Hellenistic Judaism And Our Bible

Hellenistic Judaism And Our Bible

That is the greek word used in the NT for Greeks.
Concidentally that word is used in Revelation 9. Interesting

http://www.eliyah.com/lexicon.html

1673. Hellenikos hel-lay-nee-kos' from 1672; Hellenic, i.e. Grecian (in language):--Greek.
1675. Hellenistes hel-lay-nis-tace' from a derivative of 1672; a Hellenist or Greek-speaking Jew:--Grecian.

Young)
Luke 23:38 And there was also a superscription written over him, in letters of Greek/ellhnikoiV <1673>, and Roman, and Hebrew, `This is the King of the Jews.'
Young)
Revelation 9:11 and they have over them a king--the messenger of the abyss--a name [is] to him in Hebrew, Abaddon, and in the Greek/ellhnikh <1673> he hath a name, Apollyon.

Click to expand...

Hellenistic period - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The word Hellenistic is a modern word and a 19th century concept; the idea of a Hellenistic period did not exist in Ancient Greece. In the mid-19th Century, J. G. Droysen coined the term Hellenistic to define the period when Greek culture spread in the non-Greek world after Alexander&#8217;s conquest. The major issue with the term Hellenistic lies in its convenience, as the spread of Greek culture was not the generalized phenomenon that the term implies.

Some areas of the conquered world were more affected by Greek influences than others. The term Hellenistic also implies that the Greek populations were of majority in the areas in which they settled, while in many cases, the Greek settlers were actually the minority amongst the native populations. The Greek population and the native population did not mix; the Greeks moved and brought their own culture, but interaction did not always occur.






.

CherubRam said:

Part of a conversation from MJ Forum.

Hellenistic Judaism And Our Bible


The Dead Sea Scrolls backs up the Septuagint version and not the Masoretic text of Jeremiah.

It seems that the Hellenist were removing proof text about Christ, while promoting the festivals and temple gifts, even from the Gentiles. The priest would use the festivals to generate revenue for themselves, possibly thru their relatives selling in the temple.

Any suggestions on how to proceed with a bible study?

Ezekiel 34:10
This is what the Sovereign Lord says: I am against the shepherds and will hold them accountable for my flock. I will remove them from tending the flock so that the shepherds can no longer feed themselves. I will rescue my flock from their mouths, and it will no longer be food for them.

John 2
13 When it was almost time for the Jewish Passover, Jesus went up to Jerusalem. 14 In the temple courts he found men selling cattle, sheep and doves, and others sitting at tables exchanging money. 15 So he made a whip out of cords, and drove all from the temple area, both sheep and cattle; he scattered the coins of the money changers and overturned their tables. 16 To those who sold doves he said, “Get these out of here! How dare you turn my Father’s house into a market!”

Jude 1: 4 and 12
4 For certain men whose condemnation was written about long ago have secretly slipped in among you. They are godless men, who change the grace of our God into a license for immorality and deny Jesus Christ…

12 These men are blemishes at your love feasts, eating with you without the slightest qualm—shepherds who feed only themselves. They are clouds without rain, blown along by the wind; autumn trees, without fruit and uprooted—twice dead.
I'm angry because I found out that the verses of Jeremiah 33:17-18 are not in the Dead Sea Scrolls or the Septuagint.

Originally Posted by CherubRam
In regards to Jeremiah 33, Levites and burnt offerings.

Jeremiah 33
17 For this is what the Lord says: ‘David will never fail to have a man to sit on the throne of the house of Israel, 18 nor will the priests, who are Levites, ever fail to have a man to stand before me continually to offer burnt offerings, to burn grain offerings and to present sacrifices.’”

There are a multitude of verses that disagree with this one verse, anyone know the reason why?

Verse 17 and 18 are not in the Dead Sea Scrolls or Septuagint. Now what?


The Jeremiah Scroll

Among the Qumran texts was a scroll of Jeremiah. This is very significant because the LXX version of Jeremiah is seven chapters shorter than the Masoretic, and what remains is in a different order!

The Dead Sea Scrolls backs up the LXX version, not our Masoretic Bibles.
- See more at: The Dead Sea Scrolls Version of Isaiah (and Jeremiah)

Click to expand...

Concerning what you said in the OP, many people have been of the mindset that the Septuagint version of the OT must be flawed and that Greek is "ungodly", yet God has used it and blessed it as a language, and also that the language is very precise and a great communicator. Most Jews at the time of the NT spoke Greek as well as other languages, it is estimated. It was and is the perfect language to reach both Jew and Gentile alike.

Some of it is actually interesting to consider when it comes to studying the accounts of Jewish believers in the Bible who spoke Greek..and also used differing versions of the scritptures. For most making it out as if its only "Hebrew" that was in view, I find it interesting that there was debate in the days of Christ/the apostles and the early church as to which translation was the best to use. They used the Hebrew as well as the Septuagint (Greek Translation of the Scriptures) alongside the Targums/ Aramaic Versions of the Old Testament and others. Greek. There was actually a good article I remember coming across, as seen if going online and looking it up under the name of "The Targums: Aramaic Versions of the Old Testament" ( ). Another that may be of benefit would be under the name of "A study in the Aramaic Language of Jesus" ( ). If one cannot deal with that, they're not willing to deal with what has happened historically.


