Blatant Mistranslations?! Contextual Dishonesty?! Why did christianity paint Jesus into the Jewish Scriptures? (Page 4)

Zanjan: Moses told the Jews to offer peace treaties with the Cannanites and all those in the land to show them these new settlers would be good neighbours. He said ONLY if they refuse to arrive at a treaty, then go torch them.

Think about that - it was a brutal world, a matter of who wipes out who first.

E s s e n c e: Amore, Judaic teaching traditions are very strict in how to interpret them, imagining what's unknown and humanizing to understand G-d opens the door to create G-d into our image. This is why the birth of the idea of Jesus the god was created, and I believe it was both intentions misunderstanding and contextual dishonesty.

JX Amaro:
This thread begins on page 1 with the OP – amoregrowers – providing an analysis of Psalm 22:16.
Let’s analyze that analysis. 1) It begins with the claim that Christians misrepresented the KEY WORD in the verse as “pierced” rather than “like a lion.” 2) The post then goes on to discuss the KEY WORD (stated as “k’ari”) to verify the claim of Christian manipulation and fraud.

On point 1: Yes, in the Masoretic text the KEY WORD does say “like a lion.” The problem is that the Masoretic text is a late text. In earlier texts – the Septuagint, the Syrian, the Ethiopic, the Arabic and the Dead Sea Scrolls – the KEY WORD says “pierced.”

Hmmm.
Maybe we should investigate the KEY WORD.

What is the KEY WORD? The OP – amoregrowers – says the KEY WORD is “k’ari”, but is that correct? Actually, no. The issue hangs on one particular letter in the KEY WORD. That letter is either a “Vav” or a “Yud.” And the distinction between those two letters is the distinction between translating the KEY WORD as “pierced” or “like a lion.”

Given that the Christian texts are EARLIER than the Masoretic text, the logical conclusion to draw is that the Rabbinical Jews ALTERED the text in their (Masoretic) version – the latter version – to serve their own theological agenda. But don’t take my word for it, let’s quote from a source:

“Those who argue for “lion” typically claim that “pierced” is a corruption, inserted by Christians, in an attempt to create a prophecy about Jesus. However, the fact that there are many manuscripts that predate Christianity that have the “pierced” reading disproves this concept. In fact, it is more likely that the “lion” reading in the Masoretic Hebrew text is the corruption, as the Masoretic manuscripts predominantly date to the 3rd and 4th centuries AD, after Christianity was established, giving the Jews a reason to conceal what the Hebrew Scriptures predict regarding Jesus Christ.”
This is the link to fact-check:
https://www.gotquestions.org/Psalm-22-16-lion-pierced.html

So basically, the Rabbis lied, not the Christians.

Still don’t believe me or my source material? OK, look for yourself at the Dead Sea Scrolls and determine by your own eyes if the KEY LETTER in the KEY WORD is a “Vav” or a “Yud.” Here’s a link to a PDF that has a photo of the KEY WORD and shows you the KEY LETTERS. Go to page 167; your eyes wont lie.
https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3716&context=byusq

Once again we see that Christianity is the TRUE religion of YHWH and that Rabbinical Judaism is a COUNTERFEIT built on manipulative lies and frauds.

Apokalupto: spot on. and I will add that Christians do not consider Psalm 22 to be prophetic of Jesus on account of a single word. the Psalm is a picture of the cross, it does not hang on one word. the very strange interpretation, like a lion, does not take away from the picture. others who have not gone as deep as you JX, have easily explained how even the masoretic text implies the same thing but through poetic language.

either way Psalm 22 was fulfilled by Jesus Christ and has parallels to Isaiah 53. it even says pierced in verse 5.

amoregrowers: Its ok to debate the plain meaning. We all have our own time to learn.

Let me help you hopefully shine a light on some things Jesus shared

And, behold, there are last which shall be first, and there are first which shall be last." (Luke 13:30)

Ive listened to all the basic sermons on this but could it be jesus was simply telling people about the atbash cypher in the OT? First last last first

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atbash

Or the fact that over 100 letters in Torah are either larger or smaller or inverted.

