Hot answers tagged

38

Good question - could take a book to answer! The key phrase which unlocks (or veils?) identity is in v. 12: "O Lucifer, son of the morning!" Hebrew: הֵילֵ֣ל בֶּן־שָׁ֑חַר | hêlēl ben-šāḥar Greek: ὁ ἑωσφόρος ὁ πρωὶ ἀνατέλλων | ho heōsphoros ho prōi anatellōn Grk trans.: the Day Star, which used to rise early in the morning And, important in a moment, ...


14

Short Answer: No. This is a great question, and I'm glad you asked it. This verse is often used by Christian apologists to show that the Bible was ahead of its times in its scientific claims. While this sounds convincing to modern readers of English translations, it is a very poor argument to use. Exhibit A: The word "stretch" To many, the idea of God "...


14

The Idea in Brief The best translation in this passage is not “Lucifer” (or any similar translation with the image of the brightness of light), but instead “the one wailing aloud” falling from heaven. Discussion In the Masoretic Text the word הֵילֵל appears, but in the Dead Sea Scrolls the word appears instead as היליל. The following image (below) comes ...


13

This is a good question -- or rather, set of questions. I begin by reiterating a comment from the Q&A linked by OP: to engage with this set of issues fully, one really needs to consult Catrin H. Williams, I Am He: The Interpretation of ʾAnî Hûʾ in Jewish and Early Christian Literature (WUNT II/113; Mohr Siebeck, 2000). There is plenty of other relevant ...


12

Dinah, Jacob’s only daughter, born by Leah, was a virgin. She went out to see the daughters of the land. In Gen. 34:2–3, the narrator then uses a series of vav-consecutives to describe a sequence of events. And Shechem, the son of Hamor: v. 2: וַיַּרְא אֹתָהּ (“and he saw her”) וַיִּקַּח אֹתָהּ (“and he took her”) וַיִּשְׁכַּב אֹתָהּ (“and he lay with her,...


10

The Sign of Immanuel in Isaiah 7:14 is the single most debated text in scripture. Dozens—literally dozens—of PhD dissertations have been written on it. There are three main questions inherent in the text but the center of the storm revolves around a single word: elem or alma. The story begins with Ahaz, King of Judah, and the coalition formed between the ...


10

When the KJV and other Reformation-era English translations were written, Lucifer was already seen as a proper noun for Satan The OED gives five instances of Lucifer being used as a proper noun before the KJV was written: OE Christ & Satan 366 Wæs þæt encgelcyn ær genemned, Lucifer haten, leohtberende. a1300 Cursor Mundi 442 And for þat he ...


9

The answer to whether עַלְמָה means "young maiden" or "virgin" may lie in the answer to a second question. The meaning of the word אוֹת has a tremendous impact on how we read Isaiah 7:14. The word אוֹת as it is used in Tanach can generally be translated as "sign" or "omen." But as signs in the bible often come from G-d, אוֹת can also convey the meaning "...


9

In a 2013 interview with Dr Peter Flint, who is an editor on the Isaiah scroll, he had the following to say about the issue: Many scholastic studies tell us that the book of Isaiah was divided into two parts: First Isaiah by Isaiah of Jerusalem (chapters 1–39) and Second Isaiah by a writer living after the Hebrews returned from captivity in Babylon (...


8

It's possible to be a little more emphatic about the connection to Isaiah 63:3 which is routinely cited by commentators as an "intertext" for Revelation 19:13. This is a significant connection because, as noted in the question, this is judgment context, and the "blood" in question is that of the LORD's enemies. But (again, as noted), in Revelation the "...


8

The translation of almah as virgin makes no sense in context. First, the word almah is a vague term that means a young woman. Betulah is a more specific term for a virgin, especially one whose signs of virginity are still in tact. See Bably. Talmud Yevamot 60b ("והא אמר רבי שמעון 'בתולה' בתולה שלימה משמע" -"and Rabbi Shimon says that the word "betulah" ...


8

The way many read Isaiah 6:9-10 is to hear it as ironic, as showing God expressing his utter frustration with Israel. God will give Isaiah his very word to proclaim to his people, but they'll still ignore what he says. The more he speaks truth, the more they'll ignore him. It won't be Isaiah's fault if people reject him for what he says. One thing that it ...