Concerning what Stephen noted in Acts 7:14 when Stephen cites the number of of Jacob's kindred at seventy-five, he is indeed following the Septaugint rather than the Hebrew Text for Exodus 1:5, which follows a different calculation and arrives at the number 70. Many Jews used such quite often, in the event one trys to act as if all Jews were ONLY for using the Hebrew Text as the only one. This is important in light of the fact that in the era Stephen lived in, understanding Greek language was very much a big deal.......and the Septaugint was key. The different texts were apparently based on different decisions regarding whether to include Jacob and his wife and the additional descendants born to Ephraim and Manasseh in Egypt.

As it concerns Stephen quoting from the Septaugint, of course its not surprising. For as the text makes clear:
Stephen, as the text makes clear, was a GREEK-Speaker....listed in Acts 6:8-15 as one of the seven Hellenists selected to minister to the widows in Acts 6:5. He preached Christ in the Greek-speaking synagouges of Jerusalem, where he was seized and dragged before the Sanhendrin. One should keep in mind that the people known as the Synagogue of the Freedmen were those Jews who had been enslaved and then granted freedom....and connected with the Diaspora.

The freed slaves were probably Jewish Cyrenians, Alexandrians and people from Cilicia and the province of Asia who had been captured and enslaved by the Romans, or their descendants. General Pompey, who captured Jerusalem in 63 B.C.E., took a number of Jews prisoner and released them in Rome. Some of the Jews, however, may have been Gentile converts to Judaism. ...and as it concerns the rise of Greek and the issue of how the Greek-speaking Jews and Hebrew-Speaking Jews (or culturally Greek and Culturally Hebrew), the root of it dates back from the conquest of Eretz-Israel by Alexander the Great in 323 B.C.E. He and his successors introduced the Greek Language and Greek culture into the lands they ruled. While Hellenistic influence produced such fruits as the Septuagint, Philo of Alexandria and Josephus, "Hebraists" considered the "Hellenists" to have developed an adulterated Judaism which had assimilated elements of the pagan cultures around them-----although the Judaism of the Hebrew-speakers had not avoided these influences either. The Maccabean Revolt ( which one can also see celebrated in the form of the Festival of Lights in John 10:22) contains elements of intra-Jewish struggle related to this issue.

Going back to the issue of the Greek Influenced Feedman, they used the Septuagint and Stephen, in his speech, quotes from it. As it concerns the GREEK Speaking Jews who were there, of course he'd use a version that says Seventy Five instead of Seventy since there was ALREADY an audience there that would have been familar with that...and thus, his usage of that would be meeting someone on their own grounds. Thus, saying "Well, the Hebraic TEXT is contrary to what Stephen SAID!!!!!" is a moot point.....for in that culture, different versions were used to discuss history.

As it concerns the translation that Stephen used (the Septaugint), if taking issue with that, one needs to be honest in realizing how Jews (Hellenists) were already unrolling Greek scrolls in their synagogues...and even Jesus and the apostles and the New Testament writers also accepted the Septuagint, using it in conjunction with the Hebrew.



One example of Jesus' use of the Septuagint is found in His refutation of the Devil in Matthew 4.4. The Hebrew in Deuteronomy 8.3 has "mouth of the LORD"; the Septuagint has "mouth of God". It is this latter that Jesus quotes. The Septuagint version having been current for about three centuries before the time when the books of the New Testament were written, it is not surprising that the Apostles should have used it more often than not in making citations from the Old Testament. They used it as an honestly-made version in pretty general use at the time when they wrote. They did not on every occasion give an authoritative translation of each passage de novo, but they used what was already familiar to the ears of converted Hellenists, when it was sufficiently accurate to suit the matter in handThis is not to say that Jesus or the New Testament writers considered the Septuagint to be inspired as the Hebrew was, or that we should. Only what the writers actually quoted in their canonical writings can be considered inspired, and that only because they quoted it. ...just as Stephen did in his addressment to the Jews.

Perhaps one of the most important instances of the New Testament writers' use of the Septuagint is Matthew 1: 23, in which the Gospel writer quotes Isaiah 7.14. The Hebrew word almah, argued by some in our day to indicate a young woman of marriageable age but one not necessarily a virgin, is translated in the Septuagint as parthenos. This Greek word means virgin, indicating that the Jewish translators before the time of Christ understood the prophecy correctly. Other Jews after the advent of the Christian era translated the word into Greek as neanis, 'young woman', in order to distance the prophecy from fulfilment in Jesus. Matthew quotes the Septuagint, applying it to Jesus. Other New Testament writers also used the clear translation from the Septuagint in their writings. In Hebrews 1.6 is a quotation from Psalm 97.7. The Old Testament passage speaks of the "graven images", "idols" and "gods". The final word in Hebrew is elohim (gods); the Septuagint renders this aggeloi (angels). The book of Hebrews takes the Septuagint rendering and incorporates it, in which is urged that "all the angels of God" worship Jesus.

For other examples of the Septuagint being used, one can see how in In 1 Corinthians 15:58, the Septuagint of Hosea 13:14 is much closer to Paul's quote than the Masoretic text, though the difference is still significant.