These inverted letters are the reason for the 2 fish and five loaves story...

Lets also not forget the Tagin. The little crowns over the letters.

Extraordinary dots over certain words.

Verly I say to you.... not one jot or tittle will pass away .... Jesus said it must be important right?

Isolated letters

Extra wide spaces


Each Torah scroll is carefully translated to maintain all these

Each letter has meaning beyond the narrative.

How many times did Solomon speak of riddles...

That is what the oral Torah explains that you reject. Jesus knew these things and taught them in parable. He was a Jew right?

These are not wishy washy esoteric jibber jabber beliefs. These are facts that Jesus would have learned and taught.

Lots of fun stuff in OT.. It used to be boring beget beget beget.. until I learned some of its true meaning....

I dont want anyone to change their beliefs. I want everyone to see how the Torah is actually your story, and our map in the actual teachings of the kingdom of Heaven. This is where the the bible becomes like the movie "the never ending story" and takes us on our journey revealing our purpose in this world...

While debate is fun. Its not as fun as being awake.


Prove me wrong. Ask G-d in prayer if im lying!! Seek the Holy Spirit to show you. Seek it out.. This is all HIS doing. And HE said only a FEW find it.... and I hope you are the FEW!!!!


Dont take my word for it. Im just some dude on the internet.... lol

amoregrowers: Just a quick note..

Romans 3

King James Version

3 

1What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision?

2 Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God.

It was THE JEWISH PEOPLE ENTRUSTED WITH THE ORACLES OF G-D

The "ORACLES" (i.e. JEWISH ORAL TRADITIONS)

Is the only approach to interpreting sacred scripture. Any method other then this will only lead to failure and will be lacking...

Apokalupto: I'm much more interested to see what you have to say about JX post then these two very obvious red herrings.

amoregrowers: Prove me wrong

E s s e n c e: All I have seen is jx amaro posting pseudo information to justify his beliefs. He is not a Hebrew speaker, and a lousy researcher.

Apokalupto:
amoregrowers: Prove me wrong

you just were. scroll up. you should edit your op and copy paste JX answer right in there.

amoregrowers: Copy paste his answer.. lol your funny. Ill not delete it, let the readers decide. This post is geared to get people to study. I dont censor peoples post. Everyone has a voice and opinion. Unless its vulgar... while two swords clash in battle, iron sharpens iron.

amoregrowers: Here is more copy paste.

Jewish and Christian renderings of Psalms 22:17 have different translations for the word Ka'ari. Why is it so? Let's find out.

Why do the respective Jewish and Christian renderings of Psalms 22:17 (16 in some versions) differ in the translation of the Hebrew word ka-'ari?

Answer: Christians see in this verse an opportunity to make the claim that the psalmist foretold the piercing of Jesus' hands and feet as part of the crucifixion process. They maintain that the Hebrew word ka-'ari in verse 17 (16 in some versions) should be translated as "pierce." They render this verse as: "They pierced my hands and my feet." This follows the Septuagint version, used by the early Christians, whose error is repeated by the Vulgate and the Syriac. However, it should be noted that the Septuagint underwent textual revisions by Christian copyists in the early centuries of the Common Era; it is not known if the rendering "pierced" is one of those revisions.

In any case, this rendering contains two fallacies. First, assuming that the root of this Hebrew word is  krh, "to dig," then the function of the 'aleph in the word ka-'ari is inexplicable since it is not part of the root. Karah consists only of the Hebrew letters kaph, resh, and he, whereas the word in the Hebrew text,  ka-'ari, consists of kaph, 'aleph, resh, and yod. Second, the verb  krh, "to dig," does not have the meaning "to pierce." Karah generally refers to the digging of the soil, and is never applied in the Scriptures to the piercing of the flesh (cf. Genesis 26:25; Exodus 21:33; Numbers 21:18; Jeremiah 18:20, 22; Psalms 7:16, 57:7). There are a number of words that are used in Hebrew for piercing the body: rats'a, "to pierce," "to bore with an awl" (Exodus 21:6); dakar, "to pierce" (Zechariah 12:10, Isaiah 13:15);  nakar, "to pierce," "to bore," "to perforate" (2 Kings 18:21). This last word is used in a very significant sense in the last verse cited: "It [the reed] will go into his hand and pierce it." Any of these words would be far better suited for use in this passage than one that is generally used to denote digging the soil.

