Why I think "own" should not be there; Proverbs 3:5

[rosends]

I trust there is a difference between nouns and adjectives. I know of no other word like you have. Can you give me another example?

Do you have another example where the noun and the adjective are together in the same word?

Why are there differences between nouns and adjectives? Did some "expert" tell you that? Where was God?

Why is the "B" prefix in "bchol" ok with you to be translated "with" when the prefix actually means "in"?

Now you want another Hebrew word where the use of an affix is translated in a way in English which incorporates an adjective because in your opinion, the inclusion of the adjective changes the meaning? In Judaism, that happens all the time -- the Rambam's understanding of the phrase "som tasim alecha melech" (Deut 17:15) as "only a king".

The understanding of Lev. 23:40, ""U'le'kachtem" is "and you should [legally] take" though "legally" is an adverb speaking about a verb. But a few words later on "arvei nachal" which is literally "the river willows" is translated "the willows near the river".

The Zohar has an interesting Aramaic phrase "la al enash rachitzna" which is translated as "not in any man do I put my trust" with "any" being the inserted adjective-determiner. Of course, you might ask, "what is the difference between the blanket statement of 'not in man' and the other version 'not in any man'?" And I would say "the same as the difference between 'your intelligence' and 'your own intelligence'."

 

[savagewind]

Why are there differences between nouns and adjectives? Did some "expert" tell you that?

I understand that you might be kidding me! Hahaha

 

[savagewind]

Why are there differences between nouns and adjectives? Did some "expert" tell you that? Where was God?

Why is the "B" prefix in "bchol" ok with you to be translated "with" when the prefix actually means "in"?

Now you want another Hebrew word where the use of an affix is translated in a way in English which incorporates an adjective because in your opinion, the inclusion of the adjective changes the meaning? In Judaism, that happens all the time -- the Rambam's understanding of the phrase "som tasim alecha melech" (Deut 17:15) as "only a king".

The understanding of Lev. 23:40, ""U'le'kachtem" is "and you should [legally] take" though "legally" is an adverb speaking about a verb. But a few words later on "arvei nachal" which is literally "the river willows" is translated "the willows near the river".

The Zohar has an interesting Aramaic phrase "la al enash rachitzna" which is translated as "not in any man do I put my trust" with "any" being the inserted adjective-determiner. Of course, you might ask, "what is the difference between the blanket statement of 'not in man' and the other version 'not in any man'?" And I would say "the same as the difference between 'your intelligence' and 'your own intelligence'."

There is a difference between "Not in Man do I put my trust" and "Not in any man do I put my trust".
I won't lean on that though.

I think you are adorable!

 

[rosends]

There is a difference between "Not in Man do I put my trust" and "Not in any man do I put my trust".
I won't lean on that though.

I think you are adorable!

In that case, there is an example of the adjective being inserted. Just what you asked for.

 

[savagewind]

In that case, there is an example of the adjective being inserted. Just what you asked for.

Yes, Now I am confused though. I say do not tamper with the meaning of God's word.
To add own is tampering, I am sure. I don't lean, though. Did someone add the word "any" there? If so, that would be tampering with it.

 

[savagewind]

The LORD's anger burned against Uzzah, and he struck him down because he had put his hand on the ark. So he died there before God. 1 Chronicles 13:10

The ark is to the word as touching the ark is to tampering with the original message.

The ark. Is it not for portraying God's presence? The scriptures. Are they not for explaining the rightness of God's will be done?

 

[rosends]

Yes, Now I am confused though. I say do not tamper with the meaning of God's word.
To add own is tampering, I am sure. I don't lean, though. Did someone add the word "any" there? If so, that would be tampering with it.

Did someone add it? Yes. Would you prefer the meaning without the word (since you see a difference)? I don't see a difference here or with the word "own." But you asked for another example and I provided.

In either case, this all could be avoided by relying on the Hebrew/Aramaic, and thinking in that language.

 

[Milton Platt]

I think that Proverbs 3:5 was written thus: Trust in יְ֭הוָה with all your heart and on understanding do not lean.

