Unfortunately, there are many instances of well-meaning, intelligent people misinterpreting the Bible. Sometimes, they did it intentionally to teach a lesson, and sometimes, they got it wrong. I will give two examples of each.
Intentional mistranslations
An example of the first kind is that the Hebrew word nefesh in the Torah means a person. Later, post-biblical Hebrew also defined the word “soul,” but this is not the meaning in the Torah. Nefesh occurs 754 times in the Torah. The first four times it describes animals: Genesis 1:20 sea life, Genesis 1:21 great sea life, Genesis 1:24 land creatures, Genesis 1:30 birds and land creatures. Later, Genesis 2:7 describes people. The biblical term always denotes physical life, as in Genesis 2:7 when it states, “The Lord God formed man from the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living nefesh,” meaning a living being. The word never implies a soul, a concept not mentioned in the Torah.
Some rabbis, knowing this, nevertheless interpret some verses containing nefesh as soul in sermons to teach people how to behave. They should train themselves not even to think evil thoughts about other people.
Another example is the word ger. In the Torah, the term means “stranger,” a non-Israelite. It appears 36 times, to emphasize its importance, where it tells us to treat non-Jews, who are also like us, children of God, as we want them to treat us. The decree is articulated in many ways: “You shall not wrong nor oppress the stranger, remember you were strangers in the Land of Egypt” (Exodus 22:20). “The strangers who reside with you shall be to you as your citizens” (Leviticus19:34). Also, Deuteronomy 10:19, 23:8, and dozens more.
However, when Jews began to convert non-Jews to Judaism, and our ancestors feared that Jews who were born Jewish might not treat new Jews as fellow Jews, they used the term ger to refer to a proselyte and said that the Torah tells us 36 times to love the proselyte.
There is no mention of a need for conversion or even any ceremony in the Torah for non-Jews to join the Jewish people. Jews began accepting converts to Judaism only around the 2nd century BCE, when the Hasmonean leaders converted some conquered people. The apocryphal book Judith, written around that time, portrays a non-Jew becoming circumcised to be Jewish.
Possible misunderstandings
The following are two examples where the translator may have misunderstood the Bible.
Rashi, Maimonides, and I interpret the Torah introduction differently from how most commentators translate it. The often-appearing translation from the Hebrew is two sentences: “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was unformed, and the spirit of God hovered over the water.”
The three of us and others see the introduction as a single sentence: “When God began to create the heaven and the earth, the earth was unformed, and God’s spirit hovered over the water.”
Maimonides notes that it is possible to read this first verse as Aristotle does. Before God began to create, matter existed, and although God made new things, He formed them from preexisting matter. I agree with Maimonides that this possibility exists, but I translate the final clause differently.
The Hebrew is ruach Elohim, which is generally translated as the spirit of God (hovered over the water), which makes no sense to me. I recognized that ancient Israelites and non-Israelites used el to mean “powerful” and applied it to designate their god. I think the plural form Elohim was used by Jews to denote the Jewish concept of God because, as the plural suggests, the Jewish idea of God is that He is more potent than the idols. I also noticed that Elohim is used in the Torah to indicate God and powerful human figures such as judges and brilliant people, as in Genesis 6:2, Exodus 21:6, 22:8-9, I Samuel 2:25, Psalm 82:6, and elsewhere. Therefore, I translate the final clause in the first sentence as, “and a mighty wind blew over water.”
When I graduated with a Ph.D. from Saint Mary’s Seminary and University, I already had at least some familiarity with six languages. I had also spent two years in high school learning Latin, so I decided to take a course in Greek at the University. During the first day of the class, which taught Greek using the New Testament book John, I noticed a massive mistake in the translation in the first sentence.
The first sentence in John in Greek is “Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος, καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν, καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος.” In English, this translates to “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” The term translated Word is λόγος, “logus” in English letters.
John was composed between 95 and 110 CE, when many early Christians still held on to some Jewish ideas. The translation to English was done later.
I knew Hebrew and Aramaic then and was writing my major works on the Onkelos Aramaic translation of the Hebrew Bible. I explained in my writing that the Aramaic translator did not like to portray God like a human and avoided doing this by using the Aramaic word memra, which means both “word” and “wisdom.” I also knew a few words in Greek before I started this course, and knew that the Greek “logus” was just like memra, and had this dual meaning.
The translator of John made two mistakes.
First, the Hebrew Bible does not say that the beginning of creation was a single word. The rabbis point out that God created or formed the world with ten statements. A simple reading of Genesis 1 reveals this.
Second, not only does “logus” mean word, but also wisdom. Many Jewish sources indicate that God created or formed the world with wisdom, and the author of John may have been reflecting their ancient idea, which his translator did not realize.
The Aramaic translation of Genesis 1:1, Targum Neophyti, is a paraphrased version of the Hebrew Bible in Aramaic. It translates Genesis 1:1 as: “From the beginning with wisdom, the memra (word and wisdom) of the Lord created and made the heavens and the earth.”
Proverbs 8:22-31 also portrays God creating or forming the world with wisdom. Wisdom is personified, existing before creation and participating in making the heavens and earth. This idea is also in other wisdom literature, such as Psalm 104:24 and the Wisdom of Solomon.
Thus, we may have two mistranslations of the Bible — one Jewish and one non-Jewish — and there are many more.
We must pay close attention to what we read and be prepared to question what seems wrong. This is how we improve ourselves and help others.

Dear Israel,
Of all existance.
Of all matter or material things
How did they come into being if God the almighty did not create them?
How did they formulated?
We do not know.
Dear Israel,
Are words divine?
No.
