Misquoting Jesus in the Bible

originally posted by: TheConstruKctionofLight
a reply to: Akragon

He's also good at ignoring the definition of fundamentalism that he ascribed to me

thats because he has his own definitions of certain words

a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

The words in the AV are NOT the Words of the Lord. The words in all other translations are NOT the Words of the Lord. The Words of the Lord in Psalm 12:6-7 are as followed: 6 אִֽמֲרֹ֣ות יְהוָה֮ אֲמָרֹ֪ות טְהֹ֫רֹ֥ות כֶּ֣סֶף צָ֭רוּף בַּעֲלִ֣יל לָאָ֑רֶץ מְ֝זֻקָּ֗ק שִׁבְעָתָֽיִם׃ 7אַתָּֽה־יְהוָ֥ה תִּשְׁמְרֵ֑ם תִּצְּרֶ֓נּוּ ׀ מִן־הַדֹּ֖ור ז֣וּ לְעֹולָֽם׃

Are you quite sure that is biblical Hebrew? Not up on my Hebrew but it certainly looks like modern Hebrew. i know for certainty that it is not before about 580 +/- bce because then we get into Paleo Hebrew. Don't have a keyboard for this but certainly is modern Hebrew.

a reply to: Seede

The only difference between Masoretic Hebrew and Paleo Hebrew is the way the letters look. The consonants are the same.

a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

What about the vowel marks?

a reply to: Seede

This is one thing they forget that Ancient Hebrew is not the same as Modern Hebrew or Paleo Hebrew. Even Masoretic Hebrew is different than modern and all of them come from different times when Hebrew was being destroyed by their captors. We are talking of four different types of Hebrew being displayed today.

Even the Masoretic Hebrew cannot be verified to be original language seeing those copies are unverifiable.

I'll stick to the English of the AV seeing it is God's preserved word into English. I take it on faith in God and study it in my own language.

a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

you're lost in Numerology. Good luck with that, it wont get you to heaven that is for sure.

originally posted by: whereislogic
a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

What about the vowel marks?

They are presumably preserved by the oral tradition. If you learn the grammar rules of the dagesh (lene & forte), shewas (vocal & silent) coupled with vowel length, it is much easier to see the symmetry and cadence of the meter. Again, this same metering technique exists in the NT as well, so IMO it speaks of the integrety of the Masoretic tradition.

a reply to: ChesterJohn

Yet the OT of the AV is translated from text that was preserved by Masoretic tradition.

a reply to: ChesterJohn

What does counting syllables have to do with my salvation?

a reply to: ChesterJohn

a reply to: Seede This is one thing they forget that Ancient Hebrew is not the same as Modern Hebrew or Paleo Hebrew. Even Masoretic Hebrew is different than modern and all of them come from different times when Hebrew was being destroyed by their captors. We are talking of four different types of Hebrew being displayed today. Even the Masoretic Hebrew cannot be verified to be original language seeing those copies are unverifiable. I'll stick to the English of the AV seeing it is God's preserved word into English. I take it on faith in God and study it in my own language.

Yes, you beat me to my next question. I asked this question many times to rabbinic sources and have yet to get a straight answer. In fact the original Torah was written in Paleo Script with Hebrew language or so it is believed. Yet Daniel (which is not Torah) was written in Aramaic. Both are gathered into one set of literature with many arguments of which you must be a scholar in order to sort out. So I have asked, many times, the different scholars of the three main denominations of the Jews, who then is correct and is there character difference in meaning of the two or more characters in Torah.

Read the following very very carefully.
------------------------------------
Talmud - Mas. Sanhedrin 21b
Mar Zutra or, as some say, Mar ‘Ukba said: Originally the Torah was given to Israel in Hebrew characters and in the sacred [Hebrew] language; later, in the times of Ezra,46 the Torah was given in Ashshurith script47 and Aramaic language. [Finally], they selected for Israel48 the Ashshurith script and Hebrew language, leaving the Hebrew characters and Aramaic language for the hedyototh. Who are meant by the ‘hedyototh’? — R. Hisda answers: The Cutheans.49 And what is meant by Hebrew characters? — R. Hisda said: The libuna'ah script.50

It has been taught: R. Jose said: Had Moses not preceded him, Ezra would have been worthy of receiving the Torah for Israel. Of Moses it is written, And Moses went up unto God,51 and of Ezra it is written, He, Ezra, went up from Babylon.52 As the going up of the former refers to the [receiving of the] Law, so does the going up of the latter. Concerning Moses, it is stated: And the Lord commanded me at that time to teach you statutes and judgments;53 and concerning Ezra, it is stated: For Ezra had prepared his heart to expound the law of the Lord [his God] to do it and to teach Israel statutes and judgments.54 And even though the Torah was not given through him, its writing was changed through him, as it is written:
-----------------------------------------
Now did I misread or misunderstand when Mar Zutra said the following? -----

Quote - Originally the Torah was given to Israel in Hebrew characters and in the sacred [Hebrew] language; later, in the times of Ezra,46 the Torah was given in Ashshurith script47 and Aramaic language. - Unquote

So not only did the written Torah change from Iuri Script to Ashuri Script and back again but the oral Torah also changed from Hebrew to Aramaic and back again to Hebrew. Now I call that translation while others will ignore those facts. Then when did it re change once again to the Aleppo Codex and also to the DSS? The Jews are still fighting over this one and the bottom line is that they do not know.

