The Intention of It All: Mysteries and Misunderstood Scriptures of the Bible Decoded

By T.C. Ray

Within the reader is provided with enlightened versions of selected and some even beloved segments of the Bible that have been previously either translated based on Semite legends, (due to the fact that at the time of translation those were the only historical references available,) or considered unknowable. The creation of the universe, earth, and humanity are presented in a manner that falls closer in line with the historical and archeological record as known today, instead of being based on ancient legends and fairy tales. Elements of the Book of Exodus, with passages concerning the 10 commandments and the role of Jethro in the establishment of a democratic form of government, provide the reader with new origins for the judicial and representational branches within our own form of government.

The unknowable elements of the Book of Job, concerning the Lords reply to Job in the last few chapters of the book, are presented in a manner that not only suggests that it is indeed knowable, but also reasonable and logical as well, providing a description of the universe and earth that belies the level of knowledge available to humanity at its inception. Certain controversial passages of the New Testament are addressed, such as the Magi, the intent behind the Feast at Cana, and Mary Magdalenes true role in Jesus life and ministry, and this is followed with an interpretation of the symbolism found within the Book of Revelations. All in all, the author provides the reader with a new and different take on certain elements of old scriptures.

• Language: English
• Publisher: AuthorHouse
• Release date: Nov 24, 2010
• ISBN: 9781452090962

T.C. Ray

   T. C. Ray presents the scriptures in a new and refreshing light, by applying recently uncovered archeological and scientific findings to the Bible, retranslating it from the original Hebrew using these findings and data as his guide, instead of the previously used antiquated Semite legends and fairy tales. His ability to do this brings us the beginnings of a modern version of the scriptures that provides us with an evolving Bible in line with 21st century thought for the dynamic personality of the new millennium.    The author himself is college educated, with a degree in psychology, as well as being a recovering victim of a debilitating spinal cord injury, attained from a 60 foot fall while rock climbing. Being paralyzed at first, this gave the author a lot of free time, during which he spent learning to read Hebrew, where he noticed that when reading the Bible in Hebrew, there were other possible definitions for certain phrases, terms, and words, with most being located in the first several chapters of the Book of Genesis.    This piqued his curiosity, and caused him to then research era-specific applications of the vernacular used in the ancient texts available in the archaic Hebrew, focusing on secular documents written in Hebrew, and their translations. Using this information as a roadmap, he then reexamined first, the Book of Genesis in an alternate manner, followed by subsequent elements of the Bible as well, such as the Books of Exodus and Job. What was uncovered was no less than amazing, and became the basis for this book.

Book preview

© 2010 T.C. Ray. All rights reserved.

No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted by any means without the written permission of the author.

First published by AuthorHouse 11/12/2010

ISBN: 978-1-4520-9102-0 (sc)

ISBN: 978-1-4520-9096-2 (e)

Library of Congress Control Number: 2010915728

Printed in the United States of America

This book is printed on acid-free paper.

Certain stock imagery © Thinkstock.

Because of the dynamic nature of the Internet, any Web addresses or links contained in this book may have changed since publication and may no longer be valid. The views expressed in this work are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the publisher, and the publisher hereby disclaims any responsibility for them.

In Dedication to the Memory of:

Emily Anne Hopkins

An Angel too short for this earth,

Whose life and passing inspired me to search

Leading to the creation of this work.

03/30/2007 - 02/20/2008

With Special Thanks to:

First and foremost, my mother, Collene Hopkins, for never giving up on me

John Hopkins, who provided guidance as my father

Mike Wood, for showing me what the word selfless truly means

Harold Hill, for his inspiration in the field

Rev. Todd Freeman, just for being there when needed

Dr. Diana Chen M.D., for keeping me healthy and increasing my quality of life

My pet cat Pepper, (who passed away after providing the gift of 22 years of life,) who provided me responsibility and companionship in troubled times to anchor me

All of my various brothers and sisters, you for being you (listed in chronological order: Donna, Kenny, Teresa, Linda, John Anthony, and David)

Both of my Grandmothers, (who have both since passed on,) for their love and support

My Comp II Instructor Dr. Joseph Faulds, for showing me that I could actually write, and was actually good at it

Billy Graham Ministries, for the anonymous aid supplied in preparing the minutia associated with works of this type

And last, but definitely not least,

All of the people in the publishing trade who have made this endeavor possible

A dramatic reading and literary collage

To be, or not to be,

and I looked,

That is the question:-

and behold a pale horse:

Whether ‘tis nobler in the mind, to suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune;

and his name that sat on him was Death,

Or to take arms against a sea of troubles, and by opposing end them?

and Hell followed with him.