In the first century, a large percentage of the church was Jewish. The apostles who stayed in the Roman Empire—which are the ones who wrote most of the New Testament—would have had need for the LXX, but they also would have been familiar with the original Jewish text from their days in Israel. Thus, the New Testament is a mix of quotes, some of which match the Septuagint, some of which match our Masoretic text, and some of which match neither. The reason it may match neither is because we have no early copies of the Masoretic text, and it may have become corrupted over the centuries. There were also competing Hebrew texts even in the 1st century. The Isaiah scroll of the Dead Sea Scrolls, for example, matches neither the Septuagint nor the Masoretic text.


vvv
__________________

CherubRam said:

Part of a conversation from MJ Forum.

Hellenistic Judaism And Our Bible


The Dead Sea Scrolls backs up the Septuagint version and not the Masoretic text of Jeremiah.

It seems that the Hellenist were removing proof text about Christ, while promoting the festivals and temple gifts, even from the Gentiles. The priest would use the festivals to generate revenue for themselves, possibly thru their relatives selling in the temple.

Any suggestions on how to proceed with a bible study?

Ezekiel 34:10
This is what the Sovereign Lord says: I am against the shepherds and will hold them accountable for my flock. I will remove them from tending the flock so that the shepherds can no longer feed themselves. I will rescue my flock from their mouths, and it will no longer be food for them.

John 2
13 When it was almost time for the Jewish Passover, Jesus went up to Jerusalem. 14 In the temple courts he found men selling cattle, sheep and doves, and others sitting at tables exchanging money. 15 So he made a whip out of cords, and drove all from the temple area, both sheep and cattle; he scattered the coins of the money changers and overturned their tables. 16 To those who sold doves he said, “Get these out of here! How dare you turn my Father’s house into a market!”

Jude 1: 4 and 12
4 For certain men whose condemnation was written about long ago have secretly slipped in among you. They are godless men, who change the grace of our God into a license for immorality and deny Jesus Christ…

12 These men are blemishes at your love feasts, eating with you without the slightest qualm—shepherds who feed only themselves. They are clouds without rain, blown along by the wind; autumn trees, without fruit and uprooted—twice dead.
I'm angry because I found out that the verses of Jeremiah 33:17-18 are not in the Dead Sea Scrolls or the Septuagint.

Click to expand...

If interested,

For more info, one can go online and look up an article entitled "The Dead Sea Scrolls Version of Isaiah (and Jeremiah)
<< Christian History for Everyman" ( ) and "Should We Use the Septuagint and Accept Its Canonical Books? << Christian History for Everyman" ( )

Again, of the approximately 300 Old Testament quotes in the New Testament, approximately 2/3 of them came from the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the Old Testament) which included the deuterocanonical books that the Protestants later removed. This is additional evidence that Jesus and the apostles viewed the deuterocanonical books as part of canon of the Old Testament.

Some articles one can go online/investigate under the following names/titles:

• "The Septuagint (LXX)" ( )

• "SEPTUAGINT QUOTES: IN THE NEW TESTAMENT"

• ( )

• "What Bible Did Jesus Use? - Online Bible Study Tools" ( //)

• "What Bible Did Jesus Use? - Genealogy and Jewish Heritage" ( )

• "Church Ekklesia in the Septuagint, the Bible Jesus Used!" ( )

To be clear, for the sake of technicality, there is no Septuagint–a single Greek translation of the whole OT–but in fact what we call the Septuagint is a compilation of different Greek translations of groups of books from the OT from different time periods. Often it’s easy to think that we have this copy of the Septuagint written in the same type of Greek from one period and that’s what the writers of the NT were using but that’s not the case. It’s actually a bit more complicated than that


Some of the Jewish Talmudists claimed inspiration for the Septuagint, stating that God inspired the hearts of each translator...and for more information on the historical backdrop behind the history of the Greek Version, at some time during the second and third centuries B.C., the Hebrew Bible (i.e., the Old Testament) was translated into Greek. No one is precisely sure of the history of the Septuagint, but in the synagogues of Greek-speaking Jews, it attained a wide acceptance long before the birth of Christ. One might suppose that the Jews would have resisted a translation from Hebrew to Greek, either rejecting it as disrespectful, or looking down on it as an inferior shadow of the real Hebrew Bible. But surprisingly the new translation was revered as much as the Hebrew. The Septuagint was thought of as the Bible itself.


For the Church Fathers, the Septuagint was not only the Old Testament they used in their study, writing and preaching, it was the one they used when translating the Old Testament into Latin. In time it came to be considered the inspired Old Testament, even above the Hebrew. Justin Martyr believed that in instances in which the Hebrew and Greek differed, the Septuagint was the correct text and that the Jews had "altogether taken away many Scriptures from the translations effected by those seventy elders". Most Fathers quoted from the Septuagint rather than the Hebrew when the two differed. Irenaeus relates the Aristeas story, and states that "The Scriptures were acknowledged as truly divine ... interpreted [translated] by the inspiration of God". Clement of Alexandria said that "it was not alien to the inspiration of God, who gave the prophecy, also to produce the translation, and make it as it were Greek prophecy", and based his claim that Amos the prophet was the father of Isaiah upon the identical spelling of Amos and Amoz in the Greek

It was not until the end of the 4th century AD that the ancient Church finally began to relinquish its attachment to the Septuagint. Other Old Testament translations were made into Greek, primarily those of Aquila, Symmachus and Theodotion. These three men, believed to be Judaizers, produced editions which displayed their heretical tendencies. The growing number of translations moved Origen to compare the editions, producing a polyglot Bible, the Hexapla, comprised of editions of the Hebrew, the Septuagint and several of the other Greek translations, which exhibited the differences between them.

