09-02-2004, 01:18 PM
Then let the Holy Spirit speak, Akhi Dave. Ask Him to reveal the manner by which the mistranslation occured. Show the Hebrew word "by" and demonstrate how the Aramaic and Greek translators mistook it for an "and".
The Hebrew for "by" is a Beth proclitic - looks like this: b whereas the Hebrew for "and" is a Waw proclitic - looks like this w (these two are the same thing in Aramaic, by the way.)
You could, for instance, propose that the Waw may have had a ink smudge mark on the bottom, which would have made it look almost like the Beth proclitic.
Conversely, you could propose that the ink on the Beth proclitic was worn on the bottom and faded, thereby making it look like a Waw proclitic and became mistranslated.
Now you've proposed the how and it would be up to the reader to decide whether your evidence is plausible.
The Hebrew for "by" is a Beth proclitic - looks like this: b whereas the Hebrew for "and" is a Waw proclitic - looks like this w (these two are the same thing in Aramaic, by the way.)
You could, for instance, propose that the Waw may have had a ink smudge mark on the bottom, which would have made it look almost like the Beth proclitic.
Conversely, you could propose that the ink on the Beth proclitic was worn on the bottom and faded, thereby making it look like a Waw proclitic and became mistranslated.
Now you've proposed the how and it would be up to the reader to decide whether your evidence is plausible.
+Shamasha Paul bar-Shimun de'Beth-Younan