-- To die, - to sleep, no more; -

and power was given unto them over the fourth part of the Earth,

And by a sleep, to say we end the heartache,

to kill with the sword,

And the thousand natural shocks that flesh is heir to, -

and with hunger,

‘Tis a consummation devoutly to be wish’d.

and with death,

To die, - to sleep; - to sleep! Perchance to dream: - ay, there’s the rub;

and with the beasts of the earth.

For in that sleep of death what dreams may come,

a measure of wheat for a penny,

When we have shuffled off this mortal coil,

three measures of barley for a penny;

Must give us pause.

see thou not hurt the oil and wine.

There’s the respect, that makes calamity of so long life.

- fini.

(Hamlet, Prince of Denmark. Act III, Scene 1, Lines 56 - 69.)

(The Revelation of the Apocalypse of St. John the Divine. Chapter 6, Verse 8, & Verse 6.)

Table of Contents

Introduction

Part I:

The Creation Story

The Evolution of Humanity

The Legacy of Cain

The Legacy of the Patriarchs

Part II:

In The Sciences We Trust…

The Hebrews’ Exile in the Wilderness

and its Resulting Contribution to the Origins of Democracy

What About Job?

Part III:

…and That’s the Gospel Truth

Christ and the New Covenant

The Reinterpretation of Controversial Symbolism

Found in the Book of Revelations

Epilogue:

Appendix - I

Appendix - II

Appendix - III

Appendix - IV

Bibliography:

Introduction

or

The Best of Intentions…

____________________

"While Satan’s greatest triumph of the 20th century may have been convincing mankind he doesn’t exist, his greatest triumph of the 19th century was in convincing mankind that science and religion are diametrically opposed philosophies."

____________________

One of the most common questions I have been asked concerning this work, and my purpose in writing it has been, How can you be so sure that the KJV was mistranslated when it was first written and presented to the public? After all, if the Lord is truly omnipotent, then why would He allow for any mistranslations to occur within His Holy Word? This has been a very difficult question to answer, mainly due to the fact that most people already have their own version of the scriptures within their heads. Regardless of what may be indicated, truthfully speaking most people have no desire to read, or even be exposed to for that matter, anything that contradicts each person’s specific views concerning the scriptures. To be honest, that is just human nature, - no one likes to be told they’re wrong, especially concerning something as important as the institutions governing their personal ethical and moral belief system. (Which is the domain of religion in Western culture.)

And truth be told, I really do not wish to contradict anyone, as I personally take the view where religion is concerned that everyone is correct. In fact, one of the primary purposes of this work is to unite opposing viewpoints, not contradict them, under the premise that while everyone is correct, they’re also incomplete, which has led to the differences between the faiths and denominations that we see throughout the world today. However, if you take into consideration that almost all of our modern religious texts (not just Judeo-Christian, but Islamic, Buddhist, Hindu, etc.,) are translated from either an oral tradition, or from an ancient dead language, (such as Aramaic or Latin,) we typically find that if we look through the sacred texts, scrolls, treatises, and other various sacred writings hard enough, followed with a thorough scrutinizing of what we have been previously taught to be incontrovertible translations of words and phrases through the context they appear in, certain variations still almost always appear. Thus arises the fact that perhaps there is something more to it after all.

While this type of inconsistency appears throughout every religious text that has been passed down through oral tradition or translated into another language, the text I am focusing on in this work is the Holy Bible, both Testaments. There are both positive and negative aspects to working with the Holy Bible. One good thing concerning the Torah, (the first five books of the Old Testament,) is that due to the strictures placed on copying the Torah by the Jewish Priesthood, it has remained literally unaltered as written in the original Hebrew for 3500 years. This means the original content is still unchanged as originally written, in turn meaning that the original intent is still preserved and present somewhere within the Hebrew version of the text.

