From: rpitts@emperor.gatech.edu (Richard Pitts)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: Isaiah does not prophesy Christ
Date: 22 Dec 92 15:07:42 GMT
Organization: CERL-EE, Georgia Institue of Technology

In article <fWWqowy@quack.sac.ca.us> pharvey@quack.sac.ca.us (Paul Harvey) writes:
>In article <78703@hydra.gatech.EDU> 
>rpitts@emperor.gatech.edu (Richard Pitts) writes:

I thought we should include the notes that we are talking about,
but were omitted. :-)

|>    Isaiah 9:1-7 (NIV)   Nevertheless, there will be no more gloom 
|>    for those who were in distress. IN THE PAST he humbled the land 
|>    of Zebulun and the land of Naphtali, BUT IN THE FUTURE he will 
|>    honor Galilee of the Gentiles, by the way of the sea, along the 
|>    Jordan-- {2} The people walking in darkness have seen a great 
|>    light; on those living in the land of the shadow of death a 
|>    light has dawned.
|
|Isaiah 8:23(JPS): For (o-)if there were to be(-o) any break of day for
|that [land] which is in straits, only the former [king] would have
|brought abasement to the land of Zebulun and the land of Naphtali -
|while the later one would have brought honor to the Way of the Sea, the
|other side of the Jordan, and Galilee of the Nations.(p) (9:1) (a)The
|people that walked in darkness have seen a brilliant light; On those who
|dwelt in a land of gloom, light has dawned.
|---
|o-o: So 1QIs(a); the others have "there is not."
|p: Meaning of verse uncertain. The rendering here assumes that "the
|former [king]" refers to Pekah (cf. 2Kings15.29) and "the latter" to
|Hoshea (ibid. 30). For the construction "lu ... ka'eth, see Judg.13.23.
|a: See note j at 5.30. [Which says:] I.e., the LORD will intervene and
|come to his aid. Cf. 29.6-7; 30.27. This verse may constitute a
|transition between chaps. 8 and 9.

>>Do these notes from the JPS not say that there is uncertainity here,
>>yet you say there is none????
>
>Let's not confuse issues now. The note in the JPS means that the HEBREW
>is uncertain, not that it can not be translated correctly. If you take

Oh.  The HEBREW is UNCERTAIN, but we can translate it CORRECTLY????
I think I now understand. NOT.

>your time and read the passage and the note, you will see that the best
>attempt is made to explain what the words could mean. This is quite
>different than the apparent fabrication that you posted. Just because

Oh.

>the meaning of the Hebrew words are not clear does not give one free
>license to fabricate or make up words that are not in existance.

This is true, but the best attempt could not possibly have been to
translated this the way the NIV did, correct?  Do you think they did a
second best translation?  I'm sure they would say the same thing, as JPS
(i.e., they did a best attempt.)

I checked the NASB (a very accurate word-for-word translation, whereas,
the NIV is a phrase-for-phrase translation) and found that the NASB
also gives the rendering of something like "BEFOREHAND was this and
in the FUTURE will be this."  Sorry, I don't have it in front of me.

>>Much less they even say that these
>>verses may respresent a transition, which is what the NIV has.
>
>No, you're getting confused. Study the words and the notes and see if you
>can figure it out. The note does not mean that you can transition to
>what you want to see, but no doubt you will do that anyway.

Both the NIV and the NASB give a BEFOREHAND and FUTURE rendering
to this transitional verse.

>>PAUL HARVEY - I've asked before and have yet to see your reply.
>>WHY IS IT THAT YOUR GUYS (JPS) CAN MASTER BOTH ENGLISH AND HEBREW
>>BUT NO ONE ELSE CAN OR HAS?????
>>If you think I keep missing it, email it directly to me.
>
>I've answered this before, in fact it was even the topic of a prior
>thread and it keeps coming up and not only from me. First of all, JPS

I missed it or it didn't seem to address the point, if I saw it.

>are not my guys! JPS is the Jewish Publication Society, they have been

Ok. 

>in business since 1888 and their mission is to translate Hebrew
>documents, both secular and sacred as well as children's books, into
>English. It is not a religious organization and they are not on a
>mission to convert anyone to their cause. So, the JPS translation of the
>Hebrew scriptures is solely an academic effort. Followers of Judaism

Do devout Hebrews, that are English speaking, use the JPS?

>study the Hebrew Scriptures directly in Hebrew and have no need or use
>of an English translation. This task of correctly translating across
>language families, from Biblical Hebrew to Modern English is not an easy

Understood.

>one. If I recall correctly, it took ten years for the JPS team just to
>translate the Torah. No doubt the effort involved and the desire by
>certain Christians to manipulate the translation, to conform to what they

No doubt and no bias in your editorial statement either. :-)

>want, leads to translation errors in other English versions. Regarding
>the quality of the JPS translation:
>"1986 Special Publication Award" - Biblical Archaeology Society
>"The first entirely new English version of the Scriptures based on the
>original Hebrew text."	-New York Times
>"Unrivaled as a precise and elegant rendering of the Hebrew text ...
>invaluable for both casual Bible readers and serious Bible students."
>- Biblical Archaeology Review
>"The strength ... of the new Bible, rendered directly from the Hebrew to
>English, is that is ignores the wording of all past Christian
>translation and turns Holy Writ into fresh, understandable, contemporary
>language ..." -TIME Magazine.

