How should Romans 10:13 read?
- Thread starter barryrob
- Start date
he-man
he-man
We are speaking HEBREW Do you not have a Lexicon or a Concordance that shows the Hebrew/Chaldee? Do you not see the number that is given for the occurance of Jehovah and the different number given for lord?
Psa 110:1 A Psalm of David.
The LORD<H3068 Jehovah>said unto my <Lord,H113 'âdôn>Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.
H3068 יהוה Jehovah
H113 'âdôn
Upvote
0
dcyates
Senior Member
Lol! Yes, he-man, I have plenty of study tools (in fact, you name it, more than likely, I've got it). And yes, obviously Ps 110 was originally written in Hebrew. But that still doesn't change the fact that the verse is quoted in the NT in Greek -- each and every time referring to Jesus -- using the Greek word for 'lord' kurios in place of both the Tetragrammaton and the Hebrew word for 'lord' adonai. If the NT writers wanted to differentiate the two words, they could have used basileos (king), or epistates (master, or commander), or hodegos (leader), or even the Greek transliteration of the Hebrew rabbi (master).
Upvote
0
Exactly.
Generally quoted ftom the LXX: εἶπεν ὁ κύριος τῷ κυρίῳ μου κάθου ἐκ δεξιῶν μου ἕως ἂν θῶ τοὺς ἐχθρούς σου ὑποπόδιον τῶν ποδῶν σου
Upvote
0
he-man
he-man
Do you not have a Lexicon or a Concordance that shows the Hebrew/Chaldee? Do you not see the number that is given for the occurance of Jehovah and the different number and name given for lord?Exactly.
Generally quoted ftom the LXX: εἶπεν ὁ κύριος τῷ κυρίῳ μου κάθου ἐκ δεξιῶν μου ἕως ἂν θῶ τοὺς ἐχθρούς σου ὑποπόδιον τῶν ποδῶν σου
Psa 110:1 לדוד מזמור נאם יהוה לאדני שב לימיני עד-אשית איביך הדם לרגליך
Upvote
0
You don't seem to get it.
1) The New Testament was written in Greek.
2) In New Testament times, most people used a Greek version of the Old Testament, called the LXX.
3) When the New Testament quotes the Old Testament, it usually quotes the LXX. For example, Psalm 110:1: εἶπεν ὁ κύριος τῷ κυρίῳ μου κάθου ἐκ δεξιῶν μου ἕως ἂν θῶ τοὺς ἐχθρούς σου ὑποπόδιον τῶν ποδῶν σου
Apart from that, what dcyates said.
Upvote
0
he-man
he-man
You don't seem to get it, the OT was written in Hebrew!
Psa 110:1 לדוד מזמור נאם יהוה לאדני שב לימיני עד-אשית איביך הדם לרגליך
Where do you think the numbers came from if not the analyticallexicon/Concordance? Notice the small "l" in lord!
LXX analyticallexicon 2962 kupois lord, master, sir, owner
LXX analyticallexicon 2316 θεος God
Last edited:
Upvote
0
I'm well aware that the OT was originally written in Hebrew, thank you very much. Did you read what dcyates or I said?
Upvote
0
he-man
he-man
You don't seem to get it, the OT was written in Hebrew!
Psa 110:1 לדוד מזמור נאם יהוה לאדני שב לימיני עד-אשית איביך הדם לרגליך
Where do you think the numbers came from if not the analyticallexicon/Concordance? Notice the small "l" in lord!
LXX analyticallexicon 2962 kupois lord, master, sir, owner
LXX analyticallexicon 2316 θεος God
Upvote
0
dcyates
Senior Member
Okay, either he-man genuinely cannot comprehend the content of our posts or he is deliberately refusing to. Either way, I don't know how to put it more simply, so unless his powers of comprehension suddenly expand, I'll continue to pray of course but I've otherwise no other choice but to conclude that dedicating any further time to responses to him are a complete waste.
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
Wow, this thread got ridiculous fast.
So to sum up what people are saying here for the benefit of others who don't want to read through all the nonsense...
- All translation involves interpretation.
- And all interpretation involves bias.
- The interpretor decides what is important to consider and what is not important to consider based on the issues that are important or relevant to them.
- If a person believes the original Hebrew from an OT quote in the NT is important, then that is going to effect how they translate.
- If a person believes the Greek translation of an OT quote in the NT is important, then that is going to effect how they translate.
- If a person believes it is more important to capture the meaning of something, then that is going to effect how they translate.
- If a person believes it is more important to literally capture the exact words that are written, then that is going to effect how they translate.
- There may be numerous reasons for any of these positions.
- None of those positions are inherently wrong or bad or cause mistranslation or changes to the text.
- Whether a translation is wrong or bad or mistranslated or changes the text, therefore, will have to be determined by the methods, principles, and reasons used by the individual translators and in which direction one's bias leans.
Radagast and I can serve as a good example of this.
I take the original Hebrew from an OT quote in the NT is important and meaning is more important positions, whereas Radagast takes the Greek translation of an OT quote in the NT is important and the exact words that are written positions.
My positions cause me to say YHWH, Yahweh, Jehovah, LORD, etc are better translations of kurios in Romans 10:13. Radagast's positions cause him to say Lord is the best translation of kurios in Romans 10:13.