8

Subsequent to the publication of Greek Myths and Christian Mystery, referenced by another answer, Manolis Papoutsakis made an ingenious hypothesis that may finally solve the mystery as to how the odd translation arose. In his paper, "Ostriches into Sirens: Towards an Understanding of a Septuagint Crux" (Journal of Jewish Studies, Vol. LV, No. 1, ...


8

The Dead Sea Scrolls witnesses for Isaiah 30:15 are clearly and conclusively consistent with the MT and not with the LXX. The Aleppo Codex1 of Isaiah 30:15 as copied in he.wikisource.org2 is: כִּ֣י כֹֽה־אָמַר֩ אֲדֹנָ֨י יֱהֹוִ֜ה קְד֣וֹשׁ יִשְׂרָאֵ֗ל בְּשׁוּבָ֤ה וָנַ֨חַת֙ תִּוָּ֣שֵׁע֔וּן בְּהַשְׁקֵט֙ וּבְבִטְחָ֔ה תִּֽהְיֶ֖ה גְּבֽוּרַתְכֶ֑ם וְלֹ֖א אֲבִיתֶֽם ...


7

The phraseology of turning to the right hand or the left is largely negative. The Mosaic law required that one not do so (Dt 5:32; 17:11, 20; 28:14; Josh 1:7, 23:6; Pro 4:27), and those who did not are commended (2 Kg 22:2; parallel 2 Ch 34:2). Sometimes it is simply neutral in scripture, as in one has a fixed goal (e.g. Gen 24:49; 2 Sam 2:19), but in the ...


7

A note about the flavor of the two major extant text traditions: The LXX was very Messianic in interpretation, in keeping with Jewish tendencies at the time. In contrast, after the events of the first century, Judaism became very anti-Christian to the point of altering interpretations (and even the text at times) where Christians had claimed Scriptural ...


7

There have been a couple of recent treatments of the Trisagion -- at least, these are ones I'm aware of. In 2008 H.G.M. Williamson's "Wellhausen Lecture" was published as Holy, Holy, Holy: The Story of a Liturgical Formula (Walter de Gruyter, 2008).1 He looks at the history of the verse in terms spelled out by the title, but probing back into biblical times ...


7

Rabbi David Kimchi (דוד קמחי), also known as RaDaK (רד"ק), who lived from 1160–1235 A.D., wrote this in his Sefer Mikhlol concerning the usage of the past tense in prophecies (which naturally concern future events):1 ותדע כי מנהג העוברי׳ בלשון הקדש להשתמש בו עבד במקום עתיד שהן אותיות א״יתן וזה בנבואות ברוב כי הדבר ברור כמו אם עבר כי כבר נגזר׳ And you ...


7

Isaiah did not write in the past tense. Biblical Hebrew does not employ tenses in the same way as English or Greek do. Isaiah wrote this chapter in perfect aspect ie he saw the actions of the verbs as whole/ complete without respect to their timing1 Prophecy is often presented in the perfect aspect as it is direct revelation from God the actions are not ...


7

No, they are not synonymous. In way of background, we note that the Hebrew rûaḥ is commonly rendered by the Greek pneuma, both commonly rendered by the English spirit. The OP is wondering why, in Isaiah 40:13, the translator has chosen the Greek nous ("mind") rather than the more common pneuma ("spirit"). Despite the default translations rûaḥ ↔ ...


7

The Leningrad Codex indicates a Qere and Ketiv difference, with the written version being לא (he was not) and the vocalized version being לו (he was). The Great Isaiah Scroll in Jerusalem reads לוא with the ו looking more like a yod (י) which is common, but which any reader would understand to be a ו. This would likely indicate that the text intended the ...


7

The ESV comment on Isaiah 30:6-7 says this: Isaiah mocks the Judean embassy carrying payment to the court of Egypt. The danger and difficulty of the journey, the expense of the purchase, and its disappointing outcome reveal the stupidity of the plan. Rahab is a poetical name for Egypt (see Ezekiel 29:3). Like a monster inhabiting the Nile, Egypt appears ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible