Fulfilled Prophecy

When I study Hebrew terminology I am always amazed at how many words one can create by applying different vowel marks. As I understand it, these marks were first applied a thousand years after the Hebrew scripture was written (of which nothing original survives) Yes?I have seen, in Strong's Concordance, as many as half a dozen supposedly distinct usages with identical primitive spelling. I suspect that the Hebrew language, when first biblified, had far fewer of the few words it seems to have nowadays.The fact of identical primitive spellings is often exploited by translators who can, if they like, put a different and sometimes equally plausible spin on a word by changing the vowel marks. Such ambivalence, or polyvalence (is that a word?) makes the "solid truth" of the Bible more like a Swiss Cheeze. Some imagination may be required to fill in the gaps.I exaggerate the problem, of course, for the sake of argument but you know there's a fundamental problem when you have a thousand different Bible thumping organizations selling a thousand different versions of the One and Only "truth." It's about the Word, yes?Each and every slippery one of them.

---

Theology is the science of Dominion.
- - - My God is your god's Boss - - -

kind of. the differences are generally either very subtle (different cases, tenses, etc) or dramatic (something like homonyms, in which i suspect it's just coincidence). i am truly mystified at strong's concordance. it doesn't do what *i* would have done to catalog things at all. i've often seen one entry with multiple (distinct) meanings depending on context (homonyms), which i would have given separate entries. but then i run across multiple entries for the same word:just tonight, we were discussing genesis 18 in the chat, and why abraham addresses three people as one "lord." genesis 18:3 has an entry for "adonai" but genesis 19:2 has an entry for "adon" with the yud-possesive on it, rendering "my lords" with an s instead. they're both the same root word, with the same possesive. one or both are plural, but spelled exactly the same. why two entries for one word? do you have an example? i mean, a legitimate one, not buz. ironically, most of them are fairly similar.Edited by arachnophilia, : No reason given.

---

From the translators Preface to the Revised Standard Version of the Bible (c. 1952).

quote:

---

“ . where a more probable and convincing reading can be obtained by assuming different vowels, this has been done. No notes are given in such cases, because the vowel points are less ancient and reliable than the consonants.”

---

I expect most translators will hesitate to share such things with the reader. Then again: most readers will ignore the preface.Only after I got out of theology school did I discover that the translators introduction to the King James Version contains clues essential to understanding the book. None of my teachers, none of my professors, no one in that lifetime so much as suggested that it might be interesting; and to this day I have met no believer who has actually read it!That introduction identifies: the "Most High." And whom do you suppose that is?Time to read page one.

---

Theology is the science of Dominion.
- - - My God is your god's Boss - - -

hmm. i'm curious about conrete examples. i'll go looking...

quote:

---

Perhaps, as you suggest, he has changed his mind if this edition is later than mine. If that be the case, his being supportive to my position has changed. At least, if that be the case, he was once evidently supportive to my view.

---

The 2000 copyright date would indicate that this is later version than your 1985 text. But let us note that the question of "and" or "but" is vital to your argument but trivial in actually demonstrating it. We have no indication that Green agrees with your interpretation of "but" or any other of the contentious points.Thus it is misleading to state that Green supports your position because it has not been shown that he has supported it in any significant way.

PaulK, you miss my point that the "but" separates whereas "and" conjuncts. Thus the usage of "but" by Green is supportive to my position regardless of his reason for usage of it.

That's what I said. The Hebrew language has relatively few words relative to English which I'm sure you're aware. You're trying your best to make a fool out of me. There are around 37000 words in Hebrew and nearly twice that in old English. There are many times that in modern English, well over a half million.That there is no "but" prefix in Hebrew Green evidently saw fit, at least in the earlier editions to satisfy the context with the but prefix for whatever reason. There are many instances where English statements call for a but prefix, so if you don't have a Hebrew but prefix you may have a problem in which some improvision is needed. At least that's the way it appears.Anyhow, this thread is not suppose to be a lesson on Hebrew, nor a lesson on Nahum, so hopefully we can move on. I want to get into the rebirth of the nation of Israel which may require a separate thread. It appears that there is not ample space in this thread to cover that segment of prophecy.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW ---- Jesus said, "When these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draws near." Luke 21:28

quote:

---

PaulK, you miss my point that the "but" separates whereas "and" conjuncts.

---

No, I don't miss the point. Because it isn't true. "But" doesn't even separate most of the time, if ever - it is often used to indicate a caveat, for instance. Moreover, in this case it appears that that is not a viable translation - the prefix does indicate a conjunction, usually rendered "and", sometimes "but".

quote:

---

Thus the usage of "but" by Green is supportive to my position regardless of his reason for usage of it.

