TruthVid's 100 Proofs that the Israelites were White, Part 16

Christogenea is reader supported. If you find value in our work, please help to keep it going! See our Contact Page for more information.

  • Christogenea Saturdays
ChrSat20201128-100Proofs-16.mp3 — Downloaded 2170 times


TruthVid's 100 Proofs that the Israelites were White, Part 16

Here we begin our discussion of point 42 of TruthVid’s 100 Proofs, which concerns the mistranslations or misinterpretations of words found in Scripture, whether they are purposeful or not. William Finck’s prepared notes are found below.

42) Major word mistranslations or misunderstandings that occur repeatedly throughout the Bible.

These mistranslations are systemic in that they are based on a universalist interpretation of Scripture.

Nations or Gentiles?

The Hebrew word goy means nation. The Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew lexicon defines it as “1) nation, people 1a) nation, people 1a1) usually of non-Hebrew people 1a2) of descendants of Abraham 1a3) of Israel 1b) of swarm of locusts, other animals (fig.) n pr m 1c) Goyim? = ‘nations’”

So gentile is not even part of their definition for goy, but it is translated in that manner 30 times in the King James Old Testament, half of them in Isaiah.

The Greek word ἔθνος means nation. It is translated 96 times as gentile in the King James Version. On another 5 occasions the word Ἕλλην, which means Greek, is translated as gentile, which is completely dishonest. According to Liddell & Scott, ἔθνος in earliest Greek writing meant a “number of people living together, company, body of men… band of comrades… host of men… of particular tribes… of animals… swarms, flocks…” Then later, after Homer, nation, people… later, foreign, barbarous nations, opposite to Ἕλληνες… at Athens, athletic clubs of non-Athenians in LXX, non-Jews, Ps. 2.1, al., cf. Act.Ap.7.45; Gentiles… used of Gentile Christians, Ep. Rom.15.27.” Other, more obscure uses of the word are given after these.

While Liddell & Scott always give the definitions of words as they were interpreted in the King James Version, that does not mean that the apostles understood them in that manner. That does not mean that when the apostles wrote ἔθνος, they meant non-Jew or gentile. While ἔθνος appears approximately 150 times in the New Testament, it is often translated as nation or heathen, which is also a quite subjective rendering.

As a digression, in the Latin scriptures the word ἔθνος in Scripture was often translated as gentilis, which is the Latin word which was borrowed into English as gentile. The Junior Classic Latin Dictionary published by Wilcox & Follett Company in 1945 defined gentilis as “of the same clan or race”. The New College Latin & English Dictionary by John C. Traupman, Ph. D., defines gentilis as “family, hereditary; tribal; national… clansman, kinsman”. The word gentilitas is a clan relationship. While the Greek term ἔθνος does not bear that same meaning, there must have been good reason why the Latin term gentilis was used of the nations which were to receive the Gospel, in spite of other Latin terms which can be used generally to describe any nations, such as natio or populus.

The promises to the patriarchs were that their seed would become many nations. But the same word for nations in Hebrew is often translated as gentiles. This method of translation is subjective and dishonest, especially since gentile is not even an English word. It was brought into English and given a meaning which it never had in Scripture or in its original language, which is Latin. Why did the English translators in the 16th century need to borrow a Latin word into English in order to help understand a Hebrew word which simply means nation?

Genesis 17: “4 As for me, behold, my covenant is with thee, and thou shalt be a father of many nations [goyim]. 5 Neither shall thy name any more be called Abram, but thy name shall be Abraham; for a father of many nations [goyim] have I made thee. 6 And I will make thee exceeding fruitful, and I will make [goyim] nations of thee, and kings shall come out of thee.”

Genesis 25: “23 And the LORD said unto her, Two nations [goyim] are in thy womb, and two manner of people shall be separated from thy bowels; and the one people shall be stronger than the other people; and the elder shall serve the younger.”

Genesis 35: “10 And God said unto him, Thy name is Jacob: thy name shall not be called any more Jacob, but Israel shall be thy name: and he called his name Israel. 11 And God said unto him, I am God Almighty: be fruitful and multiply; a nation [goy] and a company of nations [goyim] shall be of thee, and kings shall come out of thy loins.”

Deuteronomy 32: “43 Rejoice, O ye nations [goyim], with his people: for he will avenge the blood of his servants, and will render vengeance to his adversaries, and will be merciful unto his land, and to his people.”

From 1 Corinthians 10: “1 Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea; 2 And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea; 3 And did all eat the same spiritual meat; 4 And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.” Paul was not addressing Jews, he was addressing Corinthians. He told the Corinthians that their ancestors were with Moses in the Exodus just as his own, and we have already established here exactly how that was true, as the Corinthians were Dorian Greeks and the Dorians had come from the ancient Israelites.

