1. 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!

Featured Question for Jews: Please explain Psalms 45:6-8

Discussion in 'Religions Q&A' started by TrueBeliever37, Aug 18, 2018.

  1. pearl

    pearl Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2005
    Messages:
    6,451
    Ratings:
    +3,325
    Religion:
    Catholic
    Yet another translation;


    6Your arrows are sharp;
    peoples will cower at your feet;
    the king’s enemies will lose heart.

    7Your throne, O God, stands forever

    your royal scepter is a scepter for justice.

    8You love justice and hate wrongdoing;

    therefore God, your God, has anointed you

    with the oil of gladness above your fellow kings.

    Commentary;
    The court poet sings of God’s choice of the king of his role in establishing divine rule, and of his splendor as he waits for his bride. The woman is to forget her own house when she becomes wife to the king Her majestic beauty today is a sign of the future prosperity of the royal house. The Psalm was retained in the collection when there was no reigning king, and came to be applied to the king who was to come, the messiah.
     
  2. TrueBeliever37

    TrueBeliever37 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2015
    Messages:
    1,436
    Ratings:
    +148
    Religion:
    Non-Denominational Christian

    If it works fine with David, then why did Jeremiah prophecy as he did, hundreds of years later in Jeremiah 33:14-21, that it was still in the future?

    v.14 - Behold, the days come, saith YHWH, that I will perform that good thing which I have promised to the house of Israel and to the house of Judah. v.15 - In those days, and at that time, will I cause the Branch of righteousness to grow up unto David... (The Branch is referring to the Messiah) v.17 - For thus saith YHWH; David shall never want a man to sit upon the throne of the house of Israel. In verses 20,21 he said that if you could break his covenant with the day and with the night, then his covenant with David could be broken, that he should not have a son to reign upon his throne.

    BTW there is evidence that the NT was written in Aramaic.

    In the Aramaic there are word plays, idioms, poetry, and rhyming, that are lost in the Greek.

    Also, Aramaic is a very poetic language, with words that can have many different meanings. While, Greek is a very precise language. The Greek translations have varying manuscripts, where different translators chose different words in the Greek that are spelled different, pronounced different, have different meanings, have a different numbers of letters in them, etc. These are called split words, words that are unrelated to each other in the Greek language, yet when you go back to the original language, both of the possible meanings are found in the Aramaic word.
     
    #22 TrueBeliever37, Sep 9, 2018
    Last edited: Sep 9, 2018
  3. TrueBeliever37

    TrueBeliever37 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2015
    Messages:
    1,436
    Ratings:
    +148
    Religion:
    Non-Denominational Christian
    One problem is the Masoretic text is evidently not the only version of Hebrew that was floating around. This is known, because of differences in the Hebrew, such as was found in the DSS. Even if the Masoretic text matched 80 or 90% of the time. If key words were changed it could change the meaning drastically. I have read that there are about 134 places where the scribes actually changed God's name to adonai, and a few more places where they changed it to elohim. I don't mean they just added vowel points to remind them not to say the name, but actually replaced the name in the text.
     
  4. IndigoChild5559

    IndigoChild5559 Loving God and my neighbor as myself.

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2018
    Messages:
    7,080
    Ratings:
    +3,354
    Religion:
    Judaism
    I'm just not seeing your point. This doesn't undermine the Psalm being about David.

    All of the evidence you discussed can be explained by the fact that the people in the history SPOKE in Aramaic, and that the authors THOUGHT in Aramaic. There exists no manuscript of any of the NT books in Aramaic, nor any reference to one in any other early Christian document. Therefore such a belief is groundless.
     
  5. IndigoChild5559

    IndigoChild5559 Loving God and my neighbor as myself.

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2018
    Messages:
    7,080
    Ratings:
    +3,354
    Religion:
    Judaism
    The Masoretic added vowel points, it is not a different form of Hebrew.

    If there is no earlier Hebrew version, how do you know that there were instances that the yad hey and vav hey were changed to adonai or elohim? You can't possibly, because you have nothing with which to compare it. You have the Septuagint, which is a decidedly poor translation and cannot be trusted. IOW you have nothing.
     
  6. TrueBeliever37

    TrueBeliever37 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2015
    Messages:
    1,436
    Ratings:
    +148
    Religion:
    Non-Denominational Christian
    The Masoretic text has words that have been changed. I gave as an example how they replaced the name of God with adonai, and at times with elohim in the Masoretic text. We have DSS manuscripts and fragments older than the existing MT that have God's name still there instead of adonai, so the point seems to be proven. If they replaced the name with other words, it proves they were willing to make changes.