The correct interpretation of the verse must be based on the elliptical style of this particular psalm. The text should read, in effect: "Like a lion [they are gnawing at] my hands and my feet." Ellipsis (the omission of words) is an apt rhetorical device for a composition in which suffering and agony is described. A person in agony does not usually express his feelings in complete round sentences. Such a person is capable of exclaiming only the most critical words of his thoughts and feelings. In this case: "Like a lion . . . my hands and my feet!" Similarly, in verse 1 we find broken phrases rather than whole sentences: "Far from helping me . . . the words of my roaring."

Examining Psalm 22, we find that verses 17, 21, and 22 express parallel thoughts. In verse 17, the psalmist speaks of "dogs" and "a lion," which are metaphoric representations of his enemies, and in verses 21 and 22 respectively, he beseeches the Almighty to save him "from a dog's paw" and "from a lion's mouth." Thus, in verse 17, where he complains of the lion, the missing words are understood, and it is to be read: "Like a lion [they are gnawing at] my hands and my feet." This is the most plausible interpretation of the text. Rashi's interpretation of the verse--"As if crushed by the mouth of a lion are my hands and my feet"--is similar in thought to the one we have offered though differently stated. While these interpretations fit with the diction of the entire psalm, the Christian translation--"They pierced my hands and my feet"--does not.

Grammatical proof of the correctness of the Masoretic text is seen by the use of the qamatz under the kaph in ka-'ari, which is the result of an assimilated definite article. Thus, the literal translation would be "Like the lion. . . ." While in English, a noun used in a general sense is recognized by having no article, either definite or indefinite, in Hebrew, as well as in many other languages, such nouns take the definite article. For example, "Work is good for man" in Hebrew would be "The work is good for man." (Cf. Amos 5:19 with the English translation.)

The metaphorical terminology used by the psalmist to express in physical terms his mental anguish is comparable to similar usage found in Jeremiah 23:9. There the prophet exclaims: "My heart within me is broken, all my bones shake; I am like a drunken man, and like a man whom wine has overcome."

As a result of a careful study of this verse, we see that the Christian claim that Psalms 22:17 (16 in some versions) foretells that Jesus' hands and feet would be pierced has no truth to it.

amoregrowers: Good time friends. You all have a good weekend

We will catch up Monday.

Peace

E s s e n c e: By the way thank you amoregrowers for what you said about poetry.

E s s e n c e: Amore

JX Amaro: In regard to the long “copy and paste” statement posted by amoregrowers, I think the point is moot. All parties agree that the Dead Sea Scrolls haven’t been altered by either Christians or Jews, and I provided a link to a picture of the Scrolls with the KEY WORD and the KEY LETTERS so you can decide for yourself and not be bothered with the biased talking points of supposed “experts.”

That said, the “copy and paste” statement (un-sourced, though I suspect it comes from a sleazy Chabadnik site) provides an interesting study in “sleight of hand” argumentation.

First, note the style. It is a long “word wall” with plenty of “word salads.” In short, it’s a “filibustering” style that attempts to overwhelm the readers brain with big words and long sentences. In this way, it is hoped that the reader will be intimidated and just accept the conclusion without carefully analyzing the tiresome argument. Quite frankly, when you have TRUTH on your side, you can usually explain it in simple and easy to understand terms. Don’t be fooled by filibustering word walls: they exist to conceal deception, not reveal truth.

Second, let’s look at the substance. Really, it’s riddled with basic errors and trickster techniques. Let’s analyze a typical example.

In the fourth paragraph we read this remarkable sentence: “Second, the verb krh, "to dig," does not have the meaning "to pierce."”

