Untranslated fourth word of the Bible

[wmam]

Go to a Yasheva to learn. Reading a translation of the bible is stupid and a waste of time unless you study the Oral law which accompanies it.

Where is Yasheva?

From the post above, I thought you could translate Hebrew.

Oh no.......... I wish. I wish I had the time and money to do nothing all day but sit around and read and learn Hebrew along with other languges. Maybe when I win the lotto huh?

All I posted was: "You are children of the Lord, your God."

Oh so all you posted was: "You are the son's of YAHweh, your Elohim." Or was it actually children and Baal/Master as well as Gad?

 

[Deut 13:1]

Where is Yasheva?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yeshiva

Oh no.......... I wish. I wish I had the time and money to do nothing all day but sit around and read and learn Hebrew along with other languges. Maybe when I win the lotto huh?

http://foundationstone.com.au/OnlineHebrewTutorial.html

Oh so all you posted was: "You are the son's of YAHweh, your Elohim." Or was it actually children and Baal/Master as well as Gad?

Children.

 

[wmam]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yeshiva

http://foundationstone.com.au/OnlineHebrewTutorial.html

Children.

Oh ..........thanks for the links. I'll check them out. So was I right on the "Baal/Master" and "Gad"?

 

[Deut 13:1]

Oh ..........thanks for the links. I'll check them out. So was I right on the "Baal/Master" and "Gad"?

Anytime, and no you're not correct on "Gad??" Master isn't perfect in the context, but it works. Make sure it is Master and not master.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Go to a Yasheva to learn.

Drop the Uber Jew routine. What did you learn about Text Criticism, West Semitic Philology, or the Documentary Hypothesis in the Yeshiva? To denigrate other avenues of learning is simply bigoted.

Reading a translation of the bible is stupid and a waste of time unless you study the Oral law which accompanies it.

That is a horribly pretentious and entirely irrational position that essentially argues (a) that a Hebrew redaction of a 10th century variant is inherently and necessarily better that any translation, and (b) that reading a Hebrew redaction of a 10th century variant is inherently more valuable that reading any English commentary on the books of the Tanach.

Don't confuse language skills with wisdom, intelligence, or competency.

 

[Deut 13:1]

Drop the Uber Jew routine. What did you learn about Text Criticism, West Semitic Philology, or the Documentary Hypothesis in the Yeshiva? To denigrate other avenues of learning is simply bigoted.

Drop the uber athiest routine (the im better then you that you post in every thread, you're very good with words, articulite and all, and it is funny, but you do it in almost every thread, it sort of suprises me peoples reaction to it, we can discuss it though PM if you want).
In your opinion, just reading the scripture alone, what is the sign that we should bind upon are arms? In my opinion, it could mean almost anything. Where does the scripture tell you what a kosher slaughter is? Were commanded to do it by Moses. Is a kosher slaughter a person-to-person thing? No, but the oral law explains it in detail.

That is a horribly pretentious and entirely irrational position that essentially argues (a) that a Hebrew redaction of a 10th century variant is inherently and necessarily better that any translation, and (b) that reading a Hebrew redaction of a 10th century variant is inherently more valuable that reading any English commentary on the books of the Tanach.

a) do you believe a translation is better then the original? I mean if you wanted a literal translation of the first line of the bible, you end up with...there-waters. Do you really think a literal bible is what is needed? I can see it now:

In first, the G-ds created (out of nothingness, big difference between create and make, as you know) the there-waters and the earth.

Don't confuse language skills with wisdom, intelligence, or competency.

I don't believe I have, yet, but again that's your opinion and my opinion.

 

[Quiddity]

but you do it in almost every thread

:clap

~Victor

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

do you believe a translation is better then the original?

Typically no (although an annotated translation might well be better), but this is a strawman argument. You have no basis whatsoever to claim the Masoretic text as "the original" - other than, of course, your religious bias.

A well documented conclusion of DSS study is the pluriformity of texts in the 2nd and 1st century BCE. Add to that the fact that West Semitic philology is continuously benefitting from its study of paleo-Hebrew along with, for example, Ugaritic. To pretend that a circa 10th century BCE Tiberius school of relatively modern Jews would have a better inherent grasp of 7th century BCE vernacular is simply nonsense.

 

[Deut 13:1]

Typically no (although an annotated translation might well be better), but this is a strawman argument. You have no basis whatsoever to claim the Masoretic text as "the original" - other than, of course, your religious bias.

And you have no basis, to call the septuagint as "the original". What's ironic, in my opinion, is to use a translation of a translation to justify the way certain verses come out, in my opinion Isaiah 7:14, or as you did in the thread about it, cite something that isn't even relevent. Again, my opinion. The difference being, I don't go thread to thread calling people with different opinions morons, they may be wrong and the evidence is clearly against them, but there is something besides going around acting like an ***. He asked a question, I answered it. Furthermore, your attitude is very ironic considering how you responded on the first couple pages.

Please don't be so ignorant.

I believe you then have the audacity to tell me to drop the “Uber Jew routine”, maybe you should drop your “Uber atheist routine”.???

Ronald, do you have any idea how insulting and disrespectful it is to reduce Midrash and Aggadah to such silliness? Buy the Sefer Ha-Aggadah and actual read it.

Good.

The last thing that Judaism needs is the superficial ignorantly cherry-picking its literature.

