods where there was great turmoil that impacted all of the nations of the earth in WW1 and WW2. Other evidence can be found in the historical record which confirms that Jerusalem was partitions into three parts in 1948 and the Land of Babylon was remembered once more by Britian and France in 1926 before God.

Also, the description of people hiding in caves underground because of the falling "hail" of bombs was terrifying the people such that they wished that the earth and the rocks would fall upon them as they cursed God for their circumstances and torment.

This then means that the Seventh Bowl Judgement has already been completed which then throws into question the understanding that the Bowl judgements have been recorded in the chronological order in which John recorded these events.

I would love it if people could prove my understanding is wrong, but even your justification as to why I might be wrong is not convincing at all.

Shalom

I'm not trying to justify that you might be wrong but reading your post I must admit is quite a stretch.
Shalom.
J.

 

[Jay Ross]

I'm not trying to justify that you might be wrong but reading your post I must admit is quite a stretch.
Shalom.
J.

I trust that that is a good thing.

I must admit that it has taken me quite a while to get my laughing matter around what I am understanding can be seen in the scriptures.

Sadly, some people have difficulty in considering what I post.

Shalom

 

[Lizbeth]

This provides an excellent illustration for those interested:

Aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at an Elingsh uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoetnt ...
...snip...
... and you can sitll raed it wouthit porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae we do not raed ervey lteter by it slef but the wrod as a wlohe.

People are often times in fearful shock with I inform them that the Greek manuscripts that preserve the New Testament have over 400,000 variants. The above paragraph well illustrates what is at stake with variants. Does anyone have a difficult time understanding the above paragraph? If not, you will find the Greek manuscripts a breath of fresh air compared to the above paragraph. At a quick glance, I count 69 words in the above paragraph with 34 variants or errors in spelling. But what is at stake? What can be disputed?

What is comforting with the 400,000 variants in the manuscripts that support the New Testament is this: what are the odds of finding one more manuscript that will alter the meaning of the existing New Testament. That is, we already have over 5,700 Greek manuscripts, and comparing these to each other, there are over 400,000 variants; what would be the odds of finding a new Greek manuscript (written back in the first century) that will significantly alter the meaning of the Bible. In fact, as we find more and more Greek manuscripts, the number of variants goes up and up, and yet despite all this, the ability to piece together what the original New Testament said becomes EASIER AND EASIER.

Assume the jumbled paragraph above is a copy of an original paragraph, and we wanted to determine what the original paragraph actually said. With just this one copy we can get pretty close. But if we were to find another paragraph written with such atrocities, we would at least have another source to compare it to in determining what the original paragraph actually said. If we were to find 5,000 such poorly written paragraphs, we could with relative certainty reproduce the original document.

The next time someone tells you that the Bible is full of mistakes, you better thank your lucky stars that that is indeed the truth, for without that very fact we would be at a loss in reconstructing the original New Testament. It is this unusual fact that gives evidence to a supernatural preservation of the Bible. How? 400,000 errors and not one cardinal doctrine is at stake!

As a side note, I had the opportunity to "talk" (via email) with one of the world's leading critics of our New Testament, Dr. Bart Ehrman of Duke Divinity School. In his own words, although with much reluctance, he conceded that "we can reproduce over 95 percent of what the New Testament originally said." To which Dr. Dan Wallace of Dallas Seminary adds, "...and not one major doctrine of the Christian faith is at stake within HIS disputed 5 percent." (What Dr. Wallace means by "HIS disputed 5 percent" is that most conservative scholars content that the original New Testament can be reconstructed to within 99.6 percent. As more manuscripts are dug up, that percent will approach 100 percent and beyond.)

By the way, Dan contends we have about 103% of the New Testament. We now need to remove the dross.

Just some thoughts,

Wonderful! Amen, and thank you for that.

Would it be true to say that there is not a serious problem concerning doctrine with honest actual translations....but where we do have problems is with those versions that call themselves translations but are actually paraphrased versions..? "Lying pen of the scribes."

 

[Johann]

The first Hebrew word which has the Hebrew Root Word H:0127 embedded within it is translated as "land" and the second Hebrew word which had the Hebrew Root word H:0766 embedded within it is also translated as "land."