Jerome for many years had translated the Old Testament from the Septuagint into Latin. In the latter part of the century, however, he recognised the differences between the Greek Septuagint and the Hebrew, and began making translations of the Hebrew books, primarily for the benefit and use of his friends. "Jerome was often criticised for using the Hebrew text rather than the Septuagint as the basis for his translation, but he rightly argued that the Septuagint was not inspired and that a better translation could be made from the Hebrew, the original language of the Old Testament." In time his translation, the Vulgate, grew in importance and became the accepted Latin version.

For a thousand years, the Vulgate was the prominent version used by the Western Church. But God moved the Reformers to turn their attention back to the Bible in the original languages. Even at that, the Reformers -- as the Jews in exile had done -recognised the need for people to have the Scriptures in a language they could understand. Thus, men such as Luther and Tyndale used the original language texts as the bases for their work

Today the Hebrew text of the Old Testament is available to people around the world. The Hebrew translated into a multitude of languages has made the Old Testament accessible to millions. Greek readers have the Old Testament in their own language, which is more readily understood than the antiquated form of Greek found in the Septuagint. Thus, many question the need for the Septuagint today.

However, the Septuagint continues to fill a place, particularly in Bible translation. The Hebrew of the Old Testament, while beautiful in its phrasing and form, is not always clear. The Septuagint, having been translated without anti-Christian bias and without the warping of modern liberal or neo-orthodox theology, provides an edition of the Old Testament which predates the earliest available Hebrew manuscript. Thus, although inferior to the Hebrew text, on occasion the Septuagint is a helpful aid in translation and Old Testament study.


And as it concerns Acts 7, It is evident that Stephen has followed the account which is given by the Septuagint. In Genesis 46:27, that version reads, "But the sons of Joseph who were with him in Egypt were nine souls; all the souls of the house of Jacob which came with Jacob into Egypt were seventy-five souls." This number is made out by adding these nine souls to the 66 mentioned in Genesis 46:26. The difference between the Septuagint and Moses is, that the former mentions five descendants of Joseph who are not recorded by the latter. The "names" of the sons of Ephraim and Manasseh are recorded in 1 Chronicles 7:14-21. Their names were Ashriel, Machir, Zelophehad, Peresh, sons of Manasseh; and Shuthelah, son of Ephraim. Why the Septuagint inserted these, it may not be easy to see. But such was evidently the fact; and the fact accords accurately with the historic record, though Moses did not insert their names. The solution of difficulties in regard to chronology is always difficult; and what might be entirely apparent to a Jew in the time of Stephen, may be wholly inexplicable to us.




As said best by "Gills Exposition of the Bible" commentary on Acts 7:

Stephen speaks of Jacob and all his kindred, among whom his sons' wives must be reckoned, whom Joseph called to him: according to Moses's account, the persons that came with Jacob into Egypt, who came out of his loins, and so exclusive of his sons' wives, were threescore and six; to which if we add Jacob himself, and Joseph who was before in Egypt, and who might be truly said to come into it, and his two sons that were born there, who came thither in his loins, as others in the account may be said to do, who were not yet born, when Jacob went down, the total number is threescore and ten, Genesis 46:26 out of which take the six following persons, Jacob, who was called by Joseph into Egypt, besides the threescore and fifteen souls, and Joseph and his two sons then in Egypt, who could not be said to be called by him, and Hezron and Hamul, the sons of Pharez not yet born, and this will reduce Moses's number to sixty four; to which sixty four, if you add the eleven wives of Jacob's sons, who were certainly part of the kindred called and invited into Egypt, Genesis 45:10 it will make up completely threescore and fifteen persons: or the persons called by Joseph maybe reckoned thus; his eleven brethren and sister Dinah, fifty two brother's children, to which add his brethren's eleven wives, and the amount is threescore and fifteen: so that the Jew (w) has no reason to charge Stephen with an error, as he does; nor was there any need to alter and corrupt the Septuagint version of Genesis 45:27 to make it agree with Stephen's account; or to add five names in it, in Acts 7:20 as Machir, Galaad, Sutalaam, Taam, and Edom, to make up the number seventy five: and it may be observed, that the number is not altered in the version of Deuteronomy 10:22 which agrees with the Hebrew for seventy persons.
​

To be clear, there are many who've noted that the Mazoretic text came from about 6 different texts. And therefore the choices between these texts can be questioned...even though the Jews were very careful about keeping the results of that chosen text accurate. Some argue that even the local synagogue might not have a compete Tanack. And propably not the targums or the Septuagint. ...and that though the Greek Septuagint, may have been the reference used by most in the Diaspora, it was still the Hebrew Torah was considered the official Word of God.

However, it doesn't seem historically accurate to say that the MT ( Masoretic text ) is the "unofficial" and non-authoritative record in all instances...and it is not the case that acknowledging differing translations means that one language is being pitted against another as the "official" and authoritative record in all instances. This is especially true with regard to Stephen's economy of speech in Acts. It goes without saying that regardless of how careful the people were in creating new copies and retiring what had become substandard through use older copies the people who created the MT had to make choices. Some of those choices don't accurately reflect what was accepted among Jewish people six hundred to nine hundred years earlier.

As much as there's discussion on what is or isn't the "official" text/cannon, it is apparent that the Holy Spirit doesn't understand official in the same way as do some people..for the Hebrew was never the "OFFICIAL" and only way to go in translation. NT references which aren't according to the MT were not perceived as false and/or a threat to those who think of the text of the MT as more authoritative than the Holy Spirit led writers of the NT. Looking at the matter scripturally, logically, and historically it is apparent that the text of the MT is necessarily not always what was "official."

People didn't live in a linguistic vacuum.
__________________

CherubRam said:

Part of a conversation from MJ Forum.

Hellenistic Judaism And Our Bible


The Dead Sea Scrolls backs up the Septuagint version and not the Masoretic text of Jeremiah.

It seems that the Hellenist were removing proof text about Christ, while promoting the festivals and temple gifts, even from the Gentiles. The priest would use the festivals to generate revenue for themselves, possibly thru their relatives selling in the temple.

Any suggestions on how to proceed with a bible study?

Ezekiel 34:10
This is what the Sovereign Lord says: I am against the shepherds and will hold them accountable for my flock. I will remove them from tending the flock so that the shepherds can no longer feed themselves. I will rescue my flock from their mouths, and it will no longer be food for them.

John 2
13 When it was almost time for the Jewish Passover, Jesus went up to Jerusalem. 14 In the temple courts he found men selling cattle, sheep and doves, and others sitting at tables exchanging money. 15 So he made a whip out of cords, and drove all from the temple area, both sheep and cattle; he scattered the coins of the money changers and overturned their tables. 16 To those who sold doves he said, “Get these out of here! How dare you turn my Father’s house into a market!”

Jude 1: 4 and 12
4 For certain men whose condemnation was written about long ago have secretly slipped in among you. They are godless men, who change the grace of our God into a license for immorality and deny Jesus Christ…

12 These men are blemishes at your love feasts, eating with you without the slightest qualm—shepherds who feed only themselves. They are clouds without rain, blown along by the wind; autumn trees, without fruit and uprooted—twice dead.
I'm angry because I found out that the verses of Jeremiah 33:17-18 are not in the Dead Sea Scrolls or the Septuagint.

Originally Posted by CherubRam
In regards to Jeremiah 33, Levites and burnt offerings.

Jeremiah 33
17 For this is what the Lord says: ‘David will never fail to have a man to sit on the throne of the house of Israel, 18 nor will the priests, who are Levites, ever fail to have a man to stand before me continually to offer burnt offerings, to burn grain offerings and to present sacrifices.’”

There are a multitude of verses that disagree with this one verse, anyone know the reason why?

Verse 17 and 18 are not in the Dead Sea Scrolls or Septuagint. Now what?


The Jeremiah Scroll

Among the Qumran texts was a scroll of Jeremiah. This is very significant because the LXX version of Jeremiah is seven chapters shorter than the Masoretic, and what remains is in a different order!

The Dead Sea Scrolls backs up the LXX version, not our Masoretic Bibles.
- See more at: The Dead Sea Scrolls Version of Isaiah (and Jeremiah)

Click to expand...

There are many reasons why one should trust the the Septuagint version. Not all Jewish believers went only with the Jewish Torah and Christ often referenced the Septuagint as well as the Masoretic Text. Specifically, with the Masoretic (for more clarity), there were scriptures that the Masoretic lines up with when seeing older Hebrew translations...and it seems Christ quoted that.

The Disciples/Apostles also were not only for referencing the Jewish Torah...and did not take the stance that believers only could reference that one. Even other disciples, such as Stephen, referenced the Samaritan Pentateuch in their speeches (Acts 6-7).

Although the existing copies of the Masoretic Text date back only to the tenth century, two other important textual evidences bolster the confidence of textual critics that it is accurate. The first is the successive discoveries of manuscripts at Qumran by the Dead Sea since 1947. These revealed portions of manuscripts several centuries older than any previously known. The second is the comparison of the Masoretic text to the Greek translation called the Septuagint (or LXX), which was written around 200-150 B.C. The oldest existing manuscripts date back to the fourth century A.D. Both the Septuagint and the Dead Sea Scrolls reveal an amazing consistency with the Masoretic Text.

Most Jews at the time of the NT spoke Greek as well as other languages, it is estimated. It was and is the perfect language to reach both Jew and Gentile alike.