Then a little further on in that same chapter Paul makes a statement concerning the surrounding nations, and I will omit a parenthetical remark which obscures his intent, where he wrote: “18 Behold Israel after the flesh: are not they which eat of the sacrifices partakers of the altar? … 20 But I say, that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils, and not to God: and I would not that ye should have fellowship with devils.” That phrase “Israel after the flesh” means Israel according to the flesh: the real Israel and not the Jews in Palestine, although some of the Judaeans were also Israelites. The things which the Nations, not so-called gentiles, sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils as the ancient Israelites were pagan when they departed to settle abroad. That these so-called Gentiles were actually the nations which had come of Israel according to the promises of God is then revealed in Paul’s epistle to the Romans:

From Romans chapter 4: “1 What shall we say then that Abraham our father, as pertaining to the flesh, hath found?” The text actually says “forefather” in the majority of the older manuscripts. Then after comparing the circumcision and the uncircumcision, because the Israelites scattered abroad did not maintain the practice of circumcision, Paul continues: “13 For the promise, that he should be the heir of the world, was not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but through the righteousness of faith…. 16 Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace; to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed; not to that only which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham; who is the father of us all, 17 (As it is written, I have made thee a father of many nations,) before him whom he believed, even God, who quickeneth the dead, and calleth those things which be not as though they were.” What did Abraham believe? That his seed would become many nations. Those nations did not yet exist, for which reason Paul added that God “calleth those things which be not as though they were.” That is the faith of Abraham as it is defined by Paul of Tarsus here. When the promise was made to Abraham, those nations did not yet exist because they would come out of Abraham’s loins. So he concludes: “18 Who against hope believed in hope, that he might become the father of many nations, according to that which was spoken, So shall thy seed be.”

So what is the seed of the promise?:

Physical or Spiritual Seed?

The concept of the word of God in the minds of men as “seed” comes in part from the abuse of a parable. But the interpretation of a parable cannot change the promises of God.

Matthew 13:3 And he spake many things unto them in parables, saying, Behold, a sower went forth to sow; 4 And when he sowed, some seeds fell by the way side, and the fowls came and devoured them up: 5 Some fell upon stony places, where they had not much earth: and forthwith they sprung up, because they had no deepness of earth: 6 And when the sun was up, they were scorched; and because they had no root, they withered away. 7 And some fell among thorns; and the thorns sprung up, and choked them: 8 But other fell into good ground, and brought forth fruit, some an hundredfold, some sixtyfold, some thirtyfold.

There is no explanation of this parable as it was recorded in Matthew, but it was recorded in Luke with an explanation:

Luke 8: 10 And he said, Unto you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God: but to others in parables; that seeing they might not see, and hearing they might not understand. 11 Now the parable is this: The seed is the word of God. 12 Those by the way side are they that hear; then cometh the devil [Mark 4: Satan], and taketh away the word out of their hearts, lest they should believe and be saved. 13 They on the rock are they, which, when they hear, receive the word with joy; and these have no root, which for a while believe, and in time of temptation fall away. 14 And that which fell among thorns are they, which, when they have heard, go forth, and are choked with cares and riches and pleasures of this life, and bring no fruit to perfection. 15 But that on the good ground are they, which in an honest and good heart, having heard the word, keep it, and bring forth fruit with patience.

So in that Parable of the Sower, the distribution of the Word of the Gospel is likened to seed. But that does not make the seed of the promises spiritual. In fact, at least 30 years after Christ gave us that Parable, at a time when Paul must have been familiar with Luke’s gospel, he wrote in chapter 9 of his epistle to the Romans that “They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.” He had already defined the promise in Romans chapter 4 where he wrote that Abraham “believed in hope, that he might become the father of many nations, according to that which was spoken, So shall thy seed be.”

The churches teach that somehow many nations became Abraham’s seed. But “that which was spoken” is that Abraham’s seed would become many nations. Therefore the seed cannot be spiritual, but physical, from Abraham’s own loins, according to that same promise. Now in another parable from that same chapter we see that seed are indeed physical children:

Matthew 13: “24 Another parable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is likened unto a man which sowed good seed in his field: 25 But while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat, and went his way. 26 But when the blade was sprung up, and brought forth fruit, then appeared the tares also. 27 So the servants of the householder came and said unto him, Sir, didst not thou sow good seed in thy field? from whence then hath it tares? 28 He said unto them, An enemy hath done this. The servants said unto him, Wilt thou then that we go and gather them up? 29 But he said, Nay; lest while ye gather up the tares, ye root up also the wheat with them. 30 Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.” Now, we cannot stop here and interpret this for ourselves. Christ will interpret it for us. But first we read a statement from Matthew: “34 All these things spake Jesus unto the multitude in parables; and without a parable spake he not unto them: 35 That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, saying, I will open my mouth in parables; I will utter things which have been kept secret from the foundation of the world.”