So when the Torah is reproduced in the traditional manner, it’s copied word for word, letter for letter, with someone proof-reading the text as it is being written. If a copy of the Torah gets even one smudged letter, a page bent, or any other defect, no matter how minuscule, It is ritualistically destroyed in an honorable manner reminiscent in method of the Temple worship sacrificial burnt offerings, (i.e., burned according to ritual,) and a new one is created to take Its place. It’s due to this manner of reproduction that has kept the Torah unchanged for the past 3500 years, which has been proven archeologically, as complete copies of the Torah up to 2500 years old, (most notably, the 2100 year old complete copy found within the Dead Sea Scrolls, and the 1000 year old complete copy within the Aleppo Codex,) have been found that literally match contemporary copies of the Torah, word for word, in Hebrew.

Yet the fact that it appears today as written 3500 years ago in the original Hebrew still doesn’t mean that some problems don’t arise, as the Hebrew language itself that it’s written in presents some issues due to the homophonic properties of the Ancient Hebrew language. This means that when translating it into another language, assigning the proper definition to the correct words can present some difficulties, especially if there’s no frame of reference to base the proper definition on. This inevitably leads to using secular or legendary points of reference for the translation, which then leads to an incorrect interpretation, further leading to an incorrect translation. These homophonic aspects of the ancient Hebrew language that have allowed for the mistranslation of the Bible, have also allowed for dis-translations by certain unscrupulous individuals seeking to adjust the scriptures to fit their particular socio-political motivations in their attempts to control the masses. (This was one of the influencing factors to write this book, in an attempt to correct these elements present within the English versions.) In the history of humanity, there has been no greater institution for political control than religion, and I think that Karl Marx summed it up best with the statement: Religion is the opiate of the masses. (And I know that the question, Isn’t this similar to what I am doing?, has probably entered the reader’s mind, and the answer, on certain levels, because I am human, has to be yes, - although I also am trying to avoid this paradoxical behavior as best I can.)

These problems and issues have only been exacerbated to a certain extent in the Tanakh, (the Jewish word for the rest of the Old Testament,) because it is not held to the same high standards for copying and reproduction that the Torah is held to. However, the Tanakh, being younger than the Torah, also has some benefits concerning its translation into other languages, as it is also fresher in the Jewish collective cultural memory, thus allowing for a higher degree of accuracy in its historic information, a positive asset when addressing its proper translation. We also have this same positive element working for the translator’s benefit when translating the New Testament as well. Plus, an even more beneficial asset in translating the New Testament is the fact that it was originally written for the most part in Greek, and due to the similarities in syntax between Greek and the other European languages, including English, the issues with the New Testament become even moreso that of proper interpretation, than so much as of translation.

As you read this work, one of the first inconsistencies you will notice is that the format of each entry tends to vary somewhat. Some entries will focus on the translation, with multiple Hebrew words presented with alternate definitions, while others focus on the interpretation of the phrases, with the actual phrase remaining the same, but an alternate interpretation will be presented to account for it. Concerning the various formats, I let the passages of scripture and how they related to the main idea of the topics being addressed dictate as to how they would be approached, with the end goal of both presenting the reader with the most accurate information as possible, and having the final translation/interpretation being presented in a manner that allows it to satisfy the various belief systems that will find it meaningful I have encountered through the years, (mainly being the various Christian denominations, the various Islamic sects, the few Zoroastrians that are left, and the other Middle Eastern monotheists, such as the Mandeans, Cathars, Manicheans, Gnostics, and the Baha’i, to name a few.)

One thing that I have discovered while working on this manuscript is that if one applies the alternate definitions of the Ancient Hebrew in a particular manner, it relates a completely different story for the reader to enjoy. Not only that, more often than not the stories that emerge by using the alternate definitions tend to end up matching the historical and archeological record somewhat better, which in turn validates what is written even moreso. In addition, when another story emerges by applying this same manner of translating and interpreting the Torah and Ancient Hebrew by using a fill in the blanks approach, it then generally provides support for the original version as well, overall providing the reader with multiple interpretations to draw wisdom from. Which one is the most correct? Personally, I tend to lean toward the versions that can be supported by empirical historic and archeological evidence, but realistically speaking, it is for the individual to decide on a person to person basis, as I’m also of the opinion that we use what works for us, so long as it doesn’t interfere with others’ beliefs and basic human rights.

