What more needs to be said? Yirm'yahu says it all!

[Ikkyu]

As a Buddhist studying Christianity for the last year, I've learned very much.

Recently I decided to start "at the beginning", from the Old Testament as Christians call it, and from what I've studied, there is no way that Jesus could have been the messiah according to scripture.

Furthermore, it is humorous and sad, to see Christians (who don't speak a word of Hebrew) telling Jews what their own Hebrew scriptures mean.

[Mordochai]

As a Buddhist studying Christianity for the last year, I've learned very much.

But was it really worth the effort?

Recently I decided to start "at the beginning", from the Old Testament as Christians call it, and from what I've studied, there is no way that Jesus could have been the messiah according to scripture.

At last, someone who can think and reason rationally.....

Furthermore, it is humorous and sad, to see Christians (who don't speak a word of Hebrew) telling Jews what their own Hebrew scriptures mean.

Actually that is neither "humorous" nor "sad", it's just plain arrogant.

[TomSki]

As a Buddhist studying Christianity for the last year, I've learned very much.

Recently I decided to start "at the beginning", from the Old Testament as Christians call it, and from what I've studied, there is no way that Jesus could have been the messiah according to scripture.

Furthermore, it is humorous and sad, to see Christians (who don't speak a word of Hebrew) telling Jews what their own Hebrew scriptures mean.

Being a Buddhist, you do not even believe the Hebrew Scriptures that prophesy of Messiah Jesus to begin with. What is rational about your comment?

[Mordochai]

TomSki, YOU HAVE BEEN ASKED NOT TO POST HERE ANY MORE.

[Ikkyu]

Being a Buddhist, you do not even believe the Hebrew Scriptures that prophesy of Messiah Jesus to begin with. What is rational about your comment?

Really??

I don't believe Hebrew scripture??

So you're claiming to be psychic and know what I do and don't believe??

[Ikkyu]

But was it really worth the effort?

Yes it was worth the effort: at least now I'm informed.

My problem with Christianity is the twisted doctrine as it relates to the Hebrew Bible ("Old Testament" as Christians call it).

My dilemma with Judaism that I'm working through is the mass-killings of men, women, and children as they made their way to their promised land. Any suggestions on that one?

[sylvius]

ה', עֻזִּי, וּמָעֻזִּי, וּמְנוּסִי בְּיוֹם צָרָה, אֵלֶיךָ גּוֹיִם יָבֹאוּ מֵאַפְסֵי אָרֶץ; וְיֹאמְרוּ: "אַךְ שֶׁקֶר נָחֲלוּ אֲבוֹתֵינוּ, הֶבֶל, וְאֵין בָּם מוֹעִיל!" ירמיהו ט"ז י"ט

Adonai, my Strength, my Fortress, and my Refuge in troubled times! All the gentile nations will come to You from the most distant parts of the Earth... they will say, "Our fathers inherited nothing but falsehood - worthless, with nothing of any use in it!" (Yirm'yahu 16:19)

Jeremiah 16 ending with:

'וְיָדְעוּ כִּי-שְׁמִי ה

"and they will know that my name is "THE"."

strange thing about it:

knowledge, "da'at", [hebrew]D(T[/Hebrew],
has numerical value of 474.
(like the Boeing http://www.cardatabase.net/modifieda...g/00007863.jpg )
and:
"b'hibaram" , [Hebrew] BHBR)M[/Hebrew]
in Genesis 2:4 is the 474th word from the beginning.
see: http://www.inner.org/torah_and_scien...422a.php#PART2
and: http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/sh...d.php?t=107574

in Torah-scrolls the letter "hey"" of "b'hibaram" is written small;
so that you might read : "with "hey" , [hebrew]H[/Hebrew] , (THE), they were created".

the more strange since there seems to be one word too little in the first chapter of Genesis, viz.
a word "pri", [hebrew] pRY[/Hebrew], in Genesis 1:12.

I wrote about in http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/sh...d.php?t=104019

note also the word הַפַּעַם, "hapa'am" - same word in Genesis 2:23,

same "pa'am" in Yirm'yahu, Jeremiah 16:21 בַּפַּעַם הַזֹּאת

this time the Boeing will bring the professor over the ocean, I bet.

(KLM, by the way, Royal Dutch Airlines, is Hebrew "melech" = king , [Hebrew]mLK[/hebrew] --
in WWII fat collaborating with the Germans).

[Mordochai]

Really??

I don't believe Hebrew scripture??

So you're claiming to be psychic and know what I do and don't believe??

Ikkyu, I have asked TomSki not to post here because of his offensive and aggressive attitude and he continues to defy my request, so I should be grateful if you could please not reply to him.