So the explanation we are about to read was not necessarily revealed in the Old Testament scriptures, or these things could not have been “kept secret from the foundation of the world.” From further on in Matthew chapter 13: “36 Then Jesus sent the multitude away, and went into the house: and his disciples came unto him, saying, Declare unto us the parable of the tares of the field.”

This indicates that what He is about to explain is being done in plain meaning, not in allegory. If Christ had used allegory in His explanation, then He would not truly be explaining the meaning of the parable as the apostles had requested, and instead He would just be reciting another parable. But they asked for an explanation, and this is the explanation which He had given,

Continuing from Matthew chapter 13: “37 He answered and said unto them, He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man; 38 The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one; 39 The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the world; and the reapers are the angels. 40 As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world. 41 The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity; 42 And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth. 43 Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear.”

So, this being an explanation of the allegories of the wheat and the tares, these are the terms which Christ was using to explain those allegories, and therefore their plain meanings must be accepted. The seed are the children of God. In Luke chapter 3 the apostle records that Adam is the son of God, and in Deuteronomy chapter 14 as well as in several places in Isaiah and other prophets, the children of Israel are said to be the children of God. The enemy that sowed the tares is the devil. In John chapter 8, calling his opponents the children of a devil, Christ was referring to Cain and the Edomites of Jerusalem which can be traced back to Cain through the Old Testament, as only Cain was a murderer from the beginning.

Fornication and Adultery

The apostle Jude in his one short epistle referred to the angels that sinned, and then to Sodom and Gomorrah, and said that they had given “themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh”, where the word for strange in that passage of the King James Version is ἕτερος, which is different. The sin of the angels is clearly race-mixing with the daughters of Adam, in Genesis chapter 6. So we can safely conclude that the apostles of Christ considered race-mixing to be a form of fornication. Paul exhibited that same meaning of the word in Hebrews chapter 12 where he called Esau a fornicator, and in 1 Corinthians chapter 10 in reference to the incident at Baal Peor.

The Hebrew term which means fornication is also often translated as whoredom or whoring in the Old Testament. Denominational pastors often protest that fornication is sex without marriage, but in the Hebrew Old Testament the act of having sex was the act of getting married, as we see of both Isaac and Jacob in Genesis chapters 24 and 29. Except in cases of divorce, having when having sexual one is either getting married, already married, or committing adultery. In modern times, official marriage licenses and wedding ceremonies in church are perhaps not even 200 years old. The term adultery can also sometimes describe race-mixing, as it seems to do in the ten commandments. There we read “thou shalt not covet they neighbor’s wife” and we also read “thou shalt not commit adultery”, so the two commandments certainly must be describing two different sins. To the ancient Greeks, such as Strabo and Aristotle, either μοιχεία, which is adultery in the New Testament, or πορνεία terms πόρνη, which is fornication in the New Testament, can be used to describe race-mixing.

Race is real. The descendants of Esau were all mixed from his Canaanite wives, and from the Horites among whom he later dwelt, which were a branch of the Canaanites. The issue was not religious, it was racial, because Jacob was told to go take wives of his own kin, and they were also pagan. All of Abraham’s own fathers were pagan, as we are informed in Joshua chapter 24. There was no concept at that time of Christians or Hebrew Israelites as opposed to pagans, as we see the world today.

Going back to chapter 10 of 1 Corinthians, Paul had warned those people that on account of their being from Israel, they should not commit fornication as their fathers had, where 24,000 of them were slain. That describes the event of Numbers chapters 24 and 25, where Israel had joined themselves to the daughters of Moab. Paul was telling the Corinthians that they should not race-mix in that manner. That sort of race-mixing, among other sexual crimes, was described as fornication, which Jude called the “going after of different flesh”, the word strange in the King James Version meaning different, and Christ Himself had warned in Revelation chapter 2 that He would kill the children of fornicators. In Hebrews chapter 12, Paul called Esau a fornicator, and explained that there are both sons and bastards, for which Esau could never recover the birthright that should have been his. The message is clear: mix your race, and you lose your birthright. It is often contested that the Bible does not condemn race-mixing, but there it is in all of these passages, although it is called fornication. Then it is contested that the Bible does not speak of race, but it certainly does. However in the King James English the word for race is translated as generation.

In the next portion of this discussion we will commence with that word, generation.