As I researched and composed this book, one odd theory did occur to me, which supported the premise of multi-dimensionality. Perhaps Ancient Hebrew, being fraught with homonyms, was intentionally created and chosen as the language used for the Bible specifically because of these homophonic properties. In allowing for a greater diversity in definition, it subsequently allows for a greater amount of information to be presented, thus allowing for greater diversity in its wisdom. I do believe that for each passage in the Torah, the Hebrew words used were specifically chosen with multiple definitions to get as much information as possible into each phrase while using the least amount of space as possible. (Remember, the Ancients didn’t have books, they had bulky scrolls made of papyrus or lamb’s skin, and with both mediums being expensive to make, space was definitely an issue.)

By using both the primary translation that appears within most Bibles, as well as alternate translations attained from using alternate definitions for the Hebrew words, we can actually get between two and four versions of the same passages. These versions can be different enough from each other to the point that they can be referred to as different stories, while using the same Hebrew words, making it so there are other stories present aside from the ones everyone knows. The thing about it, as I just mentioned, is I have found these hidden stories to fit in with the archeological evidence discovered concerning the development of mankind as a species better than the currently accepted translations. This property of the scriptures then allow it to reach a greater number of people with its wisdom, because overall, when everything is said and done, none of the alternate translations changes the text enough to alter the core meaning of the primary message. (Which basically reads, Do good, treat your fellow humans with respect and dignity, and if it feels as if it’s wrong then it probably is.)

Continuing on, concerning translation variations, one thing that you will notice in most of your KJV Bibles is that a lot of words are presented in italics; usually pronouns, prepositions, and adverbs. At first I didn’t know what they were italicized for, as only in the KJV do these words appear in italics as such, and I began to wonder if many other people also shared this lack of knowledge. After researching the issue, I discovered the words appear in italics because there was a question concerning their definition to the original translators. However, our knowledge concerning linguistics has improved tremendously since King James’ time, so the newer translations do not have this problem. I know you are asking yourself, Then why don’t the modern publishers fix this particular error concerning the Word of God? I can answer that question. It is not corrected out of respect for the Book itself, and its place in influencing the historical affairs of Western civilization and society, as well as being the best-selling and most read literary work in the history of humankind.

It was originally the Old Testament’s seeming improprieties in translation that initially caught my eye, and subsequently piqued my curiosity concerning possible mis-translations; and truth be told, it was the Creation Story, (Genesis, chapter one,) the Ten Commandments, (Exodus, chapter 20,) and the Lord’s Response to Job, (Job, chapters 38 through 42,) that first aroused my attention and presented me with the idea to write this down. I just couldn’t, (and still can’t, for that matter,) accept the fact that the Torah could possibly be incorrect, but so neither could I accept that the empirical data concerning evolution, the dinosaurs, the Big Bang, and a plethora of similar deemed scientific data could be incorrect either. (Actually, I was watching the series of documentaries called Miracle Planet, on one of the Discovery Channel subsidiaries, when I realized that the first chapter of Genesis matched up with the latest views of creation and evolution.)

This moved me into exploring the actual translation of the Torah, and I began searching for a way to tie both theories together in a manner that would dictate them both as correct. First, I sought out books written on the topic, yet of those works that actually proved to be knowledgeable on the subject, I found to be few and far between, with those that did prove to be useful tending to follow the auspices of Intelligent Design moreso than of combining the actual institutions without changing one or the other to fit their personal interpretations. This made me realize that I had a lot of work ahead of me, as I would have to retranslate the passages of scripture in question and compare them with established scientific doctrine seeking corresponding points of reference. As you read my translations concerning these Old Testament stories, you will see that I have managed to do just that, or have at least gotten pretty close. (I think so, anyway; you’ll have to read my conclusions and decide for yourself if I really accomplished this or not.)