[sylvius]

In any case, when the Hebrew/Aramaic name יֵשׁוּעַ Yéshua is transliterated into Greek the result is Ιεσοας because Greek as neither Y nor SH (and Greek grammar requires masculine names to end with -s), and when this is transliterated again into Latin it becomes IESUAS, or JESUAS in late mediæval Latin and English - but what has happened to the "A" in Latin and English texts? It simply isn't there, and that is the final proof that the name being represented isn't the Babylonian Yéshua at all, but the Palestinian YÉSHU.

why then LXX has Ièsous for Yehoshua (Joshua)?

Exodus 17:13

και ετρεψατο Ιησους τον Αμαληκ και παντα τον λαον αυτου
εν φονω μαχαιρας

[Mordochai]

My problem with Christianity is the twisted doctrine as it relates to the Hebrew Bible ("Old Testament" as Christians call it).

Not to mention the twisted thinking and illogic one faces if christians are ever challenged on the twisted doctrine.

My dilemma with Judaism that I'm working through is the mass-killings of men, women, and children as they made their way to their promised land. Any suggestions on that one?

Actually only the tribe of the Emori under their king Sihon and the inhabitants of Bashan (same as the Golan - see D'varim 4:43) under their king Og were completely anihilated, men women and children - Mosheh was very specific that the other tribes were not to be troubled in any way. Thus

So command the people, "You are about to cross the frontier of your relatives, Ésav's descendants, who live in Sé'ir: they will be afraid of you, so be very careful. You are not to provoke them, because I am not giving you any of their land - not so much as a foot step, because I have given Mount Sé'ir to Ésav as his inheritance; you will buy food to eat from them with money, and you will buy water to drink from them with money...." (D'varim 2:4-6)
.....
Then Adonai said to me, "Do not distress the Mo'avim and do not provoke them to battle, because I will not give you any of their land as an inheritance - I have given Ar to the children of Lot as an inheritance" (D'varim 2:9)
.....
Adonai spoke to me and said, "Today you are crossing the Mo'av frontier at Ar. When you pass near to the people of Ammon, don't distress them or provoke them, because I will not give you of the land of the people of Ammon as an inheritance - I have given it to the descendants of Lot as an inheritance" (D'varim 2:17-19)

The two tribes who were wiped out entirely were the ones whose kings - Sihon and Og - refused Yisrael safe passage through their territories. They were thoroughly wicked, hard-hearted and cruel, and Mosheh spoke in harsh terms about them:

"...if you don't dispossess the natives of the country and wipe them out, those of them who remain will become like spikes in your eyes and like thorns in your sides.... and they will make trouble for you in the country you are going to settle in" (B'midbar 33:55)

- prophetic words indeed and we see this happening even today, and in fact they might not have been wiped out had they not attacked Yisrael first (even after being asked to grant Yisrael safe passage through their respective territories):

Then I sent ambassadors from the K'démot desert to Sihon, king of Heshbon, with peaceful words, "Allow me to pass through your land; I will travel by the highway, turning neither to the right nor to the left. You can sell me food to eat for money and give me water to drink for money, I only want to pass through on foot - just as the descendants of Ésav who live in Sé'ir and the Mo'avim who live in Ar allowed me - until I cross the Yarden into the land which Adonai our God is giving us" (D'varim 2:26-29)

but

Sihon marched out to attack us - he and all his people, and made war at Yahatz (D'varim 2:32).

Yisrael therefore wiped out Sihon and all his people in battle, and we did the same to Og and the Golanim of Bashan who also attacked us -

Then we turned and went up the along the Bashan Road and Og, the king of Bashan, marched out to us, he and all his people, and made war at Edre'i. But Adonai said to me, "Do not be afraid of him, because I have given him, all his people, and his land into your power - do to him the same as you did to Sihon, king of the Emori, who lived in Heshbon." So Adonai our God, also delivered Og, the king of Bashan and all his people, into our power, and we fought him until no-one was left. (D'varim 3:1-3)

The only other tribe that was to be totally anihilated (men, women and children) was Amalek. These were the descendants of Amalek, illegitimate son of Ésav's oldest son, Elifaz, and mortal enemies of Yisrael. They launched a cowardly and unprovoked attack on Yisrael as soon as the fledgling nation had left Egypt, targeting the old and the weak who were travelling at the rear (Shmot 17:8, D'varim 25:18). About 450 years later, Yisrael's first king - Sha'ul ben Kish - was instructed to wipe them out utterly, but he thought he could be even more merciful than God Himself and he spared the king, Agag and the prophet Shmuel had to finish the job hmself. The result of this was that Agag was able to father a child before he was killed and a descendant of his - Haman the Agagi - survived to threaten Yisrael yet again many years later.