---

That's just silly. You're saying that even if he completely disagrees with he, he supports you. His reasons have to do with his reading of the text - and THAT is the very issue. So far all we see indicates that the choice of "but" or "and" have no great significance to the reading - which rules out your interpretation completely. But then the English language also rules out your interpretation.

That's just not true. All of the Biblical books are not prophetic books as per the common meaning of the word "prophecy." History is not generally known as "prophecy."knowledge of the future (usually said to be obtained from a divine source)
a prediction uttered under divine inspiration
http://www.wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwnProphecy, in a broad sense, is the prediction of future events. The etymology of the word is ultimately Greek, from pro- "before" plus the root of phanai "speak", i. e. "speaking before" or "foretelling", but prophecy often implies the involvement of supernatural phenomena, whether it is communication with a deity, the reading of magical signs, or astrology. It is also used as a general term for the revelation of divine will.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prophecy
http://www.wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwnSorry, I can't get the links to work for some reason. It took no more of a miracle to predict latter day events than the Babylonian exile. A miracle whether prophecy or turning walking on water is a miracle requiring some divine power. Without divine power, a prophet could no more predict a lightning strike on a given fence post in the timeframe of one hour than he could predict a given event to come to pass two thousand years in the future. In Exodus 2:1 does not say that Aaron will be God's prophet. God knew how Pharoahs regarded miracle workers as gods so God said Moses would be regarded by Pharoah as a god and Aaron would be regarded by Pharoah as Moses's prophet. Get it? To Pharoah: Moses=god, Aaron=Moses's prophet. Aaron was no more of a prophet of God than Moses was a god, however. Aaron was designated by God to be the spokesman for Moses to tell God the message God gave to Moses. He also became the official priest of Israel for the priestly duties.Kings often sought out persons who had the gift of prophecy of future events for the sole purpose of knowing the future. One classic example of this was King Ahab and the prophet Elijah. Sometimes more than one role was given as with Samuel who was priest and prophet.The New Testament designates separate gift roles for teachers and prophets as well as other gifts specifying that all do not have the gift of prophecy et al.I'm not saying this is a hard and fast rule, but as a rule of thumb so to speak, the prophets and prophetic books had much to do about future events as wikapedia bears out by definition.Edited by Buzsaw, : No reason given.Edited by Buzsaw, : No reason given.Edited by Buzsaw, : No reason given.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW ---- Jesus said, "When these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draws near." Luke 21:28

buz. i didn't get out of the alef's. want me search the bet's? the gimmels? why would i need to try? the number of words in the english language, vs hebrew isn't exactly the point. you are attempting to distract from the fact that there are five better alternatives to the use of a vav-prefix to mean "but," if the emphasis is to be placed on contrast. there are five words up there that serve the same function. if nahum had wished to make the kind of contrast you seem to think he did, he would have used one of those words, not the vav-prefix. not "whatever reason." i told you the reason. starting every second sentance with "and" gets downright boring. in hebrew, it has a nice ring to it, a kind of alliteration. in english, it's dull. translators generally change the vav-prefix conjunction at the beginning of sentances to make the text more interesting to read.i've explained to you what the hebrew means. i've explained the grammatical connotations. i've explained the logic of the translation. i refuse to believe that you simply don't understand this -- you want to continue to misrepresent the text in every detail to support your failed interpretations. and to continue to hang this point a single letter that at best is rendered your way SIX PERCENT of the time? no one is convinced, buz. especially since most of that "six percent" are probably those five words above. it appears that way because you simply know nothing about translation or the hebrew language. waht's more, this has to be on purpose -- i gave you example verses, and they word they use to mean "but." and guess what? when the authors of the bible needed to start a sentance with "but" they had words for it. no, we can't move on at all. it is completely evident from this discussion that you do not read or interpret in good faith. what can we possibly hope to discuss with you if you cannot read a single letter of the bible correctly? what kind of debate is it, if you refuse to accept logic, and that maybe someone here knows a little more about translation than you? you don't want to debate. you don't want to discuss. because debating and discussing might force you to acknowledge that you didn't know something, or that you were wrong about something. no, you want to preach. and it's painfully obvious to everyone here.