I would paraphrase the quote from your post in this manner: -

"I will bring them out from the peoples and gather them from the countries where they have been scattered and will bring them to their own land/fertile field. I will feed them on the religion based on my faithful servant Israel, by the streams, and in all the inhabited places of the land/earth."​

2Ch 7:14 If Ami, which are called by Shmi, shall humble themselves, and daven, and seek my face, and turn from their derakhim hara'im (wicked ways), then will I hear from Shomayim, and will forgive their chattat, and will heal their land.

אֲדָמָה (n-f) heb
ground, land ground (as general, tilled, yielding sustenance)
piece of ground, a specific plot of land
earth substance (for building or constructing)
ground as earth's visible surface
land, territory, country
whole inhabited earth
city in Naphtali
Source: מקור: Open Scriptures on GitHub
Creator: יוצר: Based on the work of Larry Pierce at the Online Bible
אֲדָמָה (n-pr-loc) x-pn
Adamah = "the earth"
city in Naphtali
Source: מקור: Open Scriptures on GitHub
Creator: יוצר: Based on the work of Larry Pierce at the Online Bible
אֲדָמָה
n.f. ground, land (as tilled, Ger. bebaut? DlPr 105, but Fleisch. (MerxArchiv I, 236 f) comp. Ar. أَدَمَة skin, as smoothly covering & close-fitting; √דם cf. Ar. دَمَّ smear (spread over surface); cf. also NöZMG 1886, 737)—א׳ Gn 1:25 +; cstr. אַדְמַת Gn 47:20 +; sf. אַדְמָתִי Jb 31:38 + 2 textual etc.; pl. אֲדָמוֹת ψ 49:12—
1. ground (as tilled, yielding sustenance) Gn 2:5, 9; 3:17, 23; 4:2, 3, 12; 5:29; 8:21; 19:25; 47:23 Ex 34:26 (all J); Ex 23:19 (E) Dt 7:13; 11:17; 26:2, 10, 15; 28:4, 11, 18, 33, 42, 51; 30:9; 2 S 9:10 Is 1:7; 28:24; 30:23(×2), 24 Je 7:20; 14:4; 25:33 Hg 1:11 Mal 3:11 ψ 83:11; 105:35 Pr 12:11 28:19 1 Ch 27:26 Ne 10:36, 38 cf. fig. Jb 5:6 (‖ עפר); personif. 31:38 Jo 1:10; also אִישׁ הָא׳ Gn 9:20 (J) tiller, husbandman; meton. אֹהֵב א׳ 2 Ch 26:10 i.e. lover of husbandry (or do these point to earlier meaning tillage? cf. DlPr 105) אִישׁ עֹבֵד א׳ Zc 13:5.
†2. piece of ground, landed property Gn 47:18, 19(×3), 20, 22(×2), 23, 26 (all J) ψ 49:12 (pl.)
†3. earth as material substance; of wh. man is made Gn 2:7 (עָפָר מִן־הָא׳); so animals v 19 (מִן־הָא׳); altar Ex 20:24; earthen vessels חַרְשֵׂי א׳ Is 45:9, on head, sign of woe 1 S 4:12 2 S 1:2; 15:32; of contrition Ne 9:1 (cf. אֵפֶר, עָפָר); מַעֲבֵה הָא׳ 1 K 7:46 cf. 2 Ch 4:17 (firmness of earth, firm earth, clay-ground, for casting-moulds; or clay-moulds (Be)? or is this n.pr.? Klo proposes בַּמְּעָרָה הָאֲדֻמָּה in the red cave); mule-loads of 2 K 5:17; in it lie the dead מִיְּשֵׁנֵי אַדְמַת־עָפָר Dn 12:2 cf. Gn 3:19, 23 ψ 146:4.
4. ground as earth’s visible surface; רֶמֶס הָא׳ Gn 1:25; 6:20 (both P) Ho 2:20 cf. Gn 7:8; 9:2 (J?) Lv 20:25 (P) Dt 4:18 Ez 38:20; also Gn 4:10 (J) Is 24:21 Am 3:5 Zp 1:2, 3; as wet with dew 2 S 17:12; rain 1 K 17:14; 18:1; cf. personif. פָּֽצְתָה הָא׳ אֶת־פִּיהָ Nu 16:30 (P) (‖ ארץ v 32), vid. v 31 Gn 4:11; of partic. place, spot א׳ קֹדֶשׁ Ex 3:5 especially as abode of man Ex 10:6 Dt 4:10, 40; 12:1 1 S 20:31 2 S 14:7; oft.פְּנֵי הָא׳ Gn 2:6; 4:14; 6:1, 7; 7:4, 23; 8:8, 13 Ex 32:12; 33:16 Nu 12:3 Dt 6:15; 7:6 (all J, D) 1 S 20:15 + 9 textual
5. land, territory, country (= ארץ Gn 47:19 (J) Lv 20:24 (J?—‖ ארץ) cstr. bef. n.pr. א׳ מִצְרַיִם Gn 47:20, 26; א׳ יְהוּדָה Is 19:17; א׳ יִשְׂרָאֵל Ez 11:17 + 16 textual Ez; espe. of land as promised or given by י׳ to his people = Canaan Gn 28:15 Ex 20:12 Nu 11:12; 32:11 (all J?) Dt 5:16 + 16 textual Dt, Jos; 1 K 8:34, 40 +, Je 16:15; 24:10; 25:5; 35:15 Ez 28:25 2 Ch 6:25, 31; 7:20; 33:8; cf. also Dt 12:19; 21:23; 29:27 2 K 17:23 Is 6:11; 7:16; 14:1 +, Ez 34:13, 27 +, Ne 9:25 (א׳ שְׁמֵנָה),—in all c. 41 textual + Jo 2:21 (personif.); א׳ הַקֹּדֶשׁ Zc 2:16 (cf. sub 4 supr. hence also as Yahweh’s land Dt 32:43 Is 14:2 Zc 9:16 2 Ch 7:20.
†6. whole earth, inhabited earth (seld.; cf. also פְּנֵי הָא׳ sub 4 supr.) Gn 12:3; 28:14 (both J cf. אֶרֶץ 18:18; 22:18; 26:4) Dt 14:2 Am 3:2 Is 24:21.
†7. n.pr.loc. city in Naphtali (as built cf. אָדָם 4? = ed-Dâme?) W. of L. Gennes. Jos 19:36 v. Di.
Source: מקור: BDB Dictionary
Creator: יוצר: F. Brown, S. Driver & C. Briggs

