[FONT="]“As long as we are going down this route of criticism, I might as well point out that the scripture upon which you base your premise is incorrectly translated and thus, does NOT support your premise that infants are morally “depraved”.
For example, you said that infants were morally “depraved” and offered forum members a version of Psalm 58:3 to support this premise :
The wicked are estranged from the womb: they go astray as soon as they be born, speaking lies.
I understand that you don’t read greek, but your reliance upon an incorrect English translation of a text
does not support your premise that infants are morally “depraved”.
Let me explain. The LXX greek in this verse is
“vs 3 : ”
απηλλοτριωθησαν οιαμαρτωλοι απομητρασ επλανηθησαν απο γαστροσ ελαλησαν ψευδη.”
I have divided this sentence into two clauses in different colors below into two Blue and Red..
Psalms[/FONT]
[FONT="] 58:3 [/FONT][FONT="]απηλλοτριωθησαν οι αμαρτωλοι απο μητρασ[/FONT][FONT="] επλανηθησαν απο γαστροσ ελαλησαν ψευδη.[/FONT][FONT="]
[/FONT]
[FONT="]REGARDING THE FIRST CLAUSE IN BLUE [/FONT][FONT="]
The greek verse introduces as the subject-noun, a class of individuals called “
οι αμαρτωλοι” (“
the “sinners”
. It is speaking in the
plural rather than a single class. It is not just “sinners”, but, with the article present, it is speaking of THE sinners, as a specific class of individuals who are the main subject of the entire sentence. The subject is NOT “infants” and there is no word implying infants are in the class spoken of.
“
απηλλοτριωθησαν” is a verb in
past tense that tells us that this class of individuals were
previously “distinguished” or “rejected” or “estranged” due to their “difference”, or “separateness” or “strangeness” / (estranged) from another class as a group.” (the verb itself implies a separation from another group) This is the context of this clause in Koine. It is not a transitional verb that one can apply to present and future infants, but is, indeed, in the past tense.
In actual ancient usage for example, the word is used as a way to differentiate something. In Koine Greek from P Oxy VII 1067.6 (iii/a.d.) the word is used an adjective differentiating a “
strange woman” who is made an heir. This adjective form was common in its use of differentiating someone belonging to “
others”, that is, “
another class” of people. The great linguist Wilcken explained that “
τους αλλοτριους” meant “
outsiders”, using as an example from P Tebt II 285.8. Similarly, Moulton renders the Koine “το γαρ
αλλ[οτ]ριο νεποιησα “ as “
I did what was “foreign to me”. This context of being “
different” or “foreign” can even mean a “
change of mind” as it’s used in BGU II 1121.22 (5 b.c.).
A similar usage in differentiation occurs when Christ is rejected by the Jews as a stone that was inspected and
therefore,
rejected through
“judgment “,
απ-ε
δοκιμασεν (mtt 21:42). These sinners similarly are
rejected through “
difference”
απ-ηλλοτριωθησαν (estranged) based on their differences from another class of individuals.
Because this is past tense, this is speaking of a specific group of sinners who WERE already differentiated not from Birth,
but from the womb.
“
απο μητρας” does NOT mean “from birth” (i.e. it is does not mean an infant), but the words mean “from the womb”, that is, from
before birth.
Such euphamisms had entirely different meanings for pre-creation spirits Christian theology than for the later evolving Christian theologies. Thus, such comments have a different, and clearer sense in early Christian theology than for later, and different, Christian movements.
I realize that you neither read greek nor are you a historian, but these texts do not mean what you said they mean and you cannot apply them to your premise. You are simply and ignorantly repeating a usage you were taught or that seemed to apply to your use.[/FONT]
[FONT="]REGARDING THE CLAUSE IN RED[/FONT][FONT="]
[/FONT][FONT="]
(επλανηθησαν απο γαστροσ ελαλησαν ψευδη
Επλανηθησαν – This is again, a verb used NOT in a transitional or future tense which one could apply to infants as a class. It is instead, used in
past tense and the metaphorical usage of πλαναω as to “lead astray” or “deceive” is well known from much of the early koine papyri (e.g. P Par 47.25 (152 b.c.). The P Oxy VI 898.8 (123 a.d.) text examples a man who claims that another was “
injuring me much and ending by deceiving me” (
πολλα μ[εα] διακουσα ετι και πλανησασα με...” or ibid I. 119.12 (of ii/iii a.d.) says “
they deceived us there…” “…
πεπλανηκαν η μω(=ασ εκε[ι]...”.
Meander gives us multiple examples of the usage of this term, e.g. “
επλανηθη…”
She strayed away,…”
πλανη is not only used in the sense of “deceit” of people, but was also a term used by hunters when describing their stratagem used against wild beasts. Even the ordinary use of “πλανητης” / ”planetes” for a “planet” was used as a metaphorical reference to “wandering stars” (i.e. stars that had left their appointed orbits). This is the context underlying New Testament Judes use of it in vs. 13 (imagery he derived from Enoch) This is also why Benton in his LXX renders the clause “
…they wander from the belly” (though the verb is past tense and should be rendered “
wandered from the belly”
.
All of these synonyms in the verse, whether one renders the word as “lead astray”, “deceived”, or “wandered” still
are past tense and thus are events that happened in the past. Even the final portion of the second clause “
ελαλησαν ψευδη” is NOT present tense, but it is past tense . Thus the word is NOT about [/FONT][FONT="]lies a group is speaking or will speak (as could possibly apply to infants), but it refers to lies SPOKEN in the past. It is not talking about one month-old infants who “speaks lies” or are morally “depraved”.[/FONT]