They added "own" there and I believe it is wrong to read it that way.

It is a FACT that people put their trust (or lean) on the knowledge of wise men and woman. I do not think that it is wrong to learn by knowledgeable and wise persons. I believe it is alright to trust what makes sense, what promotes love and what builds confidence.

I worry that the way Proverbs 3:5 is read discourages trusting in your own conscience and encourages latching on to people who come in the name of The Lord.

Simply. 1. Trust God and 2. do not rely on worldly wisdom.

On the one hand, it is God alone that the writer trusts in and on the other hand, he warns you not to settle on what your heart tells you. What does it tell you? Some people's heart says to trust in what another person says and so in effect he or she becomes your master and you become his or her accomplice.

To add "own" there seems to encourage faith in not yourself (which isn't a bad thing to put faith in yourself) but in those of station (a very bad thing, imo).

Did you go back to the original language and find that this is so and every other expert in the original languages couldn't figure it out?

 

[savagewind]

Did you go back to the original language and find that this is so and every other expert in the original languages couldn't figure it out?

See this?
998 [e] bî-nā-ṯə-ḵā, בִּֽ֝ינָתְךָ֗ on your own understanding Noun

Do you see that it is called a noun?

binah: an understanding
Original Word: בִּינָה
Part of Speech: Noun Feminine
Transliteration: binah
Phonetic Spelling: (bee-naw')
Short Definition: understanding

knowledge, meaning, perfectly, understanding, wisdom

From biyn; understanding -- knowledge, meaning, X perfectly, understanding, wisdom.

see HEBREW biyn
בִּינָה noun feminine understanding 1 Chronicles 12:32 28t.; construct בִּינַת Proverbs 30:2; Isaiah 29:14; suffix בִּינָתִי Job 20:3 4t.; plural בִּינוֺת Isaiah 27:11; —

1 the act Isaiah 33:19; Jeremiah 23:20; Daniel 1:20; Daniel 8:15; Daniel 9:22; Daniel 10:1.

2 the faculty Job 20:3; Job 39:26; Proverbs 3:5; Proverbs 23:4; Proverbs 30:2; Isaiah 27:11; קנה בינה get understandingProverbs 4:5,7; Proverbs 16:16.

3 the object of knowledge Deuteronomy 4:6; 1 Chronicles 22:12; Job 28:12,20,28; Job 34:16; Job 38:36; Job 39:17; Proverbs 9:6,10; Proverbs 23:23; Isaiah 11:2; Isaiah 29:14; יָדַע בִינָה 1 Chronicles 12:32; 2Chron 2:11; 2 Chronicles 2:12; Job 38:4; Proverbs 1:2; Proverbs 4:1; Isaiah 29:24.

4 personified Proverbs 2:8; Proverbs 7:4; Proverbs 8:14.

בִּינָה noun feminine understanding (Biblical Hebrew; √; ᵑ7 בִּיוּנָא, Syriac

); — absolute ׳ב Daniel 2:21.

 

[savagewind]

The Bible does not say don't get discernment. It says do not lean on it.

 

[savagewind]

This: 998 [e] bî-nā-ṯə-ḵā, בִּֽ֝ינָתְךָ֗ on your own understanding Noun
Is what someone understands it says.

It doesn't make sense to me that anyone would write own because it is redundant and makes it uncertain as to whether I should read it with more or with less emphasis.

Adjectives describe or modify—that is, they limit or restrict the meaning of—nouns and pronouns.

Definition of ADJECTIVE

 

[savagewind]

You do know who had a hand in copying the Bible. The Church.

It is no secret that The Church wills us to lean on its understanding.

 

[jtartar]

I think that Proverbs 3:5 was written thus: Trust in יְ֭הוָה with all your heart and on understanding do not lean.

They added "own" there and I believe it is wrong to read it that way.

It is a FACT that people put their trust (or lean) on the knowledge of wise men and woman. I do not think that it is wrong to learn by knowledgeable and wise persons. I believe it is alright to trust what makes sense, what promotes love and what builds confidence.