---

really, buz?then why are joshua, judges, samuel, and kings in the book of prophets?Nevi'im - Wikipedia that's great, but the prophets we're speaking of are hebrew, not greek. and in hebrew, "prophet" or ‘ navi comes from a word meaning, literally, "to bubble up," implying words rapidly coming from the mouths of the prophets. "prophet" means, literally, something like "spokesperson." not the point. the point is that they talked about stuff that actually concerned their audiences. and yes, a small portion of that was end-times stuff. but most of it had to do with stuff that actually affected the lives of those that heard the prophets speak. perhaps my pronouns and antecedants were unclear; that was precisely what i meant. the relationship we are given is:prophet:god::aaron:moses.if moses is like a god, aaron is like a prophet -- aaron speaks for moses. so a prophet is someone who speaks for god. there's the word: "spokesman." aaron spoke for moses, like a prophet speaks for god. that's the biblical definition of a prophet. one who speaks for god. can you read?

quote:

---

In religion, a prophet (or prophetess) is a person who has directly encountered God, of whose intentions he or she can then speak as if a formal representative of God.

​

Prophet - Wikipedia

---

it's on the first sentance, and the definition. oh, look, it goes on:

quote:

---

In popular usage, especially among Christians, a prophet is believed to be someone who can foretell the future. While religious texts do contain examples of this sort of prophecy, many of the messages attributed to prophets in religious texts, such as the Biblical prophets in the Hebrew Bible, claimed to speak for God and taught social or religious messages not necessarily accompanied by or dependent upon accurate prognostication.

​

Prophet - Wikipedia

---

really, buz. really.

quote:

---

In Hebrew, the word traditionally translated as prophet is ‘ (nevi), which likely means "proclaimer". The meaning of nevi is perhaps described in Deuteronomy 18:18, where God said, "I will put my words in his mouth and he will speak to them all that I command him." Thus, the navi was thought to be the "mouth" of God. The root nun-bet-alef ("navi") is based on the two-letter root nun-bet which denotes hollowness or openness; to receive transcendental wisdom, one must make oneself “open”. Cf. Rashbam's comment to Genesis 20:7.

​

According to I Samuel 9:9, the old name for navi is ro'eh, , which literally means "Seer". That could document an ancient shift, from viewing prophets as seers for hire to viewing them as moral teachers. Allen (1971) comments that in the First Temple Era, there were essentially seer-priests, who formed a guild, divined, performed rituals and sacrifices, and were scribes, and then there were canonical prophets, who did none of these (and were against divination) and had instead a message to deliver. The seer-priests were usually attached to a local shrine or temple, such as Shiloh, and initiated others as priests in that priesthood: it was a mystical craft-guild with apprentices and recruitment. Canonical prophets were not organised this way. The similar term "ben-navi" ("son of the prophet") means "member of a seer-priest guild".

​

Some examples of prophets in the Tanakh (Hebrew Bible) include Abraham, Sarah, Isaiah, Samuel, Ezekiel, Malachi, and Job. In Jewish tradition, Daniel is not counted in the list of prophets.

​

Prophet - Wikipedia

---

are we done yet?Edited by arachnophilia, : typo

---

good.vav is a conjunction that joins things. sorry buz, you lose. thank you for playing.

---

Just wanted to send a big HELLO! out to my old friend, Dr. Bill.Nice to see a face from the old Yahoo Clubs days.Hope all is well with you.

Hi Scraph,Long time no see! Very good to hear from you.All is well as can be for an old fart. Everything OK with you?I see your name and it brings back fond memories. Let's get together sometime and pick a fight with someone, shall we?I find your new avatar quite humorous. Has your horse died? Are you beginning to feel that our work here is futile? Neither I hope.Thank you for the expression of camaraderie.db

---

Theology is the science of Dominion.
- - - My God is your god's Boss - - -

You continue to miss and obfuscate my point.1. Though there are Hebrew words for "but" there is no in-word prefix for "but." Since there is no Hebrew "but" prefix for the purpose of translation the word "but" must be added for whatever reason the translator had to use it.2. That the usage of the word but divides/separates is indicative that possibly translators who added the word "but" for the English language translation saw a division/separation as I do (abe: in the context.)3. None of the major translators of the English Bible used the "and" prefix in their translations and no less than five of them used either the word "but" or the word "though," though having the same connotation as "but." Four of these were "but" and one "though." Nahum 2 (KJV) - He that dasheth in pieces4. Since five of the translators (Hebrew scholars) saw fit to use the separation words, "but" and "though," there must have been something in the context which motivated them to do so in order to convey the Hebrew message to the English, the Hebrew having no "but" prefix perse.Arach, it's fine for you to disagree with Buz but though your viewpoint may be a viable and debatable one, Buz is not a fool, as per your implications.Abe: NOTE: When you get to the link, choose the different translations on that page for verification. Edited by Buzsaw, : No reason given.Edited by Buzsaw, : correct link

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW ---- Jesus said, "When these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draws near." Luke 21:28