Beyond the GREEK, its interesting to see the other languages that the Jews chose to utilize. In example, Acts 7:4 is a text that many have had issue with and have said is inaccurate. In Stephen's speech, it is in reference to Genesis 11:31-32...and in Genesis 11:31-32, by way of completing this short intro to Terah's family, the narrative records his death at the age of 205. If Abram was born when Terah was 70---as seen in Genesis 11:26--and if Abram was 75 yrs old when he departed for Canaan (as seen in Genesis 12:4), then Terah died 60yrs after Abram's depature (70+75+60=205), In Acts 7:4, however, Stephen says that after Abram left Haran after the death of Terah. A simple way to resolve the chronological difficulty is to suppose that Stephan was following an alternative text (represented today in the Samaritan Pentateuch), which says that Terah died at the age of 145 rather than 205. The Samaritan text of the Pentateuch does say 145, so we are not dealing with a deus ex machina. Moreover, there are scholars, Avraham Spero and Jakob Jervell among them, who believe that Stephen himself was a Samaritan. This would also help to explain in Acts 7:16, which says that Abraham was buried in Sh'khem, since this too follows SAMARITAN Tradition. It explains a possible anti-Temple tendency in Acts 7:47-50 (Compare to John 4:40-22 with the Samaritan woman/Jesus) and gives logic to placing the story of the spread of the Gospel to Shomoron in the immediately following passage (Acts 8:4-26). At worst, if under pressure Stephen erred, his errors would be what are known in Judaism as ta'uyot b'tom-lev, honest mistakes.

From here comes the issue of what also occurred amongst those who felt that the correct translation of the scriptures was to be found in other books outside of the Seputagint---specifically the Samaritan translation. For places one can go online to find further info, one can research the following under their respective titles:

• ^ Overview of the Differences Between the Jewish and Samaritan Versions of the Pentateuch
  " ( )

• "Good question......did the Messianic Jewish Believers use the OT deceitfully or ignorantly in the New Testament? <<Christian ThinkTank" ( )

There was a solid article online discussing the issue you bring up...and I think you'd enjoy it. It can be found, if going online/searching, under the name of "On the Samaritan Pentateuch « Daniel O. McClellan" ( ). The other one to consider looking up can be found under the name/title of "Pentateuch, The Samaritan (International Standard Bible Encyclopedia) :: Bible Tools" ( )


It truly is interesting seeing how the Samaritan version is much closer to the Dead Sea Scrolls and the LXX than to the current Masoretic. The oldest Samaritan physical document is the Nablus Roll, which is probably about 200 BCE, but uses a script the Jews used between around 550 to 700BCE, apparantly because the Samaritans chose to keep the older script and the Judean Jews didn't. It is evidence other than the script that tends to pin it to a few centuries before the common era. It seems that the Samaritan version spilt with the Jewish version, at approximately 700BCE. That goes in line with matching the genetics, the history of the Assyrian invasion, and the story the Samaritans

One significant difference between the two is that the Samaritan version has Mt. Gerizim as the center of the religion. Another key difference is that the God of the Samaritans is less anthropomorphic, more abstract, and having as hortage of other supernatural beings. As one kat said (from one of the articles referenced earlier entitled "The Samaritan Pentateuch"):
.

"Some of the philosophical differences are a little less central. For example, the Samaritan version shows much less anthropomorphism than the Masoretic version. Exodus 15:3 in the Masoretic version reads “The LORD is a warrior,” or more literally the Hebrew says “the LORD is a man of war,” whereas the Samaritan version does not call God a “man,” but says that God is “a hero of war” or “mighty in war.” Perhaps this is also the reason behind the difference of reading in Genesis 48:16, which reads in the Masoretic version &#1492;&#1502;&#1500;&#1488;&#1498; &#1492;&#1490;&#1488;&#1500; &#1488;&#1514;&#1497; (“the angel who redeemed me”), while the Samaritan version has &#1492;&#1502;&#1500;&#1498; instead (“the king who redeemed me”), thus putting the focus on God and not an angel."
​

Unsubscribing..........
Too much cut and paste spamming.....

.

LittleLambofJesus said:

Unsubscribing..........
Too much cut and paste spamming.....

.

Click to expand...

Writing actuallly takes a lot - which is what everything is (and I know cause I took time typing it out). That said, one can either deal with the info or not. But it's on them. Deflecting doesn't do any good - nor does focusing on posters instead of dealing with content. Period. And if making another post on the issue (which is inconsequential to one's ability to post/focus on the OP), one actually will go past focusing on the issues.


The OP is the focus and others seek to be focused on that - a good thing which is far better than focusing on others for something that had not even happened yet.

squint said:

One can only see and tell so much from a book. At some point most believers will come to this 'view' of the book:

Hebrews 4:12
For the word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and of spirit, of joints and of marrow, and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart.

That's when things get real interesting. Even from the written texts we have.

s

Click to expand...

Those are excellent points - as it concerns the reality of God's Word and the fact that differing versions thereof were always used within the NT times and yet it was all impactful to believers.

N M...no post...........








.

Gxg (G²);62271567 said:

Those are excellent points - as it concerns the reality of God's Word and the fact that differing versions thereof were always used within the NT times and yet it was all impactful to believers.

Click to expand...

God confused the language of men at Babel. It was done on purpose. It still goes on, everyday here for example.

That same issue exists with the supposed 'infallible' determinations and supposed 'perfect' traditions that some sects claim. The language barrier is a fact that shows itself in the inability of languages to grasp these matters perfectly, identically. It is, in short, impossible to overcome a barrier that God Himself put in place.

