Posted on 06/07/2021 5:23:12 PM PDT by Its All Over Except ...
I prefer to use what is to me a more precise term of Rabbinical Jewish meaning the other sect of Judaism that survived the destruction of the temple.
Christianity, reading historically and in the Bible and Talmud is really a sect of 2nd temple Judaism - it takes the old testament books, it rejects Marcionite/Gnostic concepts of the Godhead, and it retains the concept of Judaic sacrifices with the caveat that these were superseded by Jesus' sacrifice
Pharisee sect 2nd temple Judaism had already partially replaced the priests with the rabbis and after the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD basically reinvented or invented a religion without the sacrifices in the temple (which were KEY to the Sadducees, etc.) and then built up a monumental theology that we see in the extremely complex Talmud
christianity and rabbinical judaism are competing sects of 2nd temple Judaism. Rabbinical Judaism in its earlier avatar (apologies for dropping in Sanatana Dharma terms here) as Pharisee Judaism did win over Christianity until 70 AD and was seemingly triumphant until 132 AD and the failure of the last of the Jewish Messiah figures - Bar Kochkba (son of the Star, i.e. Son of God that was the term used for the leader of that last Jewish rebellion).
======================
with regards to Phinneous' point of Alma
--------------------
The Hebrew word for “young virgin” was alma. The Hebrew word for virgin was bethula, which did not specify age or purity. Alma, however, had a twofold meaning. alma denotes not only “maiden” or “virgin” but “hidden,” “secret’, “that is, one never exposed to the gaze of men but kept under close custody by her parents.” Hence, the Septuagint rendering of Isaias 7:14 did not use any of the several Greek words for “girl,” rather, these Jewish scholars used the Greek word parthenos, which means, exclusively, “virgin.”
Although there may be exceptions among Jewish writers from from the early Christian centuries (Trypho the Jew, whom Saint Justin [+165] debated in his Dialogues, is allegedly one), generally speaking, the Jews understood the Isaian verse to mean “young virgin.” This was certainly the case in the second century before Christ. The reason I say that Trypho is “allegedly” one is that modern Jewish scholars believe that Trypho was a fictional character invented by Justin for polemical purposes to refute Jewish arguments then used by rabbis (some scholars think the main one was Rabbi Tarphon mentioned in the Talmud) to deny that Jesus was the Messiah.
The Hebrew word alma is used seven times in the inspired text of the Old Testament. It always means “a young maiden” and in two cases it explicitly can only mean “virgin.” The first time it is so employed in the explicit and latter sense is when Abraham’s servant is explaining to Laban, Rebecca’s brother, how he had prayed to the Lord saying “…and may it be that the maiden (“alma”) who comes out to draw [water]…” would be the right woman to become Isaac’s bride” (Gen. 24:43). Earlier in the chapter, a description of Rebecca is given in verse 16 which says, “And the girl was very beautiful, a virgin (alma), and no man had had relations with her…”
Where might I read up on the history of Paleo-Hebrew?
I personally agree that it likely post-dates Moses, but the word “likely” and the phrase “I personally agree” beg for a better foundation.
(I do have some knowledge in the field, but not so much that I would care to have anyone adopting my opinion because it happens to be my opinion).
The books of the Maccabees are KEY to understanding the context in which Jesus was born, lived and preached.
The reason the English removed those books from the 1885 onwards versions of the KJV (they were in the original versions) is is that the Romans, essentially by treaty, worked with Jonathon Maccabee to protect his people from his enemy in exchange for his country becoming part of the Roman Empire. It portrays Rome as the good guy, which go against much of the thesis of the Reformation in breaking from the Roman Catholics.
a Bible without the Apocrypha is like buying a book with an important section missing from it! Why would anyone in their right mind do that? The Apocryphal books are invaluable in my opinion and add important details to events in our Bibles.
For me it is strange that many non-Catholic groups take the Masoretic texts and reject the Septuagint, when the MT as you correctly point out was a post 70 AD explicitly anti-Jesus movement agenda
A Bible without the Apocrypha is like buying a book with an important section missing from it! Why would anyone in their right mind do that? The Apocryphal books are invaluable in my opinion and add important details to events in our Bibles.
I presume that Our Lord Himself (and our Lady and St. Joseph when they were working at home together) all received the psalms and recited the Septuagint? This article would seem to support that theory. Thoughts?
Thus, using Old Testament Greek texts is useful, but one must be wary of the conclusion that all ancient Old Testament Greek texts are uniform in content.
Even with our bibles we must be wise as serpents...And prayer is “king”, even more so than any bible.
Excellent threat to all the Freepers who posted. To those of us interested in textual criticism this was fascinating.
Threat = thread.
The copying of a Torah scroll is meticulously regulated by Halakhah to insure that each scroll will be a reproduction of the original scroll written by Moses at G-d's dictation. One of the rules is that every new scroll must be copied from an already existing scroll. This means the text of a kosher Sefer Torah goes all the way back.
I bet you're one of those folks who make fun of "rednecks" for thinking the KJV is superior to all other versions.
Good on the switch from Paleo, but I’m more interested in the switch to Paleo
Israeli Scholars Discover Corrections, Erasures, Revisions in Oldest Biblical Manuscript
Analysis of Leningrad Codex shows that about a millennium ago, there were several different versions of the Bible that evolved over time
And the Masoretes left out an entire line in Psalm 145, they had Saul becoming king at age 1 and ruling for how long? Oh yeah, the Masoretes were real real experts in their field all right. /sarcasm.
Next time, try to devise better arguments than deflecting to trying to make it about me as you did in your post and flailing in the process.
And there’s a whole lot more besides that article that shows the same thing.
Thus why the switch from Square Hebrew to the Septuagint in the 3rd century BC, with the Prophets and Writings translated to Greek about a century later as shown in the OP, was necessary and thankfully came about.
As said earlier, Septuagint Chronicles is quoted by Eupolemos in the middle of the 2nd century BC, and Septuagint Job by Pseudo-Aristeas in the beginning of the 1st century BC thus Christians and certainly not Origen Correction: DID NOT create it. Furthermore...
The translation of Isaiah contains allusions to historical situations and events that point to the years 170-150 BCE” (Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible, Emanuel Tov, p 131, 2012).
I don’t have any - but I’m currently reading this — http://www.anijudaism.com/blog/is-paleo-hebrew-actually-the-oldest-hebrew
What is fascinating to me is how similar the Canaanite i.e. Phoenicians and the Hebrews were - linguistically, genetically and culturally. This is fascinating when you see the constant injunctions against the Canaan people in the Pentateuch
If you can stay awake for the second half of Joshua or pick up on the more subtle parts of Judges, it isn’t surprising at all.
It’s All Over HATES Dr Michael Brown:
https://torahresource.com/paleo-hebrew-validity-hermeneutical-tool/
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
