I very much doubt ancient hebrew had thousands of words to describe specific ailments the way we do now. It's not therefore an issue of lying, or contradicting the actual content of the hebrew script, but choosing another option for translation of the word.
The internet, more specifically some paper by an oncologist I found, says: It appears that the translators used the English word “leprosy” which originates from the Latin word lepros, meaning defilement, to replace the Hebrew word “tsara`ath.” Tsara’ath is defined as a malignant skin disease or may literally be translated as a "surface infection" and can be a skin infection that appears as welts on a person’s body. The word tsara`ath is also used in the bible to describe mildew or mold in a house or on the clothes of a person.
I wouldn't try very hard to make much sense out of it.
People want to believe in the literal truth of it so badly that they'll re-interpret it in any way necessary to square that circle. However, science and society are changing so rapidly now that it can't hope to catch up no matter how dramatically it is re-interpreted.
It'd be lot easier if everyone would just accept it as a collection of parables and allegories and not try to pretend that it was literal. That's a course that's only going to get harder and more frustrating and disappointing over the years.
Comments 2
The internet, more specifically some paper by an oncologist I found, says:
It appears that the translators used the English word “leprosy” which originates from the Latin word lepros, meaning defilement, to replace the Hebrew word “tsara`ath.” Tsara’ath is defined as a malignant skin disease or may literally be translated as a "surface infection" and can be a skin infection that appears as welts on a person’s body. The word tsara`ath is also used in the bible to describe mildew or mold in a house or on the clothes of a person.
Reply
People want to believe in the literal truth of it so badly that they'll re-interpret it in any way necessary to square that circle. However, science and society are changing so rapidly now that it can't hope to catch up no matter how dramatically it is re-interpreted.
It'd be lot easier if everyone would just accept it as a collection of parables and allegories and not try to pretend that it was literal. That's a course that's only going to get harder and more frustrating and disappointing over the years.
Reply
Leave a comment