I happen to agree with this, but again, who is the uber arrogant one here? This is just this thread alone, if I went around to other threads, I could find stuff that if I said, you would probably curse me.
On a side note, is uber even a word?

A well documented conclusion of DSS study is the pluriformity of texts in the 2nd and 1st century BCE.

And you did this from behind your computer? Cool.

Add to that the fact that West Semitic philology is continuously benefitting from its study of paleo-Hebrew along with, for example, Ugaritic.

I've studied some Paleo-Hebrew, but I don't think it's really that relevant. The form of the letters changed, not the meaning. Hebrew is different then English, from what I gathered, but you know English better, where people no longer say Maiden, they say other words now.

To pretend that a circa 10th century BCE Tiberius school of relatively modern Jews would have a better inherent grasp of 7th century BCE vernacular is simply nonsense.

Okay, again:

In your opinion, just reading the scripture alone, what is the sign that we should bind upon are arms? In my opinion, it could mean almost anything. Where does the scripture tell you what a kosher slaughter is? Were commanded to do it by Moses. Is a kosher slaughter a person-to-person thing? No, but the oral law explains it in detail.

 

[wmam]

So am I to understand that if one is to ask a question here that "the one" will have to endure this kind of............ oop's ......... almost sined. Sorry

Any who................ It looks to me that we have a difference of oppinion as to what is or isn't the right thang to read. LOL huh?

So you read and read and read and read and what do you get out of it if you don't understand the truth of it? Nothing but lie's. So you go and search for the truth......... tic toc tic toc tic toc........ Found it yet? Would you even know it if you saw it? Doubtful. How would you even know it were true if you had never seen it before? As compared to what? Lie's? How do you know what a lie is if in your search you had never came across it beforew because you haven't ever percieved what was true or lie before. Therefore I ask again............. What do we read? Proof that it is what we are suppose to read. And proof that the proof isn't corruptable. But then again that could go one for eternity as well. Proving the proof......... to what end? Unthinkable. Imposible. We need proof. And you ask what of faith? I say you need both. Then would you look at things that would need both to be considered true? Yes I believe you would then you would be picking and choosing some would say. Well so be it. I was told to search out all things that are good and keep that which is good. That to me tells me to pick and choose what I think is true by showing that it has to do with both the Law and Faith. To me anything else is rubage.

Can't you tell I love thinking just to hear myself think?

 

[Deut 13:1]

So am I to understand that if one is to ask a question here that "the one" will have to endure this kind of............ oop's ......... almost sined. Sorry

Any who................ It looks to me that we have a difference of oppinion as to what is or isn't the right thang to read. LOL huh?

So you read and read and read and read and what do you get out of it if you don't understand the truth of it? Nothing but lie's. So you go and search for the truth......... tic toc tic toc tic toc........ Found it yet? Would you even know it if you saw it? Doubtful. How would you even know it were true if you had never seen it before? As compared to what? Lie's? How do you know what a lie is if in your search you had never came across it beforew because you haven't ever percieved what was true or lie before. Therefore I ask again............. What do we read? Proof that it is what we are suppose to read. And proof that the proof isn't corruptable. But then again that could go one for eternity as well. Proving the proof......... to what end? Unthinkable. Imposible. We need proof. And you ask what of faith? I say you need both. Then would you look at things that would need both to be considered true? Yes I believe you would then you would be picking and choosing some would say. Well so be it. I was told to search out all things that are good and keep that which is good. That to me tells me to pick and choose what I think is true by showing that it has to do with both the Law and Faith. To me anything else is rubage.

Can't you tell I love thinking just to hear myself think?

Is there any question you want us to answer? Or is this just a post of you talking to yourself?

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

And you have no basis, to call the septuagint as "the original".

Binyamin, please show where I've made such a claim - then we can address your remaining points.

 

[Deut 13:1]

Binyamin, please show where I've made such a claim - then we can address your remaining points.

You didn't, I felt that you implied it though.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

You didn't, I felt that you implied it though.

You 'felt' that I implied it? Good grief! :banghead3

 

[Deut 13:1]

You 'felt' that I implied it? Good grief! :banghead3

Well, you asked, you didn't come out and say it, but I feel/felt it was implied. :banghead3 My head is tougher (sp?)

 

[ChrisP]

That's fair. After all, the OP has no meaning in Judaism.

HSSSSssss.... hear that?

That's the sound of jewish people everywhere taking a sharp breath in. Why so Caustic Deut.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Well, you asked, you didn't come out and say it, but I feel/felt it was implied.

When you decide to engage my positions rather than your fabrications, get back to me ...

 

[Deut 13:1]

HSSSSssss.... hear that?

That's the sound of jewish people everywhere taking a sharp breath in. Why so Caustic Deut.

1. He's an athiest
2. I do agree with what he said, just not within the harshness he said it.

When you decide to engage my positions rather than your fabrications, get back to me ...

Okay, let me get this straight...

You say this...

Binyamin, please show where I've made such a claim - then we can address your remaining points.

You're a tricky one, you act like I haven't addressed your positions after 2 posts earlier admitting that you will address mine. That's sneaky.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

That's the sound of jewish people everywhere taking a sharp breath in.

Why would that be, SnaleSpace? How many Jews do you know that find relavance in Revelations?

 

[wmam]

Is there any question you want us to answer? Or is this just a post of you talking to yourself?

Nope and yes...............