To Forum members :
The writers and redactors – what they did
When the Israelites leaving Babylon started the process of adopting their new language which came to be square script “Hebrew”, this long process was not merely a change of alphabet but involved changes in grammar and the addition of pointing, vowels and rules of speech and grammar and idiom and it happened over a substantial period of time. A good example of the problems a misunderstanding of a single and simple idiomatic use of language using the word “sin” as an example is found in posts #57 and #67 in this very thread (and some context in posts in between these two posts).
Even the basic language the Jews were adopting was in flux as we know from their texts. For example, the Jewish greek translation of 300 b.c. demonstrates their Hebrew source did not yet have final letter forms, yet they had the dagesh forte. By Jesus’ time he could speak of the “yot” as part of their evolving alphabet. However, the eastern schools (e.g. babylonian) and the western (e.g. Jerusalem) schools were not united in their different and competiing proposals for how this new language would form and be pointed. Thus we see in early texts, different forms.
For example, in some early texts, the vowels are above the letters (mainly eastern) and in other texts, the vowel are below the text (mainly western). Even by Jesus time, the individuals called "Scribes" (in english texts) were not merely low-level "copiers" of text, but served as grammatarians as well. Thus in the greek new testament the word for scribe is γραμματευς grammateus. (Thus they felt they had a right to interpret their writings) The adoption of this new language we now know as the square script Hebrew was still in flux for many years.
There were many, many errors caused by this flux and change in language of a nation. The addition of matris lectiones caused it’s own sets of errors. The confusions caused by this evolution of the text into pointed script with full vowel pointing took place over a long period of time and along different lines in the eastern schools versus the western schools.
This fluidity of language and its unsettled rules caused problem for several centuries. It also was causing problems for the Massorites who are still in the process of adding full vowel pointing in the middle ages. The Massorites tell us this and there are also many lists of errors having to do with spelling and the creation of inaccurate phrases.
For example, David Christian Ginsberg, the foremost scholar of the Massorah of the last century gives us examples. For example, in more than 1500 (one thousand, five hundred) cases in just the printed psalter alone, they used vav (ו ) to express the vowel shurek and cholem or kibbutz, and the yod (י) they used to designate chirec, tzere, and segol. One problem is that the redactors were inconsistent in the use of these substitutes. Because there are fifteen hundren examples in the psalter alone, one can imagine the list if I attempted to post it. However, there are examples on almost every page of the first printed psalter. (Ginsberg gives 4 pages, single spaced in his example list in his book on the Massorah).
Lists of Omissions divided into three classes. Omissions of whole verses. Omissions of half of a verse, and omissions of single words.
The point is that these errors are the types of errors that one expects with any translation from one language to another language, or with inability to accurately translate idiom, and with the formation of a new language in flux and when grammatical rules and even the vowels are in flux.
Billiardsball;
Clear said (#149) "
I gave examples concerning errors in posts, 103, 104, 115, 121, 122, and 132. Most of these examples of errors were admissions of errors that originate from the very individual groups who create the bible which you theorize is "inerrant". The creators of the text are telling you there are errors in the text they created, AND they are giving you lists of errors in their text. To then try to elevate and embellish this text to a status of "inerrant" is irrational.
Billiardsball said (#151) "
The Masoretes are etc. on extant record were not there, and never claimed to be there, when the text was written!
Clear replied :
You do realize that it was theMasoriteswho created theMasoreticBible text and they created theMasorahwith its lists of errors in their text? Their text is the main authoritative text for Rabbinic Judaism. As yet another example of error, their list describes an error in Isaiah 9:3 which, in the KJV reads :Thou hast multiplied the nation and not increased the joy...” Many other bibles have exactly the opposite “Thou hast multiplied the nation and increased their joy...”. These opposing textual renderings cannot both represent inerrancy. This is a VERY well known error (google it). How does one claim inerrancy in texts that have hundreds of such obvious and objective and well-known errors? Name a single bible translation that does not have such errors in their text and translation.
Billiardsball replied : #
153 I was Bar Mitzvah using a Masoretic Bible. The Masorites had the role to “count” texts that were pre-existing before them. They were “counting” not “writing and redacting” scriptures as they copied scrolls already extant.
This new theory of yours that the writers and redactors of the text
merely “
counted letters” is irrational and historically inaccurate.
Yes, they counted letters as well as wrote new text and redacted prior text. It made the inerrantists feel good to create the myth that counting was the ONLY thing they did, but the scholars and textual historians, who knew better, never bought into it. If we retreat into the “land of denial and closed eyes” by creating and then repeating myths and creating even more theories to create an alternative history to live in, then we cannot have rational, logical and meaningful communication with individuals who have accepted authentic history. Also, if we invent and live in alternate history and try to teach this to others, then our claims as Christians become historically irrelevant to the extent that they are untrue.
For example, even in this thread, after readers have seen for themselves, objective errors in the masoretic text, what happens to your credibility and the strength of your claim to “inerrancy” when they can see for themselves that the ancient text has error? Throwing away credibility is not good. Though you complain that I am introducing them to uncomfortable truths, still, at some point, upon simple study of the scriptures, they would have found out these things on their own.
Billiardsball said ;
Why did you accuse me of lying [“patently, not “patiently” and obviously untrue”]?......Spend some more time evangelizing our Savior
Billiardsball, I don’t believe that offering an erroneous theory that ancient biblical texts are perfectly inerrant is “evangelizing” our Savior.
It is, instead, false advertising of texts and is bound to disappoint those who buy into it. You say you are “attempting to honor holy writ”. I think your motive itself is fine and honorable, but the method of offering false advertising is misguided and honors neither the text nor the God who tells us we must not bear false witness.
You could simply tell individuals that you are aware that there are errors in all texts but that the many textual witnesses are yet valuable as they offer recurring, constant witnesses regarding Gods’ relationship to man and of his love and regarding the Savior Jesus’ superlative life and sacrifice. You could teach individuals about praying and developing a personal witness as God reveals himself to them and witnesses to them that he loves them and will guide them if they will but seek him.
Billardsball said : “
…and less time saying His followers are lying, and naïve, and irrelevant and insincere and the rest, …”
Billiardsball; You are interpreting my words incorrectly. Sit back, relax and be at peace. As to "his followers", Christians are, in the main, quite honest and good and are attempting to achieve a relationship with the God they love and who loves them and they are as honorable as any in their attempts to be obedient to God.. I am not speaking of them in my post. I am speaking about
you in this case.
However, I am not saying that you are personally attempting to
consciously lead people astray. I am saying that that your theory is patently and obviously false as I’ve already demonstrated to forum readers. Your theory is historically, naïve and it is irrelevant to reality.
IF you are sinning by teaching a false theory of “inerrancy” out of ignorance of truth, then I think it is "שגגח", which refers to a sin or error committed through ignorance. This is not the same as "חטא" which is an error or sin that is done with knowledge of the truth (and thus carries intent to deceive). As, as a self-proclaimed mesianic Jew, you should understand this difference. Other forum members can make their own judgments as to why you continue to teach inerrancy, when they can see, with their own eyes that it is incorrect.
Meanwhile, I think that if you would limit your testimony to things you actually do know; that is, things you have seen and experienced, then your witness will have better credibility.
What do you make of the error in Genesis 1:31?
I hope your spiritual journey is good and wonderful Billiardsball
Clear
τωφιεισεω
