nonconformist said:
Hi Fletch, that was really an awesome piece of research and knowledge of ancient history. You did a very good job.
The words LORD and master in Hebrew are Adonai/LORD and adoni/master.
Therefore, Psalm 110:1 should read like this:
Ps 110:1 The LORD said unto my master, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.
And not like as KJV or ASV
Ps 110:1 The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.
Big difference between these two translations or versions, wasn’t it?
How do we prove which version was the right one?
Dead Sea Scrolls is, one, if not the most treasured findings that one could ever find. It clears all controversies between the ancient Hebrew text to OG/Septuagint to the New Testament to the Masoretic text and today’s different versions of the bible, the OT and the NT.
How does that help us?
DSS doesn't have Psalms 110, so there is no possible way to compare DSS to KJV or ASV, to show accuracy of one to another.
And you are forgetting, or perhaps that you don't know, that the DSS may show that there are some differences concerning with Masoretic Text, but they are also showed identical wordings and context in other areas.
Just as DSS have differences and similarities to the Masoretic Text, so it (DSS) does with the Septuagint, just as there are similarities and differences between the Septuagint and Masoretic Text.
And let's face the hard cold facts, the large majority of translations of the Hebrew scriptures (Jewish Tanakh or Christian Old Testament) involved with the KJV translation, the Masoretic Text was the main source, but the KJV translators did supplement certain passages with the Greek sources.
Most of KJV sources for the Old Testament that relied on the Septuagint, mainly come it reliance on the New Testament quotes, because Paul, Matthew, Luke and other NT authors had relied on the Greek sources instead of the Hebrew sources, because most of these authors probably couldn't read Hebrew, because Hebrew was no longer the common language.
Only those with specialized skills, such as scribes, scholars, historians, and priesthood knew how to comfortably read and write Hebrew.
If you relied on the KJV translation, then you should know that KJV bible owe it more to the Hebrew Masoretic Text than to the Greek Septuagint Bible.
But getting back to my points. Psalms 110 is missing in the DSS, so we can't compare which, if any, the Septuagint or the Masoretic Text is more accurate.
Now unless we have something older written in Hebrew that predate both DSS and Septuagint (and of course, the Masoretic Text), we have no real way to determine which is the original context to Psalms 110:1.
And none of these, help us in any way, to determine if David was the original author to the chapter 110 of Psalms.
I still don't see how the NT authors of Matthew 22 and Acts 2 quoting Psalms 110:1 prove your points that Septuagint is more accurate.
There are other areas that the DSS disagree with the Septuagint.
Unfortunately, DSS is not complete in many of the scrolls. Some parts of them are lost, so comparison isn't possible, such as Psalms 110.
I wished they have complete scrolls of Genesis, because I would love to compare DSS against both Masoretic and Septuagint, especially the genealogy in Genesis 5 and Genesis 11:10-32. Only 2 verses survive Genesis 5, and Genesis 11 is completely lost. I would like to see how much DSS agree or disagree with the number of years in MT and Septuagint.
Like I said only 2 verses, survived in Genesis 5 - 5:13-14 -
Genesis 5:13-14 said:
13 * And] Kenan [lived eight hundred and forty years after he became the father of Mahalalel, and had other sons and daughters. 14 * So all the days of Kenan were nine hundred and ten years, and he died.]
This is the Septuagint translation from NETS (the New English Translation of the Septuagint) of 3 verses (including the DSS missing 5:12):
Genesis 5:12-14 said:
12 And Kainan lived on hundred seventy years and became the father of Maleleel. 13 And Kainan lived after he became father of Maleleel seven hundred and forty years and had sons and daughters. 14 all the days of Kainan amounted to nine hundred ten years, and he died.
Now most English translations are based on Masoretic Text, even including KJV. It would seem that you favor KJV, so I have including this translation as well as that of NJPS (the New Jewish Publication Society translation to the Tanakh.
Genesis 5:12-14 said:
12 And Cainan lived seventy years and begat Mahalaleel:
13 And Cainan lived after he begat Mahalaleel eight hundred and forty years, and begat sons and daughters:
14 And all the days of Cainan were nine hundred and ten years: and he died.
Genesis 5:12-14 said:
12 When Kenan had lived 70 years, he begot Mahalalel. 13 After the birth of Mahalalel, Kenan lived 840 years and begot sons and daughters. 14 All the days of Kenan came to 910 years; then he died.
The reasons why I show you all these quote from Genesis 5 is that you were so ready to dismiss the Masoretic Text in favor of the Septuagint.
Since both KJV and NJPS based their respective translations on the Masoretic Text for their Genesis genealogy, the number of years that Kenen/Kainan/Cainan lived after Mahalalel's birth.
All of them may say Kenan died at age 910. But only the Septuagint say that Kenan/Kainan was 170 when his son was born, and lived another 740 years afterward.
The Masoretic Text (found in KJV, NJPS, NRSV, NIV), on the other hand, say that Kenan lived another 840 years after Mahalalel's/Mahalaleel's birth, and the Masoretic Text say that Kenan was 70 when his son was born.
These figures in Masoretic Text are in agreement with DSS of Genesis 5:13-14. Like I said before verse 12 is missing in DSS. However, we can deduce Kainan's age to be 70, by simple arithmetic: 910 - 840 = 70 years.
But this topic is really about Isaiah 7:!4, not Genesis 5 or Psalms 110.
Looking at the current translation of Isaiah 7:14 from DSS, we have this translation:
Isaiah 7:14 said:
14 Look, the young woman has conceived and is bearing a son, and his name will be Immanuel.
Now compared this with NJPS translation of the Tanakh, we have:
Isaiah 7:14 said:
14 Look, the young woman is with child and about to give birth to a son. Let her name him Immanuel.
Both DSS and NJPS (hence Masoretic Text) have translated
ha'almah to "
the young woman", not "a virgin" (like in KJV).
And DSS has been translated
harah to "has conceived", while
harah was translated to "is with child". Both means the young woman was PRESENTLY pregnant.
When Isaiah was talking to Ahaz, she was probably present in Ahaz's court, when the king to "look", there is a pregnant woman.
Other occurrences of
harah can be found in the KJV translations to be presently pregnant - hence "with child" - in Genesis 16:11 ("thou art with child", Exodus 21:22 ("woman with child"), Jeremiah 31:8 ("woman with child").
In Hebrew הָרֶה or
harah is a feminine adjective, so it is equivalent to English adjective word - "pregnant".
Unfortunately, I only have transliteration of 7:14 from the Masoretic Text. I have not seen the transliteration from the DSS, because it would be interesting to compare the two transliteration.
PS Please note that any quote of the translation to DSS, come from the book, titled The Dead Sea Scrolls Bible.