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.
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