• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

The time of Judeo-Christian writings

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
This is right.


This is wrong. If you want to write a woman from a place called עלם ('elam), you would write עלמית ('elamith)., not עלמי. Unless the woman is a man.

Also, this name is spelled עילם in Tanach. That would make it עילמית.


If you chance x to a and y to b and z to c, then you have the first three letters of the alphabet! This shows that the last three letters of the alphabet are really the first three letters, thus proving the cyclic nature of the ABC's.



Two verses earlier, Esther is identified as the daughter of Avichayil, a relative of Mordechai the Benjamite from the Judean Kingdom. A recurring theme throughout the book is that she doesn't want to say that she's really Jewish.

If you want to say she didn't really exist, that's cool. But you're basically lifting the name of someone out of a text and applying it to something completely unrelated.


'aminada? This is not good spelling of whatever it is you wanted to write.

I understand in general the problem of the reason why many if not most Jews reject the Old Testament as being Jewish scripture, therefore reject the designation of the Bible as Judeo - Christian.

I believe corrupted translation, ie 'young woman' versus virgin to justify prophesy, and corrupted interpretation as in using references in the OT, like the plural for God, to justify the Trinity are examples.

I would like to here from you more on why the Jews consider the Old Testament a corruption of Jewish scripture.

Jayhawker Soule designates his belief as Judaism, but presents mostly Christian apologist arguments. Are there actually many Jews that support considering the Old Testament as Jewish scripture?
 

Jayhawker Soule

-- untitled --
Premium Member
I believe they consider it a heretical interpretation. Actually I will refer to Timah and other Jews more knowledgeable about these problems than I.
You spoke of selective translations. The problem here is that you simply don't know what you're talking about and when called upon to provide evidence you have little to offer other than limp, ignorant ad hominem such as ...
I notice you designate your belief as Judaism, but you your consistent responses in the threads over time more resemble a Christian apologist perspective, possibly a Jew for Jesus Christ perspective.
Quote a single instance of Christian apologetics.
 

Jayhawker Soule

-- untitled --
Premium Member
I understand in general the problem of the reason why many if not most Jews reject the Old Testament as being Jewish scripture, therefore reject the designation of the Bible as Judeo - Christian.
Was that intended to be a coherent sentence?

I believe corrupted translation, ie 'young woman' versus virgin to justify prophesy, and corrupted interpretation as in using references in the OT, like the plural for God, to justify the Trinity are examples.
I have written at length about almah and the problems of the standard Christian rendering of Isaiah 7:14.


Jayhawker Soule designates his belief as Judaism, but presents mostly Christian apologist arguments. Are there actually many Jews that support considering the Old Testament as Jewish scripture?
You are being dishonest. At issue is not whether "many Jews ... support considering the Old Testament as Jewish scripture," but, rather, whether it is sensible to claim ...

The Old and New Testaments are christian works, neither have anything to do with Judaism.

The Christian "Old Testament" is an honest (and, in fact, elegant) translation of the Septuagint, and where egregious differences have come to light, a few of the newer versions have sought to acknowledge and correct them. See, for example, the rendering of almah in Isaiah 7:14 in ...


As for interpretation, that Christian apologists would engage in Christian eisegesis should surprise no one.

By the way, *two of the four excellent modern translations of the Torah are by Robert Alter and Richard Elliott Friedman. Each has indicated a preference for the KJV (second only to their own).

* the other two being Everett Fox and the NJPS under the guidance of Nahum Sarna.
 
Last edited:

Tumah

Veteran Member
I found -עַלְמָה- in Ezra 4:9 in Aramaic, only in Aramaic , but i believe Imperial Aramaic was the original language of most of the Old Testament.
עלמה as a young woman can be found in Pro. 30:19. Ezra 4:9 speaks about the Elamites, עלמיא.

In Est 2:7 Esther is named 'Hadassah' , that is 'Atossa' ( daughter of King Cyrus ) (Wife of Darius I)
Hutaosā - Hadassah ( the only person with that name i could find in that Period)
Hadas is myrtle. Hadassah is the feminized version of that word. A common way of creating names in Tanach.

Queen Vashti, the Septuagint calls her 'Astin' , the suffix of Artastūnā (Artystone) (Wife of Darius I
So Vashti (that's a vav, which is assumed to have been pronounced as a w, so Washti) must be Artastuna, because some writers during the 1st century called her by a name that sounds similar to Darius I's wife name?[/quote]

Why would a Zoroastrian marry a Jew or the other way around?
In the Jewish text, he don't know she's Jewish and she wasn't given a choice when they hauled her off.
 