Now I have just touched on this simply because I am not a scholar and even if I were a scholar I would be torn to pieces by other scholars. My entire purpose of this is to show that we have had both language change and script change down through known history and of the very same literature. But what of the unknown history of Torah? We have absolutely nothing to hang our hats on. So what do we do? We believe by faith as well as evidence.

I have asked -- Why then if Torah did not change did Ezra have to teach anything? If Torah was the same in both oral and script then it would not have been necessary for Ezra to have taught what Moses had written. But that is not so is it? Torah did change in both Statutes and Judgments because of the understanding of script which in turn teaches languages. I sincerely believe that time and cultures references understanding and that is why you are correct.
My opinion of course --

a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

tradition does not mean it is correct

a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

I never mentioned salvation.

a reply to: ChesterJohn

No, but the OT of the AV is based on text preserved by that very tradition. So if the Masoretic tradition is comprised, then so it the AV

a reply to: ChesterJohn

Do you think that because I count syllables, I won't be going to heaven? Cuz that seems to be your implication.

a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

They may have had it as a source but what you forget is God inspired them with the English translation so that ALL his words are preserved to this generation just as it says in Ps 12:6, 7.

When God is in control then he can get it done.

and Like I said Tradition is not equal to correct or accurate. There is no way to verify it, so they, the translators, trusted God via prayer on inspiring them with the correct translation in any area that was to difficult for them. That is why it is the only Bible that has ALL the words and verses ALL the other English Translation don't have.

a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

Why is counting syllables even important when the Bible is to be believed and followed. Counting syllables doesn't help anyone to be a better Christian or Jew.

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

Why is counting syllables even important when the Bible is to be believed and followed. Counting syllables doesn't help anyone to be a better Christian or Jew.

This is a good question. The number of syllables per paragraph (divisible by seven) can be compared to other paragraphs with the same syllable counts to establish a common theme. If you'll refer to my breakdown of Psalm 12, that 42+42 you see is very common, and is in fact used in Isaiah 52-53 and Matt 24. When read together, they form an 84, which is found over and over again in the NT, (especially in Matt 24). The significance of 84 is a divine decree issued by God.

The 42 in Psalm 12:2-3 is introductory. Its a judgment against apostates.
"They speak vanity every one with his neighbour: with flattering lips and with a double heart do they speak. The LORD shall cut off all flattering lips, and the tongue that speaketh proud things"

Then the 42 in Psalm 12:4-5a finishes the decree. The deliverance of the humble.
"Who have said, With our tongue will we prevail; our lips are our own: who is lord over us? For the oppression of the poor, for the sighing of the needy, now will I arise, saith the LORD"

So two consecutive 42's always seem to form a composite 84.

Matt 24:1-2 uses a solid 84 syllables to decree the destruction of the temple.

"1And Jesus went out, and departed from the temple: and his disciples came to him for to shew him the buildings of the temple. 2And Jesus said unto them, See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down."

Basically, the meter is there to interpret the scriptures and prophecies. If we can get the meter right, we can eliminate the interpretive guess work of the modern denominations.

a reply to: ChesterJohn

How do you know that the heptameter isn't God inspired? You don't have to use the Hebrew text to see it, you can use Textus Receptus too. Both of them where used to construct the AV, and both of them show the same style of metering. Why would two separate collections of manuscripts maintained by two separate cultures share the same style syllable metering which is unique to the Bible?

By the way, I didn't invent the idea of syllable metering. It is a well documented poetic style in Classical Greek, called Hexameter, and it has been discovered that even the the Assyrians matched syllable counts to music (read the video description).

This is not a new phenomenon, its simply forgotten.

a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

The Bible is for you spiritual growth and assurance of God our Salvation not Numerology. If numerology was the way God Wanted to communicate his love and our spiritual growth then it would be clearly stated in the Bible text and it is not. Heptameter is a man made invention more likely inspired by the enemy of our souls to distract us from the truth of salvation and spiritual growth.

The Bible was never inspired in classical Greek.

But you notice many put more importance in numerology, counting syllables and putting music to languages than what is more important having a close relationship with God and believing he is strong enough preserve his words to us in English.

a reply to: ChesterJohn

You do realize that most, if not all of the Psalms were originally written to be sung....Yes? No?
Just read the intro to Psalm 12.

Psalm 12:1 AV
To the chief Musician upon Sheminith, A Psalm of David.

Songs require rhythm, which results in natural metering. Pagan cultures also wrote music and psalms, does that mean David was writing Devil Music? I don't think so. Then why should it matter if other cultures practiced metering too?

The Hebrew word for scribe comes from the word saphar, which literally means, to count. The practice of transcribing the Torah was called Sepher Torah, which meant, to count the Law. Without the tradition of Sepher Torah preserved by the Masoretes, you would not have an Authorized King James Version to defend.

God did preserve His original Word, and the heptameter is proof. It is so well preserved that you can learn it in the languages in which it was originally inspired. Its not numerology when the numbers reveal the theme of the text, its faith in His promise. Trusting only in the AV, in the face of objective/testable evidence is faith in man and tradition.

Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.(Matt 7:17 AV). How can the AV possibly be the only God inspired translation, when you claim that the very manuscripts used for translation are corrupt??? That makes ZERO sense. Its an unbiblical claim, and frankly it sounds downright ignorant. I don't think you are a legitimately ignorant person, so I suggest you use 1John 1:9, review this discussion, talk it over with God, and consider reassessing your position. That, of course, is entirely up to you.