I worry that the way Proverbs 3:5 is read discourages trusting in your own conscience and encourages latching on to people who come in the name of The Lord.

Simply. 1. Trust God and 2. do not rely on worldly wisdom.

On the one hand, it is God alone that the writer trusts in and on the other hand, he warns you not to settle on what your heart tells you. What does it tell you? Some people's heart says to trust in what another person says and so in effect he or she becomes your master and you become his or her accomplice.

To add "own" there seems to encourage faith in not yourself (which isn't a bad thing to put faith in yourself) but in those of station (a very bad thing, imo).

savagewind,
I was just reading what some Bible scholar wrote, and I thought it was very interesting; Changing any words in the Bible is the worst crime a human being can commit.
I have about 50 Bibles that I compare to make sure I get the right message. Almost every one says OWN understanding, a couple say your own wisdom, or intelligence.
There is a concept; Ego-centric Predicament, Epistemological Predicament. Epistemology is the study on man's knowledge, especially the limits of man's knowledge.
This is the reason that the Bible says your OWN knowledge, we will all stand, for ourselves, before the judgment seat of God, Romans 14:10,12.
The Bible also tells us not to put our trust in any man, in whom no salvation belongs, Psalms 146:3,4.
The reason for thinking about Ego-Centric Predicament, is because we all are so limited in our knowledge, we can NEVER, by reasoning in ourselves, and come up with any knowledge even compared to God's, Isaiah 55:8,9.
These things make it sure that we cannot depend on any other person to explain what God's message is, we must depend on God's word, because these things mean our Everlasting Life.
We cannot even trust in our own heart, unless it has been trained well in God's word, Jeremiah 17:5,9, Proverbs 28:26, Hebrews 5:14.
It is very clear that we must our trust in God only, and not our own understanding, or anyone's, unless we check what we learned with the Bible, Acts 17:11. Agape!!!

 

[savagewind]

savagewind,
I was just reading what some Bible scholar wrote, and I thought it was very interesting; Changing any words in the Bible is the worst crime a human being can commit.

OK. If someone changed it and you go along with the change, is it a crime?

 

[savagewind]

savagewind,

This is the reason that the Bible says your OWN knowledge, we will all stand, for ourselves, before the judgment seat of God, Romans 14:10,12.

No. it isn't. When the Judgement Seat of God happens there will be no leaning. Do you understand? "We will all stand" in trueness. There will be no place there for anyone's personal opinion, SO, Proverbs 3:5 was written for the ones who seek to do the will of God now. Once the Judgement starts, there will be no more seeking. If you think that there will be, where?

Leaning means resting mean NOT seeking.

 

[savagewind]

savagewind,

The Bible also tells us not to put our trust in any man, in whom no salvation belongs, Psalms 146:3,4.

It is a fact that you are putting your trust in the people who translated and copied the Bible.

The mistake was brought forth from one of the oldest copies till now. I think that for anyone who has read the Bible and kept what it says, it should be no surprise that error got propagated.

1 John 5:19

19 We know that we originate with God, but the whole world is lying in the power of the wicked one.+ 20 But we know that the Son of God has come,+ and he has given us insight* so that we may gain the knowledge of the one who is true. And we are in union with the one who is true,+ by means of his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God and life everlasting.+ 21 Little children, guard yourselves from idols.+

To guard yourself from an idol is the same as learning not to lean on anything.

 

[savagewind]

You all don't teach, "We know that we originate with God". 1 John 5:19

YOU teach, "We know that they* originate with God".

*They are all the people you have put your trust in to write the Bible

 

[Ron Hackel]

Savagewind
Here is something no one will agree with. We are not supposed to have freewill. Eating off the tree of the knowledge of good and evil was an analogy by God for using your freewill. Choosing for yourself what is bad or good for you is eating off the tree. No one realizes that Satan is in everyone's mind and is putting these thoughts in your mind that we should have freewill. Only by following God's word can you fight Satan's thoughts. Remember the Bible says he was created perfect in wisdom. He can con us into believing anything.