I remember these.  They did not sway me, becasue they are no less than
what other translations would receive.

>>|Richard! The point is plain and simple. The Hebrew text does not say
>>|virgin! To translate the Hebrew for young woman into virgin is to add to
>>|the text! Please read your Revelations 22:18-19 for the details of what
>>|will happen when one adds to the text.
>>Paul! The point is plain - you don't want it to say virgin or even
>>imply virgin, do you?
>
>I don't care either way! I want an accurate translation, that's all,
>nothing more and nothing less. If the Hebrew says virgin, fine, but it

You desire baffles me - what do you do or will you do with an accurate
translation?  How does it affect your life?

>does not! GET IT! THE HEBREW DOES NOT SAY VIRGIN! It does not matter what
>you or I want or don't want it to say! IT DOES NOT SAY VIRGIN! GET IT?
>IT'S A FACT! Do you understand the meaning of fact?

Why did the Septuagint understand it to mean virgin.  They were
closer to the original, than we are, weren't they?  

>>Are you saying that this word cannot mean virgin? 
>
>Look it up in a dictionary. Read what the NIV has to say about it and
>the NRSV. Use your mind for a change. Read the other posts on t.r.m.
>WAKE UP! The creator created you with a mind, use it!

I use my mind.  The Creator has also indowed me with a Spirit, which
leads me in all truth.  I use it, too.

>>Are you saying that a young maid (prior to marriage) cannot
>>be understood as being a virgin?
>
>Are you saying that a young maid prior to marriage is a virgin? Are you
>saying that a young woman with child is a virgin, even it the text does
>not say she is? Are you saying that a young woman with child is not
>married, even if the text does not say she is not? If someone points out
>a young woman with child to you, do you automatically assume she is a
>virgin and is unmarried? Do you have any reading comprehension skills?

I see you agree.  A young maid (engaged or not) is not exclusive of
the term virgin.

>>|>The KJV is considered a very accurate translation - it is a little
>>|>archaic in style, but that doesn't mean it is inaccurate.
>>|Nice try. The KJV is *not* a very accurate translation as it
>>|relied heavily on the Septuagint, another *not* very accurate translation.
>>It is an accurate translation based on the then available evidence.
>
>No, it is not. The Masoretic text was available at the time of the KJV,
>in fact it was even used to correct translation mistakes in the Septuagint.

I beleive there are a few more manuscripts available now, too.  The
KJV used what was available.  The NIV and NASB used the ones available
and I believe they revise accordingly, as new ones are found.

Have you heard the Dead Sea Scrolls are now rapidly or more rapidly
approaching release?

>>|Obviously your standards aren't very high and you demonstrate quite well
>>|the lengths that some Christians are willing to go to make reality
>>|match what they want to see. Do you really think you can lie your way
>>|into heaven?
>>Again, what do you, Mr. Harvey, consider valid Scripture?  Only
>>the OT?  Again, email me directly, if you think I've missed your
>>response.
>
>This question has absolutely nothing to do with this discussion.

It will help me to understand your purpose and what you consider to 
be worthy evidence.  Else, how can I say such and such says so and so,
without you telling me that it isn't valid evidence?

You know I consider the OT and NT vaild.  And the NT shines light
on the OT, but yet too the NT comes from the OT, for the NT tells us
what Jesus did, but the OT tells us he was coming.

>>|Clearly you have given us insite on your approach to Scripture. That
>>|being: make it conform by whatever means necessary, including gross
>>|mistranslation, to the picture you want to see. Who do you think you're
>>|fooling Richard? Do you have a problem with honesty? Do you have a
>>|problem with the truth? Do you have a problem with fidelity?
>>It is nice to see how you aviod the question.  What is Scripture
>>to you - answer this, please.
>
>This question has absolutely nothing to do with this discussion.

See previous comments.  It helps us better discuss things.

>>I know the truth - it is Jesus the Christ, the Messiah, the Annointed
>>One, God in human flesh, the Lord Almighty.  Which truth do you
>>know and what are you doing with it and what is the eternal benefit
>>to you?
>
>Everything's a power game to you, isn't it?

I think a lot of the power game has to do with one's own concept of
how much power oneself has or should have.  I don't want to win
every argument (that's not my goal) and I'm sure you'd agree I don't
win all the time or even much of the time.  However, I do want you
and all of the world to come to Jesus - the Author of our Faith.
He came and experienced all the temptations and struggles we do and
now he is ever making intercession to the Father for us.  He provided
the way to the Father for all and He wants us to be like Him - loving
perfectly and having eternal life. 

For Christ and His Kingdom,
Richard Pitts
-- 
rpitts@cerl.gatech.edu      |  Love and Worship God, the Creator of the Earth. 
                          --|--   
Pro-Life!              -|-  |  -|-    Come bow down in worship, let us kneel
Pro-Responsibility!     |   |   |     before the Lord Our Maker.  Psalm 95:6