In addition, while I am on the subject, something you will notice is that there are more entries based on the Old Testament, and from within the Old Testament itself, more entries based on the Book of Genesis than of any other book of the Bible. This is due to the fact that the Book of Genesis has more controversy concerning its content than any other book in the Old Testament, as well as the Bible as a whole. The Book of Genesis begins with recorded history, and as such, there are not many other written historical accounts to either verify or discount what is written there, and the only frame of reference in translating and interpreting it available during King James’ time were Jewish legends and fairy tales. Another point that most scholars, and people in general tend to forget and/or omit is that Genesis is focused on the people and nation of Israel’s history, so if you compare other ancient histories that are written about specific peoples and nations, you will notice similar discrepancies that the nay-saying scholars and other similar detractors claim to find in the Torah, and through association, the Bible in general, often trying to use these discrepancies to discredit the Bible.

As you read this work, you will see that most of the time I present the KJV before I present my own conclusions. This is to specifically encourage the reader to peruse and study it first, so as to not unduly influence or prejudice the reader. This is my way of seeking to remove as much politicalization within my own interpretations as I possibly can. Don’t get me wrong, I do know that it is next to impossible to remove all political references and factors from any literary work; (just look for political inferences within the text of Moby Dick; you’ll find more than a few, - and don‘t even get me started on such classical writers as Charles Dickens or William Shakespeare.) That is just human nature, but I am trying to remove as much of the politics as I possibly can on my part, while still getting the initial message across.

And concerning the actual translation, while I have used many different texts to accomplish my retranslations, the main volume of texts used to retranslate the Old Testament scriptures from the original Hebrew are the New Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance, and Webster’s New World Hebrew Dictionary. I also used the King James Version, the New International Version, the Living Bible, the Revised Standard Edition, the Jerusalem Bible, and the Dead Sea Scrolls Bible as references for comparison. I attempted to follow each retranslation with a short interpretation when applicable, all the while trying to avoid the politicalization that has become tantamount and indistinguishable from within most translations of the Old Testament.

Then, with the New Testament texts that I retranslated from the original Greek, I used the New Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance, and the Webster’s New World Greek Dictionary. Here, I used the King James Version, the New International Version, the Living Bible, the Revised Standard Edition, and The New Greek-English Interlinear New Testament, as references for comparison, again following each passage with a short interpretation, trying to be as politic-free as possible here, also. I will be the first to admit that I might have made a few mistakes, but all in all, I feel, (and hope,) that I have gotten most of it as correct as is possible for me.

Within the text, you will notice that I capitalize all references to the name of the Lord, even the pronouns, with the exception of the parts of this book where I am referencing an actual text from a specific version or translation of the Bible. Similarly, you will also notice that I wrote all of Jesus’ words in red, as most of the KJV Bibles, (as well as several of the other translations,) have done. The color red was chosen because the color of blood is red, and thus making His words representative of His blood shed on our behalf on the cross at Calvary. I think that most people have figured that one out already before reading this, but I thought that I would point it out anyway, for the benefit of those few who don‘t know. This is done out of respect for the Lord, and for Jesus, and the sacrifice He made for us on the cross, as I do consider myself a Christian, (although after you finish reading some of these entries, one might come to doubt it; all I ask is that you reserve condemning me to Hades until after you have read the whole book.)

I actually started with more topics from the Bible than made it in this book. My standard for entries began with looking through the Bible for stories that had some vagueness, controversy, or discrepancy in their telling. I then researched the particular story in question, first with "The New Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance, then applying to it the appropriate Webster‘s New World Dictionary," following-up with the various applicable texts to attain the closest correct translation as possible. During this research, I would look for discrepancies to appear with the translation, then after addressing these discrepancies, I would look to see if a translation appeared that was different from the one in any of the four most current and popular translations. And if different, then I checked to see if it made historical sense as well, and lastly, if the four previously stated criteria were met, (Concordance, Lexicon, Discrepancies, Historical Sense,) the length of the entry needed to properly retranslate and interpret the passages in question became the deciding factor. (The finished entry had to be between at the least a half a page, and at the most, around fifty pages.) One thing I did discover was that James Strong, writer of the original Strong’s Concordance in the 1800’s, probably knew that the KJV had been mistranslated in certain areas as well, as he strove to provide as many alternate definitions as possible, most matching the era-specific vernacular of the Ancient Hebrew language, but due to the political climes of the time, he was also smart enough to not disagree with the accepted KJV of the Bible.