JEREMIAH 10 : 23 "I know, O Lord, that a man's life is not his own; IT IS NOT for man to direct his own steps."

HOSEA 10 : 13 "You have eaten the fruit of deception, because you have depended on your own strength."
I know this is not the way it is punctuated by the interpreters. There was no punctuation in Hebrew. They were using the punctuation they thought was right. If you use what I used it is grammatically correct.

PROVERBS 28 : 26 "He who trusts in himself is a fool"

PROVERBS 20 : 24 "A man's steps are directed by the Lord. How then can anyone understand his own way?"

PROVERBS 14 : 12 "There is a way that seems right to a man, but in the end it leads to death."

PROVERBS 3 : 5 "Trust in the Lord with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding."

JEREMIAH 17 : 9 "The heart is deceitful above all things and BEYOND CURE."

Think of what mankind has done with freewill. Only an all knowing God can make decisions that will not only be best for you but also for all the billions of his creation. Freewill is self seeking. It is the law of greed. As Paul said it is in direct opposition to God's law of love. The two can not co-exist.

 

[savagewind]

Savagewind
Here is something no one will agree with. We are not supposed to have freewill. Eating off the tree of the knowledge of good and evil was an analogy by God for using your freewill. Choosing for yourself what is bad or good for you is eating off the tree. No one realizes that Satan is in everyone's mind and is putting these thoughts in your mind that we should have freewill. Only by following God's word can you fight Satan's thoughts. Remember the Bible says he was created perfect in wisdom. He can con us into believing anything.

JEREMIAH 10 : 23 "I know, O Lord, that a man's life is not his own; IT IS NOT for man to direct his own steps."

HOSEA 10 : 13 "You have eaten the fruit of deception, because you have depended on your own strength."
I know this is not the way it is punctuated by the interpreters. There was no punctuation in Hebrew. They were using the punctuation they thought was right. If you use what I used it is grammatically correct.

PROVERBS 28 : 26 "He who trusts in himself is a fool"

PROVERBS 20 : 24 "A man's steps are directed by the Lord. How then can anyone understand his own way?"

PROVERBS 14 : 12 "There is a way that seems right to a man, but in the end it leads to death."

PROVERBS 3 : 5 "Trust in the Lord with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding."

JEREMIAH 17 : 9 "The heart is deceitful above all things and BEYOND CURE."

Think of what mankind has done with freewill. Only an all knowing God can make decisions that will not only be best for you but also for all the billions of his creation. Freewill is self seeking. It is the law of greed. As Paul said it is in direct opposition to God's law of love. The two can not co-exist.

For the most part, that looks like you arguing my case.
But, I disagree with "We are not supposed to have free will."
I disagree with the to have part. If you mean by free will the ability to make personal choices, we have that. I think the vision of eating from the tree put human kind's "free will" to the forefront where it doesn't belong.

Faith belongs where they put free will. The tree pictures the problem of examining human choices.
Faith is said to be "the evident demonstration of realities though not beheld".

The taking of the fruit shows the drama of WANTING to know whether what we want is wrong or right.

Some people are not able to do good without knowing what it is (in their own opinion, which is sad), and knowing that they have done good.

God's will is that we do good without the imagined benefit of knowing that we are doing good.

I think that the bad means needing to know.

Choosing a religious belief is for "knowing" the right course. But, with so many different courses it is obvious to me that each one can't be right.

So, the Tree was for lying to the self.

Adam, Eve and the Tree was not a real life drama. LOL
What would life on Earth be like if not for the supposed drama of Adam and Eve?

Way less analytical.

 

[savagewind]

I thought of an illustration.

Before Adam's sin*, the wind would take them where it would go. After Adam's sin, he wants the wind to take him where he wants to go. It won't.

The wind pictures God's Holy Spirit.

*which, I am sure, is just an illustration for thinking.

Another one. Before Adam's sin, the human soul was free. After Adam's sin, it became tied to the weighty obligation to choose right.

To choose right might seem to make the chooser righteous. Righteous before God? Seeing that that is not possible.........The World!

The World is a place where the people are committed to doing the impossible.