Isaiah 14:2

For peoples shall take themathem I.e., the House of Jacob. and bring them to their homeland; and the House of Israel shall possess thembthem I.e., the peoples....

www.sefaria.org

Hebrew Word: 'eres
Strong's Reference: H776
Definition: earth, land, city (-state), (under)world.

According to KB3, (p. 87), this word LAND appears approximately 2400 times in the OT. More specifically, THAT 1, p. 229, remarks that 'eres is the fourth most frequently used noun in the OT, appearing 2504 times in the Hebrew sections and 22 times in the Aramaic sections.

The first two meanings listed above are far and away the most crucial. That is, 'eres designates either (a) "the earth" in a cosmological sense, or (b) "the land" in the sense of a specific territorial designation, primarily the land of Israel.

In the former meaning, we are informed first (Gen_1:9-13) that God created the earth on the third day. All is done here by the divine fiat. The earth is not the product of a primordial substance, as is the case in the Babylonian Enuma Elish where the earth is formed from part of the cadaver of the fallen and slain deity Tiamat. It is a sphere that is totally under the control of divine sovereignty. The earth is the Lord's (Psa_24:1). He is its King (Psa_47:2, [H3]), and its Lord (Psa_97:5). As such the world is good, and is not to be written off as intrinsically evil, the work of a demiurge. Absolutely no tinge of an "escapist mentality" is to be found in the OT. The reader of Scripture cannot but notice how relatively silent the OT is about the next life or another world. By contrast this is a dominating motif in other ancient near eastern literature. Can this be one of the Bible's ways of accentuating the goodness of the earth, the here and now?

Because the earth is the Lord's, it is answerable to him. As sin escalated, God determined to destroy the earth (Gen_9:11). But ultimately our righteous God is not happy with mere judgment, for this simply destroys the wicked. It uncreates. The ultimate expression of righteousness is neither dis-creativity nor turning the clock back. It is redemptive righteousness that is ultimate righteousness. This is why we have the rainbow covenant. God's intention is to establish a new heaven and a new earth (Isa_65:17; Isa_66:22; Rev_21:1).