Due to this criteria I set for myself, a lot of topics that I personally would have enjoyed putting in this work didn’t make the cut, and similarly, a lot of topics that I wouldn’t really have cared to place in here made the cut. This actually led to me going through the Bible in more detail looking for places where a valid entry, according to my criteria, might pop up. A lot of the stories that I had wished to address ended up being too all encompassing to place in this book, as they each one could have had a whole book written about them, (such as the Deluge, Sodom, and Exodus both individually and as a whole,) although I did take some of the elements of the stories that had the most discrepancies and addressed them here, such as "The Loading of the Ark, The Nakedness of Noah, Jethro, High Priest of Midian, and The Ten Commandments. (And I will also add that The Lord’s Reply to Job" almost ended up in this category of being too long, as well, but ended up squeaking by.)

Another thing that I have found is that most inconsistencies within the Bible are human in origin, through either mistranslation or misinterpretation, and can be traced to a particular era in humanity’s development and evolution as both a society and civilization by examining the precise political bias attached to each individual incongruency inherent in a specific passage of scripture. The only unadulterated copies of the scriptures as they were presented to humanity, in the manner they are meant to be read, that are available to mankind can only be found within the Hebrew Torah.

And concerning this aspect of translation, most people tend to forget that there are two phases in translating a manuscript from one language into another. The first part is the actual translation, letter for letter, word for word, and the second part is the interpretation of the translated words, letters, and phases, usually using a set of rules governing sentence structure. One of the most common mistakes made in interpretation is when the translator applies the rules provided for speaking his native tongue to both languages, instead of using the rules provided for the foreign tongue on the document first, then interpreting the translated document by using the rules set for the translator’s native tongue, second.

When I first envisioned this literary work, it mainly consisted of reinterpreting the Ten Commandments, the Lord’s reply to Job, and the Creation story, with the intention of adding a few more entries following the same criteria used as was used with these three. But, after personally re-reading the Bible with the major focus being on the Torah and Tanakh, as well as using the Talmud as a source of reference to find stories with similar mistranslations and misinterpretations as the first three listed in this paragraph, I also began to discover quite a few passages and scriptures that actually met the criteria used to determine relativity for usage within this particular transcript. Some are short, being a page or two in length in summarization, as the entry The Red Sea does, while others are incredibly long, with The Lord’s Reply to Job, and Mary Magdalene, coming to mind. However, most fall somewhere in the middle, running between four and five pages, such as The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse and The Nakedness of Noah, with a few that run even longer, like Jethro, High Priest of Midian, which is around twelve pages long.

A major problem that I noticed while writing this manuscript is that it had been very easy to become preachy concerning certain scriptures I felt passionately about. This work is not designed to be a sermon. It is supposed to present an alternate view to those passages of scripture where an alternate view can be presented, and in doing so allow the reader to grasp a greater understanding of what is written in the Bible, getting away from the Western body politic that has become part and parcel in much of it. As much as we would like to deny the fact, the Bible has become a vehicle for political change throughout the ages, being used for various political agendas through the years. For after close scrutiny of the publication dates in correlation with the actual translation and interpretation on these various versions, (from the KJV, the NIV, to the Living Bible, to name a few,) it can be seen that the various translations tend to reflect the views and political values of the era it is translated in.

However, if the reader wants to hear a sermon, they can instead go to their personal favorite denominational church and get it from their pastor, who, as their pastor, will know what they want to hear concerning the spiritual aspects of the scriptures. Similarly, if the reader wishes to read a political manifesto, he or she can go to their favorite congressional representative’s local office and pick up a printed flier or pamphlet on the subject. There are literally thousands of assorted types of books, pamphlets, sundries, and other reading material out there on the topics of religion and politics, and the last thing that anyone really wants, or needs, to read is another such piece of propaganda fluff.