    It was Jewish scribes involved in the initial translation to get the Septuagint. I realize it has been tampered with, but so has the MT.
     
  7. Jayhawker Soule

    Jayhawker Soule <yawn> ignore </yawn>
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2004
    Messages:
    40,754
    Ratings:
    +15,017
    Religion:
    Judaism
    Perhaps you could cite some examples?
     
  8. IndigoChild5559

    IndigoChild5559 Loving God and my neighbor as myself.

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2018
    Messages:
    7,080
    Ratings:
    +3,354
    Religion:
    Judaism
    AGAIN, you have no evidence at all of your claims. None. You would have to have a copy of the earlier text and you don't. I think the only earlier copy that exists is a DDS copy of Isaiah. If you are saying these two texts don't match in terms of the sacred texts, please provide me with a scholarly link indicating this.
     
  9. Jayhawker Soule

    Jayhawker Soule <yawn> ignore </yawn>
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2004
    Messages:
    40,754
    Ratings:
    +15,017
    Religion:
    Judaism
    Huh?
     
  10. TrueBeliever37

    TrueBeliever37 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2015
    Messages:
    1,436
    Ratings:
    +148
    Religion:
    Non-Denominational Christian
    BTW I do have evidence.

    Go to the online - Israel Museum, Jerusalem, DSS - Great Isaiah Scroll and examine Isaiah 6:11, Isaiah 7:14, and Isaiah 21:16

    You can pull it up, enlarge, and examine these verses. There are probably more, but these are 3 verses I have looked at and verified. YHWH is in the Isaiah scroll, but not in the MT in these verses.

    Also, check out Wikipedia - Masoretic text, under Scribal emendations
    1 of the 4 general types where they made changes was - Safeguarding of the tetragrammaton. e.g. substitution of Elohim or Adonai for YHWH in some passages.
     
    #30 TrueBeliever37, Sep 13, 2018
    Last edited: Sep 13, 2018
  11. TrueBeliever37

    TrueBeliever37 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2015
    Messages:
    1,436
    Ratings:
    +148
    Religion:
    Non-Denominational Christian
    Please see my post #30
     
    • Like Like x 1
  12. TrueBeliever37

    TrueBeliever37 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2015
    Messages:
    1,436
    Ratings:
    +148
    Religion:
    Non-Denominational Christian
    In the Psalms, whoever this is referring to would have a throne forever. The promise to David was that one of his descendants, of the fruit of his loins would be raised up to sit on his throne, and that he would never want a man to sit on the throne. After David, there has not always been a man to sit on the throne. Jeremiah 33:14-21 lets us know the days were coming when God would perform the good thing he had promised to the house of Israel, Judah, and to David. God would raise up the Branch of righteousness (the messiah) unto David, and that he would never want a man to sit on the throne. So it makes more sense for this to be about the Messiah.
     
    #32 TrueBeliever37, Sep 13, 2018
    Last edited: Sep 13, 2018
  13. Jayhawker Soule

    Jayhawker Soule <yawn> ignore </yawn>
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2004
    Messages:
    40,754
    Ratings:
    +15,017
    Religion:
    Judaism
    Thank you!
     
  14. IndigoChild5559

    IndigoChild5559 Loving God and my neighbor as myself.

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2018
    Messages:
    7,080
    Ratings:
    +3,354
    Religion:
    Judaism
    Even in Christian theology, the Messiah did not arrive until Jesus' birth. So you are still left with the problem that you have made up, which is that no one was on the literal throne of David during the Babylonian captivity.

    Let's not change the goal posts from a psalm to a passage in Jeremiah.
     
  15. IndigoChild5559

    IndigoChild5559 Loving God and my neighbor as myself.

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2018
    Messages:
    7,080
    Ratings:
    +3,354
    Religion:
    Judaism
    Okay, you did a good job backing up your claim. So, apparently somewhere along the line, the scribes felt such a reverence for the sacred name that they used substitutes. That's understandable. Last time I looked into this, the differences between the Isaiah text found at Qumran and the Masoretic Isaiah were insignificant. Most were spelling differences. There were differences of what in English would be considered conjunctions and prepositions. But actual word changes or drops/additions were exceedingly rare. The Isaiah find was an absolute testament to how accurately the scribes had preserved the documents over the ages.
     
