Early Christian writings along with the NT...

[pinacled]

Have you found a number of almond blossoms on a mountain..?

 

[pinacled]

I found a number of judges that constitute a number of hebrew consonants.

Blessings Always

 

[pinacled]

The word means "dog."

View attachment 1331Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon, pp. 476-477


View attachment 1332Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament, vol 1, p. 439

View attachment 1333
The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament, vol 2, p. 476


View attachment 1334
Dictionary of Classical Hebrew, vol. 4, p. 415


View attachment 1335
New International Dictionary of Old Testament Theology and Exegesis, vol.2 p. 632.

Topical Bible: Jackal

biblehub.com

Also known as the egyptian worship of anubis.
So from an exegetical point I'm of the opinion that Yeshua referring to dogs is pointing perhaps to the womans possible egyptian/greek heritage.

And her response was an indication of her knowledge of anubis.
Yet never having a worship of anything greco egyptian.

Exodus 11:7
Isaiah 13:22

 

[pinacled]

I agree it can also refer to a backslider, once loyal but then untamed, that makes since too, backsliders are also kept outside the Kingdom

כט שְׁלֹשָׁה הֵמָּה, מֵיטִיבֵי צָעַד; וְאַרְבָּעָה, מֵיטִבֵי לָכֶת.
29 There are three things which are stately in their march, yea, four which are stately in going:
ל לַיִשׁ, גִּבּוֹר בַּבְּהֵמָה; וְלֹא-יָשׁוּב, מִפְּנֵי-כֹל.
30 The lion, which is mightiest among beasts, and turneth not away for any;
לא זַרְזִיר מָתְנַיִם אוֹ-תָיִשׁ; וּמֶלֶךְ, אַלְקוּם עִמּוֹ.
31 The greyhound; the he-goat also; and the king, against whom there is no rising up.

 

[pinacled]

The word means "dog."

View attachment 1331Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon, pp. 476-477


View attachment 1332Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament, vol 1, p. 439

View attachment 1333
The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament, vol 2, p. 476


View attachment 1334
Dictionary of Classical Hebrew, vol. 4, p. 415


View attachment 1335
New International Dictionary of Old Testament Theology and Exegesis, vol.2 p. 632.

Have you ever considered that the English use of dog is incomparable to the hebrew keleb.
A mistranslation?

 

[pinacled]

...seem to point to the Septuagint as a more accurate and proper vorlage of an earlier original Hebrew text in opposition to the common Masoretic Hebrew text used today in most modern bibles..

Knowing that the council of Jamnia in 90 AD was the first ever assembly and establishment in regards to Hebrew canon (for unknown reasons by unbelieving Jewish high priests) leads me to believe without a doubt that God intended a translation for the gentiles and Jews of that era, meaning that the "canon" was settled by God through the Septuagint and every book it included -as inspired and not to be neglected.

How does one counter these facts to the contrary?

Why do protestants follow the tradition of the RCC with Jerome's advice from the unbelieving Jews he studied under -that certain books in the Septuagint were neither of any importance nor were they translated correctly..?

Hebrew is a raisin sword with a scabbard of husk.

Name the 6 husk and I'll show the scabbard .
You've alot to learn youngin.

 

[pinacled]

Hebrew is a raisin sword with a scabbard of husk.

Name the 6 husk and I'll show the scabbard .
You've alot to learn youngin.

Song of Solomon 1:5
Sheer and benign

 

[Andrew]

As I said before, we have no LXX complete or near complete manuscripts before the 4th century A.D. And the ones we do have are Christian. There are only a few fragments that predate the 4th century A.D.

Moreover the manuscripts and codices of the Septuagint are not uniformed. No two are exactly alike. They all differ in some way.


Please point to the manuscript evidence which supports that claim.

Please provide a quote and the sources where Jerome states that is what he did.

In his preface to the book of Isaiah in his new translation he wrote "The Jews can no longer scoff at our churches because of the falsity of our scriptures"
His translation was a hybrid of the proto-masoretic and the LXX
David Bercot points the instances out in his lectures, he's well studied in early Christianity and early church writers.
Here is his audio lecture on Jerome, you can find the other parts on the same channel.
Note: around 4:00 he goes into what you mentioned earlier regarding "out of Egypt I have called my son"

 

[Origen]

The proof is in the translation which combined both proto masoretic and the LXX.
David Bercot points the instances out in his lectures, he's well studied in early Christianity and early church writers.
Here is his audio lecture on Jerome, you can find the other parts on the same channel.