Coming in the middle of a long word wall, the reader might just keep going without critical thinking (which is the point of the filibuster style). But wait! Are those words really that different? Let’s actually think this through. Let’s say I use a shovel to dig in the ground. That would mean the shovel would PENETRATE the ground and then BORE into the ground. Now let’s say I use a steel nail to crucify someone. That would mean the steal nail would PENETRATE the flesh and BORE into the flesh. See the “conceptual parallelism”? See the similarity of meaning between “to dig” and “to pierce”? So much for the absurd and dogmatic statement that: “the vrb krh “to dig” does not have the meaning “to pierce.””

Virtually every paragraph engages in tricky techniques and “sleight of hand” games like this.

Let me offer one more example.
In the third paragraph we read this: “They (the Christians) render this verse as: "They pierced my hands and my feet." This follows the Septuagint version, used by the early Christians, whose error is repeated by the Vulgate and the Syriac.”

Note that the writer dogmatically asserts that the Septuagint version is in error. But that is the basic blunder of “assuming what is to be proved” (ie, “begging the question”)! Has it been proved that the Septuagint version is in “error” by using “pierced”? No, it’s just asserted! No proof offered! Nada! Zip! Zilch!

Here is the conclusion of a scholarly study on the subject. “Accordingly, I have to conclude that “pierced” is the better reading of the alternatives–under the praxis of textual criticism.”
And here is the link for fact checking and source vetting:
https://onedaringjew.wordpress.com/2010/09/02/psalm-22-they-pierced-and-the-septuagint/

Once again we see that the Christians were the honest brokers and the Rabbis were the schemers and tricksters. The reason is simple. Christianity is the TRUE faith of YHWH and Rabbinical Judaism is a COUNTERFEIT and a FRAUD.

Zanjan: Like rabid dogs, biting the feet of scripture because they can't reach the body.

Apokalupto: you can dig a well, a well is a hole. to dig to pierce, we're talking about the same thing here we're making a hole in the hand.

Dead Sea scroll Psalm 22:16 xrusaoros pegasos's Picture

I feel stupid just saying that because it's so obvious that the term to dig is not problematic. I've seen that argument a few times " to dig doesn't mean to pierce." I've never spent time on it because I thought it was obvious. I've seen not a few times people using excuses such as "there are other words that would have been better suited to use than 'to dig' therefore the Christian argument is wrong." I find that one quite shallow.

I read the Greek New testament. being able to read Greek I have come across quite a few times where the definition of the word in the sentence is so straightforward you can't understand it. so unless you're aware of the connotation, the figurative sense, the poetic usage, the hyperbole or however the author or speaker in the text means to use the word etc etc then you will be lost. because of my experience in Greek, "to dig" can never be an issue for me, frankly it shouldn't be for anyone else, either.

as for like a lion.

the passage gives you the context
Psalm 22 uses lions for poetic imagery
they gape at him with their mouths
like a lion my hands and my feet
save me from the mouth of the lion

no instance of pawing, so it is all teeth.

xrusaoros pegasos's Picture

just look on Google images, if a lion bites your hand it's going to pierce straight through.

so if we are considering the like a lion reading, the author did not tell us exactly what happened, he left it up to the reader to imagine and this is the most plausible explanation provided above, that his hands and feet were nipped or bit (which would no doubt make holes with those teeth) rendering him immobilized. the alternative imagination is that David wants us to imagine and imply that the lion ate off his feet and his hands as poetic imagery.
lol..

amoregrowers: So could the lion represent Babylon or Nebuchadnezzar?

Apokalupto:

in Jesus case it represents the Romans nailing him to the cross.

another comment I would like to add on the like a lion reading

considering that the word like a lion is so close to "dig" it's almost as if that's what he's implying through the poetic language in yet another way, saying it without saying it.

so it's like he is implying to dig or making a hole while yet using a word that means like a lion. quite genius actually.

Apokalupto: right zanjan, as I've already pointed out this one word does not make or break the point. it's the body of the text, it's the whole chapter, it's a portrait, a picture, a preview of the crucifixion event.

E s s e n c e: xrusaoros pegasos Thank you for speaking in favor of Poetry.