  16. rosends

    rosends Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2014
    Messages:
    6,698
    Ratings:
    +4,637
    Religion:
    Jewish
    Of course, there is another, much simpler answer. If we don't start by assuming the supremacy and accuracy of the DSS then any concerns about what doesn't match the Masoretic text supports the Mas, not DSS version.
     
  17. TrueBeliever37

    TrueBeliever37 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2015
    Messages:
    1,436
    Ratings:
    +148
    Religion:
    Non-Denominational Christian
    As I said in an earlier post, there is no conflict for me with no one being on the throne during the Babylonian captivity. Because the fulfillment of what was promised to David happened when the Messiah came. That was why I had referenced Jeremiah, to show that the promise he made to David, that his descendant who would be raised up to sit on the throne, was still in the future at that point in time.

    So the promise couldn't have been fulfilled with Solomon, and his descendants taking the throne either, because that came to an end. Although if they would have lived for God as they should, he would have allowed a natural continuation on the throne. Eventually God got fed up and said he would overturn overturn overturn it, until he come whose right it is.

    Solomon was made king and sat on the throne, just prior to the death of King David. The promise to David was that after his days were fulfilled, and he slept with his fathers (that is he was dead and buried), then God would raise up his seed after him and establish his kingdom and throne forever. And at the time of Jeremiah's prophecy this was still in the future.

    When the Messiah ascended he took the throne, and it is his forever.
     
  18. TrueBeliever37

    TrueBeliever37 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2015
    Messages:
    1,436
    Ratings:
    +148
    Religion:
    Non-Denominational Christian
    God didn't want his name hidden. He wanted it revered and respected and honored. He had a book of remembrance for those who remembered and thought on his name. He wanted his great name and power to be known throughout the whole world. He wanted the glory and honor to be given to him whenever he did something. He didn't want it to not be spoken. He said it would be his name forever. Now because of what was done, we have the artificial name Jehovah tossed around, and we have it said that it is no longer known how to even say his name properly for sure. And we have scriptures where the inspired men of God wrote his name, but a title is being used. Do you really believe that is what YHWH wanted?

    One of those little changes you are talking about would change v'qarat to v'qara in Isaiah 7:14 - making it "he will call" instead of she will call.
    It's all those little differences that change the meaning.

    I think for the most part the scriptures we have are very accurate. My point was that if even a small percentage of the text is changed in key points, that can make a huge difference in meaning. Also look at how much flexibility, and control the scribes had to steer the scriptures in the direction of meaning they want. With the very same consonants being used, different vowel points can be used to change the meaning. For example just look at adoni vs adonai, one would be referring to my lord/master (a human master), while the other is reserved for God. So with just the stroke or elimination of one vowel point, the meaning is totally different.
     
  19. TrueBeliever37

    TrueBeliever37 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2015
    Messages:
    1,436
    Ratings:
    +148
    Religion:
    Non-Denominational Christian
    But it does show there was evidently slightly different Hebrew available at the time. What makes the MT the more accurate version of the Hebrew? There is an awful lot of time for changes to have been made. There has been a lot of dispute between Christianity and the Jews over whether the Messiah has come or not. How do you know that some tweaking to the scriptures wasn't done to battle the idea that the Messiah had come?
     
  20. Jayhawker Soule

    Jayhawker Soule <yawn> ignore </yawn>
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2004
    Messages:
    40,754
    Ratings:
    +15,017
    Religion:
    Judaism
    What makes 1Q Isaiah the more accurate version?

    You previously noted ...


    Of course, were one interested in honestly evaluating the DSS one would have also examined the other Isaiah fragments. To the best of my knowledge, Isaiah 6:11 is only found in the the Great Isaiah Scroll (1Q Isaiah), so no comparison is possible. On the other hand:
    • Isaiah 7:14 is found in one other remnant, 4Q65 Isaiah, where no change is found. Similarly,
    • Isaiah 21:16 is found in one other remnant, 4Q55 Isaiah, where, again, no change is found.
    So what we see is not evidence of later redaction by some band of 6th - 10th century Masoretes, but, rather, a pluriformity (see Tov) of textual witnesses.

    This is sophomoric rubbish and you know it. How do you know "that some tweaking to the scriptures wasn't done" to remove all reference to reptilian astronauts?
     
    • Like Like x 1
Loading...