I like David Bercot and have no doubt he believes what he says but that is not hard evidence. I am not going to take the word of someone without evidence. Moreover nothing he says contradict any of the points I made.

Let me remind you (see post 283).
You stated: "The LXX was composed of several versions of the Septuagint, one of which was likely Aquilas version"

I replied: "We have no LXX complete or near complete manuscripts before the 4th century A.D. And the ones we do have are Christian. There are only a few fragments that predate the 4th century A.D. Moreover the manuscripts and codices of the Septuagint are not uniformed. No two are exactly alike. They all differ in some way."

You stated: "Jerome later would switch around verses from Origins composition with the prot-Masoretic which also differs in a few areas from the Christian Masoretic"

I replied: "Please point to the manuscript evidence which supports that claim. Please provide a quote and the sources where Jerome states that is what he did."

So again I says:
Please point to the manuscript evidence which supports that claim.
Please provide a quote and the sources where Jerome states that is what he did.

 

[Andrew]

I like David Bercot and have no doubt he believes what he says but that is not hard evidence. I am not going to take the word of someone simply because he says. Moreover nothing he says contradict any of the points I made.

Let me remind you (see post 283).
You stated: "The LXX was composed of several versions of the Septuagint, one of which was likely Aquilas version"

I replied: "We have no LXX complete or near complete manuscripts before the 4th century A.D. And the ones we do have are Christian. There are only a few fragments that predate the 4th century A.D. Moreover the manuscripts and codices of the Septuagint are not uniformed. No two are exactly alike. They all differ in some way."

You stated: "Jerome later would switch around verses from Origins composition with the prot-Masoretic which also differs in a few areas from the Christian Masoretic"

I replied: "Please point to the manuscript evidence which supports that claim. Please provide a quote and the sources where Jerome states that is what he did."

So again I says:
Please point to the manuscript evidence which supports that claim.
Please provide a quote and the sources where Jerome states that is what he did

I don't have Jerome's writings handy, I still don't know what to make of "out of Egypt" being wrong in the lxx, I do know that Jerome doesn't always side with the hebrew, rabbis point that out all of the time, when it differs it's almost always found in the LXX

 

[Origen]

I don't have Jerome's writings handy, I still don't know what to make of "out of Egypt" being wrong in the lxx, I do know that Jerome doesn't always side with the hebrew, rabbis point that out all of the time, when it differs it's almost always found in the LXX

Let's consider another case then. Do you consider Isaiah 9:6 messianic?

For to us a child is born,
to us a son is given;
and the government shall be upon his shoulder,
and his name shall be called
Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God,
Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace. (ESV)

 

[Andrew]

Let's consider an other case then. Do you consider Isaiah 9:6 messianic?

For to us a child is born,
to us a son is given;
and the government shall be upon his shoulder,
and his name shall be called
Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God,
Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace. (ESV)

Yeah my Brenton has a note "Alex. +" meaning its from the Alexandrian text with additions "wonderful counsellor, mighty one..."

 

[Andrew]

Let's consider an other case then. Do you consider Isaiah 9:6 messianic?

For to us a child is born,
to us a son is given;
and the government shall be upon his shoulder,
and his name shall be called
Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God,
Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace. (ESV)

Thanks for pointing that out

 

[Origen]

Yeah my Brenton has a note "Alex. +" meaning its from the Alexandrian text with additions "wonderful counsellor, mighty one..."

Excellent! That note tells you that not all LXX manuscripts read alike. That means, just as I said in post 309:

"The manuscripts and codices of the Septuagint are not uniformed. No two are exactly alike. They all differ in some way."

Nevertheless Brenton translated the verse this way:
"For a child is born to us, and a son is given to us, whose government is upon his shoulder: and his name is called the Messenger of great counsel: for I will bring peace upon the princes, and health to him."

Thus LXX translators mangled this clearly messianic passage.

Also note I will check what Alexandrinus does have. I have found instances where the notes in Brenton are wrong.