[Mordochai]

why then LXX has Ièsous for Yehoshua (Joshua)?

Ιεσους only corresponds to יְהוֹשֻׁעַ Y'hoshua in the Pseudo-LXX because christians equate it to יֵשׁוּ Yéshu. "Ιεσουας" (which ought to correspond to יֵשׁוּעַ Yéshua) is never found.

And, of course, although יֵשׁוּעַ Yéshua is sufficiently similar to יְשׁוּעָה y'shu'ah ("salvation") for christians to be able to pretend they are the same, they are actually quite distinct - note the differences in the vowel diacritics, and also that the common noun יְשׁוּעָה y'shu'ah is feminine. There is also a major difference in pronunciation - יֵשֽׁוּע is pronounced mil'eil, "yéshUa", while יְשׁוּעָֽה is pronounced milra, "y'shu'AH".

[sylvius]

Ιεσους only corresponds to יְהוֹשֻׁעַ Y'hoshua in the Pseudo-LXX because christians equate it to יֵשׁוּ Yéshu. "Ιεσουας" (which ought to correspond to יֵשׁוּעַ Yéshua) is never found.

And, of course, although יֵשׁוּעַ Yéshua is sufficiently similar to יְשׁוּעָה y'shu'ah ("salvation") for christians to be able to pretend they are the same, they are actually quite distinct - note the differences in the vowel diacritics, and also that the common noun יְשׁוּעָה y'shu'ah is feminine.

is there then a known (authentic) LXX (with "Ιεσουας" )? (or [greek]"ihsouas"[/greek]?)

and:
what is the meaning of the name Yehoshua?

[hebrew]YH$W([/hebrew]

[Adrift]

what surprises me is that Hebrews from the 1st century got their interpretations so completely screwed up. You'd think that a native 2,000 years closer to the source would know a bit more about what they were talking about than a scholar 2,000 years later. who knew?

Recently I decided to start "at the beginning", from the Old Testament as Christians call it, and from what I've studied, there is no way that Jesus could have been the messiah according to scripture.

bizarre then that millions, perhaps billions, of people have come to an entirely different conclusion based upon their own readings of the Old and New Testaments.

TomSki, YOU HAVE BEEN ASKED NOT TO POST HERE ANY MORE.

didn't realize you were a mod... usually your names are colored...

[Mordochai]

is there also an authentic LXX

Personally I doubt that there ever was an "authentic" Septuaginta; the legend originated in an apocryphon called "Aristeas's Letter", supposedly dating from the 2nd century BCE, which is now regarded as a forgery. But the legend caught on and even found its way into the Babylonian Talmud (although not the Y'rushalmi), where it is told like this: King Ptolemy (i.e. Ptolemy II "Philadelphus", reigned 285-248 BCE) assembled 72 Hebrew scholars (each in a different location) without disclosing what he wanted them for and then asked each one to translate the Torah (not the whole T'nach) into Greek (nowhere is it claimed that the translation was made for "Greek speaking Jews who had lost the use of Hebrew") - and by a "miracle" they all made the same 15 (or thereabouts) minor alterations to the text "to avoid confusion". I cannot say if the legend is true or not, but no trace of that translation (if it ever existed) has ever been found and the changes that the 72 are said to have made are not present in today's LXX. It is interesting that even Aristeas only refers to the Five Books of the Torah being involved, not the whole of the 24 books of the Bible, so even on that evidence the Greek translation that christians now call the Septuaginta (which is of christian, not Hebrew, origin) is dubious. Aristeas's Letter is widely available on the internet.

what is the meaning of the name Yehosha?

It's a fallacy that Hebrew names have "meanings" - they don't. Otherwise Ya'akov's favourite wife Rahel would have been a "ewe" (a female sheep) and the prophetess D'vorah (1288-49 BCE) would have been a "bee". What is true is that a child would often be given a name that reflected something someone - usually the baby's father or mother, or the midwife - said at the time of the birth; for example:

Then Lé'ah exclaimed, "Oh, how happy I am [b'oshri] - all the women will say I'm happy! [ish'runi]" - so she named the baby Asher." (B'ré[color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color][color=red]EDITME[/color] 30:13)

and

She named him Mosheh because she said, "I pulled him out of the water!" (Shmot 2:10)

[Adrift]

So what exactly are the chief differences between the Septuagint and the Hebrew?
I think there's a misunderstanding that Christians only use the Septuagint translated to English because its the only way they can under the NT. I don't think that's at all accurate. I think there are plenty of scholars who are reading both the Hebrew and Greek, and if I had a Hebrew version of the OT translated into English I see no problem whatsoever in using that version rather than a later version translated from Greek (course the other option is to learn Hebrew).
Has the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls changed our understanding of classic Hebrew and the Tanakh?