But don’t they create civilization?
Isn’t the Torah made of words?
Aren’t all books made of words which are necessary for a civilization to thrive?
Excellent questions.
Was the Bible translated correctly? Unfortunately, not always. In many cases, words are mistranslated, sometimes intentionally. This is problematic for people who believe that the Bible or Koran is divine revelation. The idea or belief of a word of God existing in print, or in writing, or in speech, is inconsistent since, due to the differences in human languages, errors in translations, etc., God would not communicate through human language. The errors in translations, the mistakes of copyists and printers, are of themselves evidences that human language, whether in speech or in print, cannot be the vehicle of revelation.—The Word of God exists in something else.
Yes, there are many mistranslations, for many reasons. The best approach is to learn Hebrew and read the original.
. I also noticed that Elohim is used in the Torah to indicate God and powerful human figures such as judges and brilliant people.
Why is this true?
Shouldn’t God be seperated from his Creation?
Is God not bound to material matter?
El originally did not mean god. It meant powerful. The ancients used it to describe god.
Excelente artigo, parabéns pelo excelente trabalho esclarecedor.
Thank you Yisrael.
Adriaan Koerbagh, a friend of Spinoza, also interpreted the Bile like you, Maimonides, and Rashi. Koerbagh wrote that “Elohim means powerful ones, in the singular ael, powerful, strong,” “elohim is also used for rulers…” Like you, he translates “and the spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters” as: “and the powerful or strong wind moved on the surface of the waters”. He notes that Rouach means wind or blowing and comes from the root word rouah, which means ‘has breathed’; and breathing occurs by inhaling and exhaling of air, and the wind is nothing but a motion of the air. Besides, how could God or a spirit move upon the waters?
Additionally, Koerbagh rejected the notion that creation comes from nothing. At the beginning of Scripture, one reads bereschit bara & elohim & haschamaim ve & haarets, to which Koerbagh correctly translates to mean: “In the main the powerful have made or shaped those yonder waters, or fire waters, and the earth.” Therefore, Genesis does not refer to a beginning, or time, but to the main. Bara means has made, modifed, or shaped.
It is interesting that I was not the only person to think this.
I agree with you that there are many errors in translations. Since you know several languages, you know that it is impossible to translate from one language into another without losing a great part of the original. Most people mistakenly think that what they are reading in the Bible is the very words of God. They forget that the Bible was not written at first in English, but in Hebrew, Greek, and Latin; and that it has been translated out of these languages into English. If people what to know what the Bible is really teaching, they should read it in its original launage, as you have done. I am impressed by your findings. You found a mistake in the English translation of the Gosple. You correctly pointed out that the word “logus” is like memra and has a dual meaning of word or wisdom. In Greek philosophy logus often means a universal, divine reason. Philo used “logus” to mean an “idea of ideas” or an “archetypal idea.” Even Augustine said that the Greek word “logus” signifies both word and reason. Thus, I agree that reason is the better word to translate “word,” and John 1 can be translated to mean that God and reason are identical, or that God and reason has eternally co-existed (ie “the Word was with God, and the Word was God”).
We agree, my friend Turk.
Do you believe there is a “soul” within human beings?
I am not certain, but I doubt that such a thing as the soul exists. I once said this to a fellow rabbi who screamed at me.
What did the rabbi say? I understand that Psyche in Greek means mind. Today, psyche has been translated into soul. The soul is our intelligence, our ability to think. Thus, the soul exists. Everybody has a mind. And since nothing disappears from the earth, the mind survives.
The rabbi who was also a lawyer did not think well. He said the soul and mind are the same thing. Obviously, they are different things.
I think the soul and mind (psyche) are the same thing only if we use the term “soul” to describe the mind. But when pople begin to speak about the soul an an unproven separate item from body, then they are not the same thing. Do you agree?
The soul by definiton is an entity that is separate than the body. The mind is part of the body. People who say the soul is the mind are trying to persuade themselves that the soul exists.
You are correct. I am trying to say that the word psyche was translated into soul in English. You said that your skeptical about the soul, but if I said are you skeptical about having a psyche, you would probably say no because most people associate the word psyche with the mind but the soul is something religious and weird and but actually it’s the same thing.
Additionally, Arsitotle explained that the soul comprises five parts, the last being thinking. Since they are alive, plants and animals also have souls, but not all five parts. Aristotle said that the “mind” or “intellect,” the last part of the soul, is what surives the dissolution of the body. Thus, everyone has a soul in the sense that all human beings have a mind.
I think we are in agreement.
I must say that I find your observation, dear Rabbi Israel Drazin, regarding the possibility of reading the first verse in an Aristotelian sense to be quite intriguing. The notion that matter may have existed prior to God’s creative act, and that He formed new things from preexisting material, is a concept that resonates with my own philosophical inclinations.
Now, regarding the final clause of the sentence, I must commend you on your meticulous analysis of the Hebrew term “ruach Elohim.” Your suggestion that “Elohim” may be intended to convey the idea of “mighty” or “powerful” rather than simply “God” is a compelling one. The fact that the Torah employs the term “Elohim” to describe not only God but also human figures of authority and wisdom lends credibility to your interpretation.
As a scientist and philosopher, I have always been drawn to the pursuit of clarity and precision in language. And so, I find your translation of the final clause as “and a mighty wind blew over water” to be a more plausible and poetic rendering of the original Hebrew. The image of a mighty wind sweeping over the primordial waters is a powerful and evocative one, which resonates with the biblical account of creation. Best :stephen
Wow! Such a strong compliment coming from a wise man like you really made me feel good.
Thank you, Stephen.
Israel