So, in my approach to the subject matter, I have thus tried to follow the age-old axiom about what not to discuss at family reunions, taverns, and other public gatherings in addressing the entries that have made the final cut for this book. Which is, basically, do not pursue or debate the topics of religion and politics when trying to have a friendly discussion. And yes, I know that with the particular subject matter chosen for this work, there is a very, very fine line between the subjectivity of political and religious preference, and the objectivity of presenting the issue written in the context of a historical document without straying into a tangent concerning my personal feelings and opinions on the various entries.

And I know there will be some out there that believe that I am manipulating the Bible as much as, if not more than, those whom I am claiming to desire to correct, instead presenting my version in place of someone else’s, what I claim to be against. As all translations of any document will retain a degree of subjectivity in the translation, there really is no way to defend against such claims except to state, I have tried to keep my intentions as noble as possible. And yes, I do know that any retranslation will have mistakes and errors, and all I can do is present my opinion and interpretation on the issue and allow the reader to make their own choice as to what to believe and not to believe.

You will notice that a few times throughout this work and in the Appendix, I mention the Bible Codes, (the theory that the history of mankind is encoded within the Torah using Equidistant Letter Sequencing, or ELS.) It is my belief the that Torah is incredibly multi-dimensional, being worded in a manner that allows for, and consists of multiple translation variations in tandem with both equidistant letter sequencing and equidistant word and phrase sequencing. This is a very controversial issue within the Biblical scholar and academic community, with opponents on both sides of the controversy so convinced that they are correct, that it has gotten to the point of slandering those who either do, or do not, believe in the so-called Bible Codes. This is despite the mathematical improbability of so much information being encoded in such a small area possibly being random, and having personally experimented with the process, (which in turn validated for myself much of the information presented for publication by the scientists involved,) I could only conclude that there probably is something to it. While I personally support and approve of the theory due to its mathematical accuracy, I will allow the reader to make up their own mind concerning the theory with the information and references supplied pertaining to it in the Appendix and Bibliography. The codes and their dates of presentation with the identification of those involved concerning the assassination of Israeli P.M. Yitzhak Rabin was the convincing piece of evidence that sold me on the actual validity of the Bible Codes.

Another controversial topic you will see reference to in this work is the Kabala. When most people think of the Kabala, they either think of New Agers sitting around in a chalk circle chanting Occult phrases, trying to summon this demon or that, or Madonna and other Hollywood pretty people brandishing its symbolism in an attempt to show the world they too are spiritual. However, that is not what the Kabala is about, or originates from. The Kabala, in reality is based on the Temple rituals practiced by the High Priests, with nothing Occult about it. It only became affiliated with the Occult during the Reformation and Renaissance as such things slowly filtered into Western Europe after the Crusades. It was banished to the realm of the Occult by a paranoid Catholic church that realized, due to the Kabala’s affiliation to the original Temple worship of the Lord combined with the burgeoning new Middle Class’ curiosity attained from having a copy of the scriptures they too can now read, that it had the potential to supplant the current incarnation of the church as it existed. (How paranoid? Look at what happened to the Templar Knights. No matter what the conspiracy buffs claim, it was their association with the Kabala that brought about their downfall. The last straw dropped when the Templars began practicing and charging usury, a custom practiced within the Ancient Jewish Synagogs, operated out of the Temple in Jerusalem by the High Priesthood.)

Yes, there will still be those hardliners out there on both sides who will refuse to believe that the scientific and theological communities can both be correct in their assessments on the creation of the universe. Just as I am sure there will be people who read this book that believe I am incorrect in my assessments of the scriptures in relation to the scientific data I used to draw my conclusions. I can even see myself thrown into a category with certain authors like Erich Von Daniken, ("Chariots of the Gods?,) and Immanuel Velikovsky, (Worlds in Collision,") who were considered crackpots at the time they wrote their manuscripts. Nevertheless, they were later proven out to be reputable authors and correct in at least some of their findings and conclusions, (although there are still those who refuse to acknowledge them or their contributions to the field of study surrounding the early history of mankind.)

