|
|
|
Father "Ye shall not ADD unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish [ought] from it, that ye may keep the Commandments of the Lord your God which I COMMAND you" Deuteronomy 4:2 Joh 8:39 They answered and said unto him, Abraham is our father. Jesus saith unto them, If ye were Abraham's children, ye would do the works of Abraham. father.3962 Jesus2424 saith3004 unto them,846 If1487 ye were2258 Abraham's11 children,5043 ye would do4160, 302 the3588 works2041 of Abraham.11 John 8:41 Ye do the deeds of your father. Then said they to him, We be not born of fornication; we have one Father, even God. John 8:48 Then answered the Jews, and said unto him, Say we not well that thou art a Samaritan, and hast a devil?
As these jews were born 42 generations after Abraham, they were obviously not the immediate children of Abraham, so in this context the word father could only mean ancestor. But this definition is completely missing from Strong's Concordance, it's never translated as ancestor by the KJV translators, 20 other translators of the Holy Bible never seemed to have grasped this simple concept, Torrey's New Topical Textbook never even stumbles across this definition, Webster's calls Abraham the "father of the Israelites" even though it was Jacob who was, the word father doesn't even appear in the King James Dictionary nor in Hitchcock's Bible Names, and Nave's Topical Bible claims that father is "an idolatrous title of priests". Is it at all possible that each one of these many Biblical references unilaterally failed to comprehend the actual context of the word pater? It seems unlikely, but the same mistake was repeated in the following Scripture where the same Greek word "pater" is again translated as "father": John 4:12 Art thou greater than our father Jacob, which gave us the well, and drank thereof himself, and his children, and his cattle? Again, with Christ and this Samaritan being born 40 generations after Jacob, we are obviously now on our own to comprehend what the Samaritan woman meant here by her use of the term "pater". Not only did the jews claim that both Abraham and God are their father, but they claimed that they had only one father.
We know from the fact that "even" was italicized that it was added by the KJV translators, so in an effort to reconcile this Scripture, let's remove it:
It seems inescapable that the jews are proclaiming that Abraham was God, and that Christ was proclaiming that Abraham was either not their God, not their ancestor, or both. Is it possible that jews view Abraham as God and Israelites don't? The phrase "God our father" appears 11 times in the New Testament, proof enough that, just as these jews are claiming, Israelites also considered God to be their "father". But it's also clear that neither Christ nor any other Israelites ever claimed that Abraham to be God. It's clear from this study that the Greek word "pater" must be a reference to genealogy. We know that some of the Samaritans were Israelites and would have proclaimed that Jacob was their ancestor. The Samaritan woman wasn't claiming that Jacob was God, she wasn't claiming that Jacob was a spirit, and she wasn't claiming that Jacob was her literal father. She was claiming simply to be a genetic descendant of Jacob, meaning her use of the term "pater" must mean ancestor, not father. When the jews made a similar claim about Abraham being their pater, they weren't claiming that Abraham was their literal father, nor that he was a spirit, but it appears that they WERE claiming that Abraham was God. Could a single Greek word like "pater" be both a genetic term and a spiritual term? It seems unlikely that the Greeks could have conquered so much of the world and held it captive for so long, and built structures like the Parthenon, had their language been so obfuscatory. If we go back to the Old Testament, we see that both Greek and Hebrew appear to be more robust languages than English. For example, there are 14 Hebrew and 6 Greek words which are all translated into the single English word "idol". There are 4 different Hebrew words which are all translated into the same English word "man", and 8 different Hebrew and Greek words which are all translated into the same English word "beast". There were important distinctions between these words in the original Scripture which cannot possibly be understood by relying solely on the KJV translation. The simple fact that the original Hebrew word "awb", Strong's #1, from which "father" is translated in the Old Testament, is translated once as "forefather", is proof enough that this concept existed in the English language at the time of the KJV translation:
Of 1,136 occurrences of awb, it's translated as father, fathers, father's, or father' almost exclusively. It appears as forefathers only once, as patrimony once, as pincipal once, as chief three times, but never as grandfather, great grandfather, God, ancestor, or ancestry, all of which are important concepts in a patriarchal society. It's highly significant that judeochristians consider such a concept to be so unimportant that it's completely missing from their Biblical commentary.
|
               |
|
Modified Tuesday, November 02, 2010 Copyright @ 2010 by Fathers' Manifesto & Christian Party |