It's more interesting to try to understand the 'why's' behind that matter.

s

God is truly faithful...

squint said:

God confused the language of men at Babel. It was done on purpose. It still goes on, everyday here for example.

That same issue exists with the supposed 'infallible' determinations and supposed 'perfect' traditions that some sects claim. The language barrier is a fact that shows itself in the inability of languages to grasp these matters perfectly, identically. It is, in short, impossible to overcome a barrier that God Himself put in place.

It's more interesting to try to understand the 'why's' behind that matter.

s

Click to expand...

Had not considered the dynamic of Babel and the reality that language confusion was a big deal from the days of antiquity. But on the issue, when seeing how much language made a difference, it helps to bring things back into focus on how it was God's SPirit which ultimately makes the difference. Some of this goes into the issue of discovering which cannon of scripture was seen as the most accurate in the days of Christ (and likewise, in our times) - but I was curious as to what you understand to be the "why's" behind the matter.

CherubRam said:

Hellenistic Judaism And Our Bible


The Dead Sea Scrolls backs up the Septuagint version and not the Masoretic text of Jeremiah.

It seems that the Hellenist were removing proof text about Christ, while promoting the festivals and temple gifts, even from the Gentiles. The priest would use the festivals to generate revenue for themselves, possibly thru their relatives selling in the temple.

Any suggestions on how to proceed with a bible study?

Ezekiel 34:10
This is what the Sovereign Lord says: I am against the shepherds and will hold them accountable for my flock. I will remove them from tending the flock so that the shepherds can no longer feed themselves. I will rescue my flock from their mouths, and it will no longer be food for them.

John 2
13 When it was almost time for the Jewish Passover, Jesus went up to Jerusalem. 14 In the temple courts he found men selling cattle, sheep and doves, and others sitting at tables exchanging money. 15 So he made a whip out of cords, and drove all from the temple area, both sheep and cattle; he scattered the coins of the money changers and overturned their tables. 16 To those who sold doves he said, &#8220;Get these out of here! How dare you turn my Father&#8217;s house into a market!&#8221;

Jude 1: 4 and 12
4 For certain men whose condemnation was written about long ago have secretly slipped in among you. They are godless men, who change the grace of our God into a license for immorality and deny Jesus Christ&#8230;

12 These men are blemishes at your love feasts, eating with you without the slightest qualm&#8212;shepherds who feed only themselves. They are clouds without rain, blown along by the wind; autumn trees, without fruit and uprooted&#8212;twice dead.
I'm angry because I found out that the verses of Jeremiah 33:17-18 are not in the Dead Sea Scrolls or the Septuagint.

Originally Posted by CherubRam
In regards to Jeremiah 33, Levites and burnt offerings.

Jeremiah 33
17 For this is what the Lord says: &#8216;David will never fail to have a man to sit on the throne of the house of Israel, 18 nor will the priests, who are Levites, ever fail to have a man to stand before me continually to offer burnt offerings, to burn grain offerings and to present sacrifices.&#8217;&#8221;

There are a multitude of verses that disagree with this one verse, anyone know the reason why?

Verse 17 and 18 are not in the Dead Sea Scrolls or Septuagint. Now what?


The Jeremiah Scroll

Among the Qumran texts was a scroll of Jeremiah. This is very significant because the LXX version of Jeremiah is seven chapters shorter than the Masoretic, and what remains is in a different order!

The Dead Sea Scrolls backs up the LXX version, not our Masoretic Bibles.
- See more at: The Dead Sea Scrolls Version of Isaiah (and Jeremiah)

Click to expand...

If interested,

• "Basic Facts Regarding the Dead Sea Scrolls" ()
• "Exploring the Gospel of John: in honor of D. Moody Smith - Google Books " ( )

For good resources, perhaps one of the best books out there are the issue that has been a TREMENDOUS aid to me is known as "The Meaning of the Dead Sea Scrolls"








That book was one of the best reads I've ever been able to come across on the issue (as I borrowed it from one of the Messianic Jewish leaders at my fellowship) and it greatly helped me to see how the Dead Sea Scrolls verify so much of what it is that we see in our times....especially as it concerns the work of Jesus, John the Baptist and what it meant to be a follower of the Way in the early church.

Additionally, as it concerns some of your question, there's an excellent resource that has been used often within many circles of Messianic Judaism. It's entitled In the Shadow of the Temple: Jewish Influences on Early Christianity.


It's a work focused on early Christian history with special attention to the often neglected Jewish background. Skarsaune, long a recognized scholar in Jewish followers of Jesus in the pre-Nicene period, shows convincingly that Judaism is not simply "background" for the NT but is of vital interest throughout the history of the early church. His survey of the Jewish encounter with Hellenism, changing understandings of Torah, what it means to "be" a Jew and how that fits in with the Gentile mission is very in-depth.

The focus given to Alexandrian Judaism and the Greek translation of the Bible, Septuagint , is pretty amazing as well...seen in In the Shadow of the Temple: Jewish Influences on Early Christianity - Page 282

In In the Shadow of the Temple: Jewish Influences on Early Christianity, the issue of how multi-faceted Hellenism was is truly amazing - for I always assumed it was something where all Jews automatically felt it was negative - and yet it was present as far back as the account of Chanukah. The Maccabean fighters, who eventually established the Hasmonean kingdom, were themselves influenced deeply by Hellenism - with later generations finding many positive benefits from it as a result (more shared here /here and here). Of course, other negatives occurred as well. With Hannakuh, In the battle against Hellenism invaiding the Temple, there was a major victory at restoring Torah instruction to Temple services. The success of the victory did seem to come at the expense of some blessings....and other things that the other nations around them supported.