That is the good thing about being human and having the ability to reason; we can make our own choices concerning things to form our own opinions. And if there further questions concerning the information presented here, please feel free to check references within the bibliography, as I encourage those interested and curious to check the various sources, for many of them go much further in depth on one or two singular subjects than was done here. I also encourage questioning what I have written here, because I am all about the increase in knowledge, and haven’t forgot that all new hypotheses and theories begin with that first question asked. Finally, please bear in mind that just because I believe the conclusions I arrived at, I do not ask nor require anyone else to believe them. Just try to keep an open mind and approach what I have written without letting current politics and/or newly redefined social taboos influence your assessment of the data presented.

Part I:

In The Beginning…

[Exploring the pre-Diluvian origins of mankind.]

The Creation Story

[Genesis chapter 1: 1 - 31]

The Creation Story has been considered one of the most controversial elements of the Bible since Darwin published On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection in 1859. Almost immediately, a line was drawn in the sand with the scientific community on one side, and the theological community on the other, with both sides refusing to budge an inch. It was the creationists who, in their phobia of everything that did not agree with how they had translated the Holy Word, first passed laws preventing evolution, and anything remotely pertaining to it, from being taught in schools. This led to return fire by the evolutionist community to attempt to overcome these irrational fears by challenging these laws in court.

The most renowned is the Scopes Monkey Trial, (made famous by the movie, Inherit the Wind,) where the evolutionists actually lost the court case, but succeeded in bringing the argument to the public forum for more debate. This led to less famous cases, such as Epperson vs. Arkansas, where the United States Supreme Court invalidated a statute that prohibited the teaching of evolution in the classroom, a victory for the evolutionists, and Reynolds vs. United States, which stated that the government cannot interfere with religious beliefs, but can interfere with certain practices, (the original case was over polygamy, with the conviction upheld, but the opinions were generalized to include human sacrifice, drug use, etc.,) a case in which both sides claimed victory.

Cases such as these led to the clarifications of the Establishment Clause and Free Exercise Clause, both pertaining to the first amendment. The Establishment Clause states, Congress shall make no laws respecting religion, and refers to the first several pronouncements of the First Amendment in the Bill of Rights. The Free Exercise Clause is a continuation of the Establishment Clause and continues to state, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. So the two together state, Congress shall make no laws respecting religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.

In the years following the social change of the 60’s, these two clauses in the Bill of Rights were used to validate evolution as the sole, primary creation myth taught in the classroom. This remained the policy by consensus until recent years, when the concept of intelligent design, emerged, that in and of itself has become almost a new pop culture phenomenon, (for lack of a better descriptor concerning its place in today’s societal norms,) supported by the vast group of people who wish to believe in both evolution and the Bible. (My use of the word myth is not meant to be taken in the most popular context, that is to say, to mean a fallacy, but instead in the anthropological context as of being an anecdotal term pertaining to a specific religious belief system.)

However, the concept of intelligent design, (while I appreciate what its progenitors are attempting to accomplish, - the merging of evolution and creationism,) is somewhat lacking in its interpretation of what I believe is being told to us in the first chapter of Genesis. For starters, to follow the precepts of intelligent design, one must first admit that at least some parts of the Torah isn’t true, as well as having had several authors, instead of one, (both of which are something that my personal belief system will not allow me to do.) Nevertheless, similarly I also cannot ignore the overwhelming evidentiary database supporting evolution, either. Therefore, the only conclusion that I can come up with is that they are both correct.

Therefore, what I am attempting to do here is to present the Creation Story in such a method, by first using alternate definitions and applying them in context with the varying possible applications of the syntax from the original Hebrew. Then second, by using these alternate definitions with alternate interpretations of the various metaphoric analogies present, to form an interpretation that represents both sides of the debate as the truth.

King James Version:

Chapter 1:

1) In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

2) And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

3) And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.

4) And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.

5) And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

6) And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.

7) And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.

8) And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.

9) And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so.

10) And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called the Seas: and God saw that it was good.

11) And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind: whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.

12) And the earth brought forth grass, and the herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

13) And the evening and the morning were the third day.

14) And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for the seasons, and for days, and years:

15) And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so.

16) And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.

17) And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth,

18) And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from