Tumah

Veteran Member
I understand in general the problem of the reason why many if not most Jews reject the Old Testament as being Jewish scripture, therefore reject the designation of the Bible as Judeo - Christian.

I believe corrupted translation, ie 'young woman' versus virgin to justify prophesy, and corrupted interpretation as in using references in the OT, like the plural for God, to justify the Trinity are examples.

I would like to here from you more on why the Jews consider the Old Testament a corruption of Jewish scripture.

Jayhawker Soule designates his belief as Judaism, but presents mostly Christian apologist arguments. Are there actually many Jews that support considering the Old Testament as Jewish scripture?
I don't understand what you're saying. The "Old Testament" is what Jews call the Tanach albeit in a slightly different order. The Tanach is Jewish Scriptures.

Are you talking about Christian translations of the Tanach? In that case, yeah I'd agree with him. Christian translations tends to capitalize words that don't bear capitalization or otherwise use translations to indicate Jesus in a text where he is not indicated.
 

Magus

Active Member
עלמה as a young woman can be found in Pro. 30:19. Ezra 4:9 speaks about the Elamites, עלמיא.


Hadas is myrtle. Hadassah is the feminized version of that word. A common way of creating names in Tanach.


So Vashti (that's a vav, which is assumed to have been pronounced as a w, so Washti) must be Artastuna, because some writers during the 1st century called her by a name that sounds similar to Darius I's wife name?




The Book of Esther isn't even found in the Dead Sea Scrolls, thus the Greek version of Esther is older, comparing the Greek and Hebrew.

Esther 2:7
And he brought up Hadassah, that is, Esther, his uncle's (דּוֹד = David) daughter

The father of Esther in the Masoretic is 'אֲבִיהַיִל' and if you look at other uses of this name, for example 2 Ch 11:17 ( Abihail, wife of Rehoboam, daughter of Eliab, son of Jesse ) and 1 Ch 2:29 (Wife of Abishur was Abihail )

This suggests 'Abihail' is feminine, thus most likely Esther's mother, her father must be Aminadab.

The Septuagint version of Esther, he father is 'Amminadab' (עַמִּינָדָב)

According to Esther 2:6, 'Mordecai' was carried away with Jeconiah into the captivity of Nebuchadnezzar II .

Jeconiah - 615 BCE - 598 BCE
Nebuchadnezzer II ruled between 605 BCE - 562 BCE
Cyrus - 559 BCE to 530 BCE
Darius I - 522 BCE to 486 BCE
Xerxes I - 486 - 465 BCE
Artaxerxes 1 - 465 - 424 BCE

Esther 1:1
Now it came to pass in the days of Ahasuerus ( Masoretic)
In the second year of the reign of Artaxerxes the great king (Septuagint)

Bad chronology ?
 

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
I don't understand what you're saying. The "Old Testament" is what Jews call the Tanach albeit in a slightly different order. The Tanach is Jewish Scriptures.

Are you talking about Christian translations of the Tanach? In that case, yeah I'd agree with him. Christian translations tends to capitalize words that don't bear capitalization or otherwise use translations to indicate Jesus in a text where he is not indicated.

Thank your for the clarification.
 

Tumah

Veteran Member
The Book of Esther isn't even found in the Dead Sea Scrolls, thus the Greek version of Esther is older, comparing the Greek and Hebrew.
I don't know how to explain this to you, but the Dead Sea Scrolls only represent one community's cannon. Just because its not in the DSS, doesn't mean in didn't exist.

Also, what's the oldest existent copy of the LXX dated to?

Esther 2:7
And he brought up Hadassah, that is, Esther, his uncle's (דּוֹד = David) daughter
First of all, the text reads דד, not דוד. Its a cholam chaser.

Second of all:
ובהגיע תר אסתר בת אביחיל דד מרדכי

"and with the arrival of the turn of Esther the daughter of Avichayil, David Mordechai"

...is not a sentence.

And third of all, verse 7 confirms that דד should be understood as relative/uncle, because it says, "she is Esther, the daughter of דדו [his relative/uncle]."

The father of Esther in the Masoretic is 'אֲבִיהַיִל' and if you look at other uses of this name, for example 2 Ch 11:17 ( Abihail, wife of Rehoboam, daughter of Eliab, son of Jesse ) and 1 Ch 2:29 (Wife of Abishur was Abihail )
No its not. Its אביחיל. That's a ח (ḥ) not a ה (h).

This suggests 'Abihail' is feminine, thus most likely Esther's mother, her father must be Aminadab.