JX Amaro:
Re: 75 or 70 Hebrews entering Egypt

On page 1 of this thread (the third post) the OP, amoregrowers, brings up – in a somewhat haphazard way – the Chabadnik talking point that the New Testament speaks of 75 people going to Egypt while the “always authoritative” Tanakh states only 70 people went to Egypt. Certainly this demonstrates that Christians are a bunch of dolts who can't even get basics correct, but is this view correct? Let's investigate.

Yes, it is true that most Christian Bibles state 75 and most Jews have Tanakhs that state 70. But keep in mind that most Jews use Tanakhs based on the Masoretic translation, made over 1,000 years after the rabbis in Alexandria wrote the Septuagint. In point of fact, ALL the old writings confirm the Christian belief of 75! This includes Josephus, Philo, and the Dead Sea Scrolls, among many others. Indeed, if anyone is in error, it would seem to be the Jews. Here is a quotation from a highly interesting and detailed study:

“For unknown reasons the Masoretic text was changed so all three places in the Torah agree to read 70 persons entered Egypt. What is significant for the Christian is that Stephen is fully validated in his “75 persons” from the Septuagint, Philo and two Hebrew language Dead Sea scrolls which also record 75.”
source:
https://www.bible.ca/manuscripts/Book-of-Exodus-1-5-Jacob-enters-Egypt-70-75-persons-Bible-Manuscript-Textual-Variants-Old-Testament-Tanakh-Septuagint-LXX-Masoretic-Text-MT-scribal-gloss-error.htm

As for the “unknown reasons,” one wonders if the reason was precisely yet another distortion of text to give Jews an opportunity to slander Christians. Hmmm. Decide for yourself, of course.

So again, we see that the FACTS are on the Christian side.

E s s e n c e: Lol at the flats presented from the Christian side, this is full of pseudo theological knowledge based in ignorance

amoregrowers: Well Now I realize that you dont understand how to comprehend Hebrew scripture. Your more interested in proving why Christians are right and Jews are wrong. I being raised christian know exactly where your coming from. There is always two things at work.

The letter of the Torah
The spirit of the Torah

I also said numbers mean something in Torah.

So I will agree with you, and that Talmud you hate will agree with you, These conflicts are nothing new. Both Jewish and Christian scholars way smarter then any of us have been looking at this for centuries.

But by a literal look you can see there is a conflict. Your way to explain the literal error is to say Jews are wrong and christianity is correct because the dead sea scrolls say so...

Here are the 70 that went to egypt in this pic

amoregrowers's Picture

Remember numbers mean something

The 70 nations
The 70 elders
The 70 years of captivity
The 70 holy days a year 52 sabbaths 18 festivals
The 70 bulls on succoth for 70 nations
The 70 years till 2nd temple destruction
The 70 words in the kiddush
The 70 languages from babel
The barley omer planted 70 days before pesach
The letter ayin spelled out is 70
The 70 levels of Torah understanding
The sending of 70 by Jesus in Luke

And many more

Not 75


The 70 elders were always chosen from the family of the 70 in that picture list that went to egypt.

Why you might ask. Here is a Torah secret.

Genesis 46:27 KJV

And the sons of Joseph, which were born him in Egypt, were two souls: all the souls of the house of Jacob, which came into Egypt, were threescore and ten.

In the Hebrew Torah. The part that says "all the souls of Jacob" is singular. So it indicates that these 70 are the house of Israel united as one soul for the first time.


The 70 elders in egypt were appointed as the taskmaster over Israel. They were beaten by the Egyptians when they didnt make their brick quota.

They took the beating for the people.

For generations the 70 eleders were decendents of the original 70.

This shows the 70 were always of a oneness unification with G-d and with the people of Israel.

The number 70 signifies first a change, then it shows us a building of a spiritually elevated community.

So I ask again is it 70 or 75??? Because the Spirit of the Law says 70.

I didnt even get into the deeper meanings in kaballah.

The bible is a spiritual book with a spiritual purpose.

All things happen in the unseen before they manifest in the seen.

G-d help us to understand his words.