Skip to comments.The Bible is Wrong!!! (Grammatically)
Posted on 12/28/2013 7:17:56 PM PST by Phinneous
How can this thing be divine?!?
The Pentateuch, if divine, is full of mistakes from the very first word (we're talking Hebrew here...the basis of the Greek/Latin/English translations everyone in the world uses.) How could that be?
Example: In the beginning G-d created, in the Hebrew version, is actually literally "In the beginning OF... G-d created" There are thousands of examples of the Pentateuch making no sense in its grammar or syntax. So how do we know how to interpret it even on a literal level?
Well... behold, the Oral Torah...
The link is to an hour-long class (in English y'all) on the rational proofs of an Oral Torah (the Mishnah) given to Moses concurrently with the Pentateuch. Rabbi Kelemen is a great speaker so pastors, etc will have loads of sermon material from this...
We’re talking about syntax that was perhaps used at that time (of inscription) for subject of great import. Many languages have various dialects for specific purposes. I believe the Japanese language has a dialect for business use, one for home use, maybe more than that. Olde English is found in many historic documents from England and America, when it was still new to most of the earth.
The books that were left out were left out for good reasons. Not sure about any "lost" books.
Never existed. Maybe you mean Old English (sometimes called Anglo-Saxon)? If you mean older English forms - when people used ye, thou, thine, and the like - that was simply early modern English not “Olde English”.
Like Chinese, there is a lot of implication in Hebrew. B’reishit means at (or in) the head of [something implied]. You have to follow the story to get the sense of what this was at the head of (in this case, the creation order). If you try to turn it into mathematical equations you will fail.
The need to follow the story doesn’t mean that what non-Christian Jews today call the Oral Torah is what they crack it up to be! There is a spiritual sense however, and it’s carried by the Holy Spirit. And it’s ultimately a redemption story with a happy ending, except for those who dig in and refuse it.
Dude, I scanned 33 (Larry Bird!) pages...you know what they say about philologists, right? (I don’t...tell me if you do)
Can you summarize?
Shakespeare’s English was Early Modern English, AFAICR. Chaucer’s language was apparently a London dialect of Middle English.
If you’re serious about the Hebrew or Greek check out teknia.com.
Lots of good stuff on both languages.
I’m currently studying the Greek. It gives you an even firmer foundation of the Word.
Well, as far as the Masoretic texts go (which omit all the Apocrypha and or “Deuterocanon”), I’ll trust the apostle Paul when he says that the Jews were entrusted with the “oracles of God” (Rom. 3:2).
Nobody’s stopping you; they can be seen online.
It makes sense to respect existing worship communities, however. The proof of the pudding is in the tasting. The proof of understanding God’s story is in the worship. Accounts that direct too much ultimate attention to man’s affairs and don’t pass the glory back to God are suspect. IMHO.
But it’s not math...it’s a language that has its own rules too. The rules are frequently broken by G-d. Does He get a mulligan or is there a deeper meaning. It’s critical, actually, for understanding and makes no sense whatsoever as a guide to life without the key to “unlocking” the “mistakes” or ambiguities.
I doubt you’ll listen to the class, which is fine...but for example, the root word for milk and fat [a type of fat from the sacrifices which is prohibited for consumption] is the same, a Ch, an L, and a V sound. Depending on how they’re vowelized (the vowels appear under the word in Hebrew and are often left out, relying on context and tradition) the Jews could be prohibited from mixing meat and milk (no cheeseburgers) or meat and...fat. I will be pissed if we got it wrong...
That’s a “cute” example but the point is to prove the Oral Law, for Jews. Christians may and do feel free to negate it all, not being bound by it at all save for the seven Noahide laws from Genesis (http://www.noahide.org/?p=669) BUT realize that insofar as you “believe” in the “OT,” you are believing in something that cannot be understood as G-d instructing Man how to live without any further explanation.
I wouldn’t be surprised. Language is more spiritually electric than we think (for lack of a better word) and the biblical languages especially. Though this property does carry somewhat even into English. The chief danger here would be in bogging yourself down in the details and forgetting the One to Whom this is all put there to be a witness!
You know what they say about philologists, right? (I don’t, please tell me!)
I hate to tell you this but your Sabbath was over at 6 PM...
Typically the commandments make sense on more than one level. Dietary rules prohibited things that were common pagan sacrifices. Since all eating is a sacrifice offering to God, it was considered a safeguard against confusion with pagan practices. Its relative importance can be seen by the prescribed penalty for transgressing (to be put outside the camp and be ritually unclean until evening).
You’re treating God like Someone who is throwing dice in a corner then daring you to match what He just threw. Rather than Someone who is offering to save your souls in love. You’ve created a need which isn’t even there except in your desire to be dignified.
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.