|
|
|
|
Words
are useless and,in many cases, deceiving when they are
mis-defined. Sometimes, mis-definitions are purposeful - to
"prove" points, positions and, what could otherwise, only be
theories while devoid of convincement by way of Scriptural
"evidence".
Purposeful redefinitions (DIS-defining) of words
are rare. Deceivers are NOT the majority of the problem. The main
difficulty comes from well-meaning, well-intentioned followers,
repeating and accepting these and other definitions and
interpretations without their own study and investigation.
An
Example
A rather benign, but good example of "Back Words" is the
word "let" found in the Scripture in 2 Thessalonians 2:7, "For
the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth
will let, until he be taken out of the way."
In our modern
vernacular the word "let" means "to allow", however, in the time the
bible was written it meant just the opposite - to hold back, to NOT
allow. The characteristic of "he" descibed in this Scripture,
is actually the OPPOSITE of what many read. "He" does not
allow, but hinders iniquity. So, who is "HE"
anyway?
There are many such words in the
King James Bible, even more in the ancient manuscripts.
Interpretations, definitions and, ultimately, translations are
complicated by this phenomenon.
Mostly, we need to
careful when reading any "accepted" definition into any sacred
document - especially those that "prove"
doctrine.
|
|
| |
 Some red ink to consider:
"... the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit,
and they are
life."
John 6:63
"Are you
ready to know the
truth?"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