He and I disagree with each other, but neither of our interpretive preferences based on our positional biases are inherently wrong or bad. Neither he nor I are coming to our conclusions because we are trying to change the text to suit who we believe Yeshua is. Whether you agree with myself or Radagast will depend entirely upon your own personal biases and whether you take the same positions as either he or I do.
So to sum up what people are saying here for the benefit of others who don't want to read through all the nonsense...
- All translation involves interpretation.
- And all interpretation involves bias.
- The interpretor decides what is important to consider and what is not important to consider based on the issues that are important or relevant to them.
- If a person believes the original Hebrew from an OT quote in the NT is important, then that is going to effect how they translate.
- If a person believes the Greek translation of an OT quote in the NT is important, then that is going to effect how they translate.
- If a person believes it is more important to capture the meaning of something, then that is going to effect how they translate.
- If a person believes it is more important to literally capture the exact words that are written, then that is going to effect how they translate.
- There may be numerous reasons for any of these positions.
- None of those positions are inherently wrong or bad or cause mistranslation or changes to the text.
- Whether a translation is wrong or bad or mistranslated or changes the text, therefore, will have to be determined by the methods, principles, and reasons used by the individual translators and in which direction one's bias leans.
Radagast and I can serve as a good example of this.
I take the original Hebrew from an OT quote in the NT is important and meaning is more important positions, whereas Radagast takes the Greek translation of an OT quote in the NT is important and the exact words that are written positions.
My positions cause me to say YHWH, Yahweh, Jehovah, LORD, etc are better translations of kurios in Romans 10:13. Radagast's positions cause him to say Lord is the best translation of kurios in Romans 10:13.
He and I disagree with each other, but neither of our interpretive preferences based on our positional biases are inherently wrong or bad. Neither he nor I are coming to our conclusions because we are trying to change the text to suit who we believe Yeshua is. Whether you agree with myself or Radagast will depend entirely upon your own personal biases and whether you take the same positions as either he or I do.
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
dcyates
Senior Member
Against my better judgement...
he-man, no one here is disputing that the Old Testament was oringinally composed in Hebrew, and no one here is questioning that, keyed to Strong's, the numbers for the Tetragrammaton and the Hebrew word 'adonai' are different. They are obviously two different words which are not even spelt the same. Okay?
Upvote
0
In answer to childofdust, it's important to realise that the NT writers are generally not quoting the Hebrew OT, but quoting the Greek LXX.
I would also argue (for reasons outlined by me and by dcyates) that selectively translating certain uses of "kurios" as "Jehovah" radically changes the meaning of the NT and generally has an anti-Trinitarian agenda.
I would also argue (for reasons outlined by me and by dcyates) that selectively translating certain uses of "kurios" as "Jehovah" radically changes the meaning of the NT and generally has an anti-Trinitarian agenda.
Upvote
0
It's probably pointless responding.
I note that he-man (a) seems to think the LXX is a lexicon, and (b) seems in any case not to have access to standard lexicons which explain that κύριος is used for God.
Upvote
0
he-man
he-man
No, the Analytical Lexicon is a Lexicon of the LXX. The Analytical Lexicon to the Septuagint, Which, by your statement you apparently do not have a copy. You can purchase it for a mere $10 here> The Analytical Lexicon of The Apostolic Bible Polyglot or you can also use the one below like the Wigram, The Englishman’s Hebrew and Chaldee Concordance of the OT or Brown, Driver, Briggs, Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament or even better "A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament by JH Moulton and G Milligan; The Vocabulary of the Greek New Testament
Adonai and Adoni are variations of Masoretic pointing to distinguish divine reference from human.”
Adonai is referred to God but Adoni to human superiors.
Adoni — ref. to men: my lord, my master [see Ps. 110:1]
Adonai — ref. to God…Lord (Brown, Driver, Briggs, Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament, under adon [= lord]).
“The form ADONI (‘my lord’
, a royal title (I Sam. 29:8), is to be carefully distinguished from the divine title ADONAI (‘my Lord’ used of Yahweh.” “ADONAI — the special plural form [the divine title] distinguishes it from adonai [with short vowel] = my lords” (International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, “Lord,” p. 157).The reason why [God is addressed] as adonai, [with long vowel] instead of the normal adon, adoni or adonai [with short vowel] may have been to distinguish Yahweh from other gods and from human lords” (Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible, p. 531).
“The form ‘to my lord,’ l’adoni, is never used in the OT as a divine reference…the generally accepted fact that the masoretic pointing distinguishes divine references (adonai) from human references (adoni)” (Wigram, The Englishman’s Hebrew and Chaldee Concordance of the OT, p. 22) (Herbert Bateman, “Psalm 110:1 and the NT,” Bibliothecra Sacra, Oct.-Dec., 1992, p. 438).Adonai and Adoni (Psalm 110:1)
Last edited:
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
You may be in error since the tetgrammation is in the new and old test over 7000 times....... Jehovah is an english translation....Yhwh is Hebrew.
God told Moses His name in Prov 83:18 It will stand fro time indifinite as written in the holy Scriptures...Hope this helps
Upvote
0