The second major use of 'eres is to designate a particular territory. Here the references to Palestine are of special significance. The boundaries of this new land, promised to Abraham and his seed, are first spelled out in Gen_15:18. It is of interest that this promise has been fulfilled geographically only two times, briefly during the period of David, and again during the time of the Hasmoneans during the intertestamental period.

This land belongs to the Lord, as does the earth at large. It is his heritage (1Sa_26:19). The land is holy only because the God of holiness has given it to his people. There is nothing intrinsically sacrosanct about this land any more than there is about the city of Jerusalem or the temple. If God departs, the sanctity leaves too.

The world of the Bible is divided into two sections, Israel and the nations. One is holy, the other is impure. Although God governs everywhere, the area of his sanctity and self-revelation are limited to the boundaries of the land of Israel. In alien lands the people were not even capable of worshipping the Lord (Psa_137:1-9). This is illustrated in the book of Jonah. While it is said by the prophet himself that the Lord of heaven rules the sea and the dry land (Jon_1:9), yet he attempts to flee from the presence of God (Jon_1:3, Jon_1:10). This can only mean that Jonah attempts to flee from the area of divine revelation. Here he hopes the land of God will not come upon him. No wonder then that the prophet's messages to the exiles ring with the call that God will bring his people back to this land. The meaning "underworld" (not given in BDB) is uncertain and appears to depend on the comparison of the usage of some verses of the Psalms with similar concepts in pagan literature.

Bibliography: 'eres as underworld: Cross, F., and Freedman, D., JNES 14: 247-48. Dahood, M., Bib 40: 164-66 and elsewhere. Holladay, W. L., VT 19: 123-24. 'eres as city-state: Dahood, M., Bib 44: 297-98.________, Supp VT 16: 46-47. __________, Bib 50: 337. Watson, W. E. G., Bib 53: 92-93. General: Barr, JSS 20: 149-(A. De Guglielmo, Antonine, "The Fertility of the Land in the Messianic Prophecies," CBQ 19:306-11. Delcor, M., "Les Attaches Litteraires, l'origine et la Signification de l'espression Biblique 'Prendre a Temoin le Ciel et la Terre'," VT 16: 8-25. Henrey, K. H., "Land Tenure in the Old Testament," PEQ 86: 5-15. Miller, Patrick, D., "The Gift of God," Interp 23: 451-65. Unger, Merrill F., "The Old Testament Revelation of the Creation of Angels and the Earth," BS 114: 206-12. Whitcomb, John C., "The Creation of the Heavens and the Earth," Grace Journal 8: 26-32. TDOT, 1, pp. 388-404, THAT, I, pp. 228-35. V.P.H.

Shalom
J.

 

[Johann]

I trust that that is a good thing.

I must admit that it has taken me quite a while to get my laughing matter around what I am understanding can be seen in the scriptures.

Sadly, some people have difficulty in considering what I post.

Shalom

Not me, we can continue this study but I have to ask you what secondary sources you are using-only Strongs?

Shalom
J.

 

[KUWN]

Wonderful! Amen, and thank you for that.

Would it be true to say that there is not a serious problem concerning doctrine with honest actual translations....but where we do have problems is with those versions that call themselves translations but are actually paraphrased versions..? "Lying pen of the scribes."

Hi Lizbeth,

Glad you enjoyed the post!

Yes. There are many good Translations out there. The doctrines of the Christian Faith are well preserved in many Translations. I use the NET Bible sometimes. I am not exactly sure what you are referring to when you talk about a Translation being more of a Paraphrase. Can you give me an example so I can know how to answer your question.

 

[Lizbeth]

Hi Lizbeth,

Glad you enjoyed the post!

Yes. There are many good Translations out there. The doctrines of the Christian Faith are well preserved in many Translations. I use the NET Bible sometimes. I am not exactly sure what you are referring to when you talk about a Translation being more of a Paraphrase. Can you give me an example so I can know how to answer your question.

The most extreme one that I know of that comes to mind is the Message Bible...it isn't a translation but a paraphrase of scripture....the author is adding his own own meaning and interpretation to it. But I wonder about others as well, whether they are paraphrasing or simply translating. With your background you might be well positioned to say which ones are honest translations and which ones have a high degree of paraphrasing.