Gxg (G²);62271592 said:

Had not considered the dynamic of Babel and the reality that language confusion was a big deal from the days of antiquity. But on the issue, when seeing how much language made a difference, it helps to bring things back into focus on how it was God's SPirit which ultimately makes the difference. Some of this goes into the issue of discovering which cannon of scripture was seen as the most accurate in the days of Christ (and likewise, in our times) - but I was curious as to what you understand to be the "why's" behind the matter.

Click to expand...

Many matters behind that matter. One of which is to keep the evil in men's hearts purposefully divided and confused.

Even in the churches.

s

Gxg (G²);62271619 said:

If interested,

• "Basic Facts Regarding the Dead Sea Scrolls" ()
• "Exploring the Gospel of John: in honor of D. Moody Smith - Google Books " ( )

For good resources, perhaps one of the best books out there are the issue that has been a TREMENDOUS aid to me is known as "The Meaning of the Dead Sea Scrolls"

That book was one of the best reads I've ever been able to come across on the issue (as I borrowed it from one of the Messianic Jewish leaders at my fellowship) and it greatly helped me to see how the Dead Sea Scrolls verify so much of what it is that we see in our times....especially as it concerns the work of Jesus, John the Baptist and what it meant to be a follower of the Way in the early church.

Additionally, as it concerns some of your question, there's an excellent resource that has been used often within many circles of Messianic Judaism. It's entitled In the Shadow of the Temple: Jewish Influences on Early Christianity.

​

It's a work focused on early Christian history with special attention to the often neglected Jewish background. Skarsaune, long a recognized scholar in Jewish followers of Jesus in the pre-Nicene period, shows convincingly that Judaism is not simply "background" for the NT but is of vital interest throughout the history of the early church. His survey of the Jewish encounter with Hellenism, changing understandings of Torah, what it means to "be" a Jew and how that fits in with the Gentile mission is very in-depth.

The focus given to Alexandrian Judaism and the Greek translation of the Bible, Septuagint , is pretty amazing as well...seen in In the Shadow of the Temple: Jewish Influences on Early Christianity - Page 282

In In the Shadow of the Temple: Jewish Influences on Early Christianity, the issue of how multi-faceted Hellenism was is truly amazing - for I always assumed it was something where all Jews automatically felt it was negative - and yet it was present as far back as the account of Chanukah. The Maccabean fighters, who eventually established the Hasmonean kingdom, were themselves influenced deeply by Hellenism - with later generations finding many positive benefits from it as a result (more shared here /here). Of course, other negatives occurred as well. With Hannakuh, In the battle against Hellenism invaiding the Temple, there was a major victory at restoring Torah instruction to Temple services. The success of the victory did seem to come at the expense of some blessings....and other things that the other nations around them supported.

Click to expand...

Having read some of the stuff from the link; "Exploring the Gospel of John". I found somethings interesting due to, that I had started a thread, to explore the issue of the festive calender in an atmosphere of various "Judaisms". The thread is called a "sabbath thread of sorts". I have long been curious concerning this sibject. But, I am not knowledgable on these things. Would it be to much to ask you to look at that thread and offer commentary? Just curious what you might add to the discussion. thanks in advance.

annier said:

Having read some of the stuff from the link; "Exploring the Gospel of John". I found somethings interesting due to, that I had started a thread, to explore the issue of the festive calender in an atmosphere of various "Judaisms". The thread is called a "sabbath thread of sorts". I have long been curious concerning this sibject. But, I am not knowledgable on these things. Would it be to much to ask you to look at that thread and offer commentary? Just curious what you might add to the discussion. thanks in advance.

Click to expand...

Hey annier Saw your thread - and when I have more time to study all of the comments offererd in the OP and afterward, I'd have no problems sharing some of my own thoughts on the matter. May be awhile since I'm in and out lately due to multiple factors.

Blessings, sis

squint said:

Many matters behind that matter. One of which is to keep the evil in men's hearts purposefully divided and confused.

Even in the churches.

s

Click to expand...

Not certain as to what examples of such you had in mind

Hi, CherubRam,

CherubRam said:

The Dead Sea Scrolls backs up the Septuagint version and not the Masoretic text of Jeremiah.

Click to expand...

I'm afraid it's far more complicated than this quote would have you think. Numerous scrolls of Jeremiah were found in the Dead Sea scrolls and not all of them are the same. And as luck would have it, some Jeremiah scrolls survived better than others. So what we have is fragmentary at best. For instance, the scrolls 4QJeremiahA and 4QJeremiahC mostly follow the Masoretic, not the Septuagint, whereas 4QJeremiahB and 4QJeremaihD mostly follow the LXX.

CherubRam said:

It seems that the Hellenist were removing proof text about Christ,

Click to expand...

All of the scrolls above pre-date Christ. They could hardly be removing proof-texts about someone that no one had yet even met.