If it was feminine, the text should have used דדה and דדתו when referring to him.

And really. Earlier on, you claim the LXX is more authentic because it has the earliest version of Esther, but

The Septuagint version of Esther, he father is 'Amminadab' (עַמִּינָדָב)
Yes, it does say that there.

According to Esther 2:6, 'Mordecai' was carried away with Jeconiah into the captivity of Nebuchadnezzar II

Jeconiah - 615 BCE - 598 BCE
Nebuchadnezzer II ruled between 605 BCE - 562 BCE
Cyrus - 559 BCE to 530 BCE
Darius I - 522 BCE to 486 BCE
Xerxes I - 486 - 465 BCE
Artaxerxes 1 - 465 - 424 BCE

Esther 1:1
Now it came to pass in the days of Ahasuerus ( Masoretic)
In the second year of the reign of Artaxerxes the great king (Septuagint)

Bad chronology ?
The chronology is not what I call into question.
 

Magus

Active Member
The Septuagint was deriving from a source in which Amminadab was the father of Esther , Not sure why the Septuagint would make up a specific name like that.

Exodus 6:23
And Aaron took him Elisheba, daughter of Amminadab, sister of Naashon, to wife
2 Chronicles 11:18
And Abihail the daughter of Eliab the son of Jesse
2 Samuel 11:3
Bathsheba, the daughter of Eliam ( Eliab -Ελιαβ in Septuagnt )
1 Chronicles 3:5 (אֱלִיעָם = עַמִּיאֵל in reverse )
Bathshua the daughter of Ammiel ( ALI OM OM ALI
Numbers 1:9
Eliab the son of Helon (חֵלֹן from חַיִל , prefix of אֲבִיהַיִל)
Numbers 16:1
Dathan and Abiram, the sons of Eliab
1 Kings 16:34 ( these built Jericho )
Sagub and Abiram, the sons of Hiel (חִיאֵל) (lengthening of חַיִל)

'אֲבִיגַיִל' is a dialectic form of 'אֲבִיהַיִל'
- Abigail and Abihail

Abigail (previous wife of Nabal)
1 Chronicle 3:1 - Daniel , son of David, with second wife Abigail
2 Samuel 3:3 - Chileab, son of David, wife second wife Abigail

' Kil'ab ' (כִּלְאָב) KL AB in the septuagint is 'Δαλουια' (Dalouia )

1 Samuel 25:3
Nabal; and the name of his wife Abigail of the House of Caleb

I can see why so much editing was involved, it seems David, Solomon, Moses, Aaron, Esther and Daniel were contemporaries.
 
Last edited:

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
I don't understand what you're saying. The "Old Testament" is what Jews call the Tanach albeit in a slightly different order. The Tanach is Jewish Scriptures.

Are you talking about Christian translations of the Tanach? In that case, yeah I'd agree with him. Christian translations tends to capitalize words that don't bear capitalization or otherwise use translations to indicate Jesus in a text where he is not indicated.

I believe Christian translation also include interpretive punctuation in Hebrew scriptures that may influence the interpretation of the scripture.
 

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
Would you care to give an example?

The questions was directed to Tumah. I am awaiting for his response. I know that Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek lacked the punctuation present in English translation. I believe this also is a problem in the gospels.

Like the use (misuse?) of capitalization in translation, the use of punctuation may impart interpretation of the scripture.
 

Jayhawker Soule

-- untitled --
Premium Member
I don't know how to explain this to you, but the Dead Sea Scrolls only represent one community's cannon.
I think the use of the word 'canon' is misleading: 'collection' would be better. In fact, one of the interesting characteristics of the DSS is that it contains what Emanuel Tov refers to as a pluriformity of textual witnesses, i.e., there are manuscripts that most closely conform to Samaritan or LXX texts while others could be viewed as "proto-Masoretic."
 

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
And my question was directed at you. You asserted a belief and I am trying to determine whether is has any basis.

Again . . . It was directed to Tumah for clarification concerning the Old Testament. I am awaiting for his response.

I can cite where punctuation in the gospels inferred interpretation of the scripture. I may refer to this in the future.
 

Curious George

Veteran Member
Again . . . It was directed to Tumah for clarification concerning the Old Testament. I am awaiting for his response.

I can cite where punctuation in the gospels inferred interpretation of the scripture. I may refer to this in the future.

I believe the punctuation in the following post includes interpretive punctuation that influences whether or not it is percieved as a question:

I believe Christian translation also include interpretive punctuation in Hebrew scriptures that may influence the interpretation of the scripture.
 
Top