One Type of Demon

Dr. Bob, I have been thinking about your comments and I am beginning to wonder if the issue you are finding with word usage isn't a small example of a larger problem? Let me explain.

I used to use the KJV exclusively. While using the KJV (and KJVO resources like Ruckman's commentaries, etc.), I often noticed that entire doctrines were built upon specific words used in the KJV. Your example of the word "satyr" is a prime example. By using this verse to describe demons, we conjure up a picture in our minds of what we think a demon looks like. But, as you stated, the word "satyr" is not used in modern translations. While looking up the word translated "satyr", it is found that it is a goat. Which is more accurate? I don't know, but it does seem to me that the KJV translators took a liberty here with that word.

Given all of this, and maybe this is a topic for another message thread, do we have different faiths/beliefs/doctrines/theology being taught between the KJV and the modern translations? I know that the KJVO crowd would say a definite yes. I am almost inclined to say yes as well, but not because I believe the KJV is perfect, but rather because I think we have attached meanings to the old english that aren't necessarily what the translators had in mind or the meanings have radically changed to the point of saying something completely different. I will attempt to come up with some other examples, but I thought I would throw this out to see if my "hypothesis" holds any merit or am I all wet?

[ May 20, 2003, 11:24 AM: Message edited by: mesly ]

 

Here is what John Gill says on this verse..I found it interesting..maybe you will too:

 

Kman,

The quote from Gill is very interesting. So, do you think that the literal translation of the word (hairy-male-goat) is somewhat incorrect given the context of the text? Or is the word demon/satyr a more literal translation?

 

Well...not knowing Hebrew..nor Hebrew literature (ie. how the word was commonly used) I would defer to Gill..who studied that sort of thing intensely.

If the meaning "hairy goats" is so obvious..why did the translators of the Septuagint (circa 300BC) use "demons"? What were they thinking?
Do we know more about Hebrew and it's usage than they did?

Perhaps they just mistranslated and that view has been propagated down through the ages...or maybe they knew something that isn't as clear to us today.

-kman

 

did these "angles" have white complexion?

"Angles?" he exclaimed. "Say rather they are angels!"

http://users.aol.com/butrousch/augustine/angels.htm