Okay, Which one is correct then?

a reply to: DaathSader

Well I am glad that this issue is settled because one thing in the world that I can't tolerate is intellectual dishonesty.

You're only describing yourself. You reject the Hebrew and the Greek, they both say the same thing.

"Virgin"

Even in the Genesis use of the word is says Rebekah had not known a man, it's Ha'Almah in the Hebrew and parthenos in the Greek LXX that the Jews themselves translated.

originally posted by: fusion97
a reply to: forthelove

Old Testament: Exodus 21:24
eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot

New Testament: Matthew 5:38-48
38 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’ 39 But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also. 40 And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well. 41 If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles. 42 Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.

This above is how I see as well.

I look at it this way. The OLD Test. is just that.... OLD.. the OLD "you". The New Test. is also the NEW "you" once you accept that being Christ like is a way of life for you and the way you will live.

Intent of the heart with Love is what Jesus taught. There is no in between. What you do to others or what you say to others is just like it being done to you. If you kill by the sword you will die by the sword.

originally posted by: DaathSader
a reply to: NOTurTypical

That 70 scholar story is specific to the Pentateuch/Torah buddy.

Greeks did the rest on there own.

What planet are you from?

What are you talking about? The Septuagint was the entire Tenakh, and it was completed in the 2nd century BC. You're thinking of when it began and the Torah was completed in the 3rd century BC. The rest of the Tenakh was completed in the 2nd century BC. The entire OT and some other Hebrew books not included in the modern OT, was all completed by the 2nd century BC. That's a fact.

Septuagint - Encyclopedia Britannica

a reply to: NOTurTypical

You actually don't read your own links?

Because it confirmed just what I said.

The Torah was all that was translated by the 70. Roughly 300 BC

200 BC was when the rest was done.


Thanks .

a reply to: NOTurTypical

Here why don't you read this and learn something LXX

The letter of Aristeas, the Talmud, Josephus and many other writings prove beyond doubt that the Septuagint proper is just the Torah, only part translated by Jews.

I don't see how so much documentation could exist that proves this beyond a doubt yet you are here arguing like you really know what your talking about.

Stop, you just don't have the knowledge yet.

Seriously.

a reply to: DaathSader

Despite the FACT that almah is not the word for virgin, and that was not even a Messianic prophecy, you still refuse to give up.

I already provided 3 other places in the Tenakh where Almah is translated virgin. I provided evidence that the Hebrew scholars 200 years before Christianity and Jesus even existed they translated Almah as virgin into the Greek, for Isaiah 7:14 and Genesis chapter 24. That's a fact of history, the Jews themselves translated Almah as virgin in Isaiah 7:14 as well as Genesis 24 when the LXX was done.

Where are your sources?? I've linked Hebrew lexicon, Greek Lexicon, and where are your sources? Finally, it's makes absolutely no sense whatsoever that a sign from God (a miracle) would be that a young woman conceived a child. That happens a million times a day, that's not a sign from God. So even common sense of the text says Isaiah didn't prophesy a young woman would conceive.

I've backed up my claims on this point. You have not.

a reply to: DaathSader

Let's say that link is correct for argument sake, (they make no mention whatsoever of the Council of Jamnia in 90 AD that codified their Tenakh and elevated the Babylonian Talmud to the level of the Tenakh), but let's just say they are correct.

The Jews still translated Almah in Genesis chapter 24 as virgin when talking about Rebekah, Issac's virgin wife.

a reply to: ChesterJohn A true christ-like reply.

a reply to: NOTurTypical

Still at it with him I see.

originally posted by: In4ormant
a reply to: NOTurTypical

Still at it with him I see.

I suppose you're right, we shouldn't engage him. He's been banned.

a reply to: forthelove

When people dig their heels in and refuse to accept a different explanation it reeks of delusion and denial. Just because you were forced to believe in some idiotic notions passed down to you from your environment does not make them true, it just makes them rhetoric idealistic endeavors that have no basis in fact.

We are all born with the inherent knowledge of what is right and wrong behavior, we do not need to be taught that which we already know to be.

a reply to: olbe66

It is a real answer and a true one. He makes claims of studying the Bible then ask a question that proves as I said over and over, he is not familiar with the Bible.

a reply to: MamaJ

That is exaclty why when we are rightly dividing the word of Truth we give president to the New Testament over the Old.

You know what has been lost is the question the OP asks.

So just in case we for get neither of those verses are for today's Christian or for Israel.

One thing we can say is. If we a Christians can live peaceably with men let's do it without retaliation. No eye for an eye we as Christians can take it and not give it if we so chose for peace sake. However if someone is attacking you need to fight don't turn the other cheek in this age you will lose your life.

Once in the kingdom Jesus will see all and know all and his reign upon his throne in that 1,000 year earthly kingdom he will rule with a rod of iron. Best at that time to turn the cheek because if that person is wrong in striking you, or stealing from you or what ever he does for you, Judgement comes swiftly.

a reply to: ChesterJohn

a reply to: olbe66

It is a real answer and a true one. He makes claims of studying the Bible then ask a question that proves as I said over and over, he is not familiar with the Bible.

An you do it with a delightful avarice that is both mean-spirited and dripping with contempt. Like I said before, how Christ-like.