Michah / Micah 5:1 (5:2 in Christian versions) says nothing about anyone being "from everlasting" or "eternal." Mistranslation. Michah . Micah 5:1 in the T'nach. "And you, בֵּֽית־לֶ֣חֶם / Beit Lĕḥĕm Ephrathah-you should have been the lowest of the clans of Judah-from you [he] shall emerge for Me, to be a ruler over Israel; and his origin is from of old, from days of yore." Micah is saying that the messiah (who is indeed the subject of this passage) will be descended from King David who was from מִבֵּ֥ית לֶ֙חֶם֙ יְהוּדָ֔ה / Beit Lĕḥĕm–Ĕfratah -- the house of Bread (Lĕḥĕm) from Efrat. The Davidic family is "from days of yore." He lived nearly a thousand years before Jesus and 3000 years from now. . . When the messiah does emerge he will be from an ancient family -- that of King David. The messiah's origins go back even futher -- to ancient times: to the tribe of Y'hudah (Judah) as prophesied by Jacob (Israel) in the book of B'reshit / Genesis! See B'reshit / Genesis 49:10. But what of the claim that Micah says he is "from everlasting." A total mistranslation. Christian translations try to twist Michah / Micah 5:1 (2 in Christian translations) to somehow fit Jesus. "from days of old." magically becomes "eternally." Yet, as with so many "proof texts" (a biblical passage which missionaries point to as being about Jesus) -- the mangled translation disappears in passages not viewed as being Jesus prophecies. So while the Holman Christian Standard Bible, New American Standard Bible, International Standard Version and others have "eternity" -- and the King James has "from everlasting" they translate the exact same phrase more accurately as "from old days" in other biblical passages: יְמֵ֥י עֹולָֽם / "days of the past." Isaiah 63:9, Holman Christian Standard Bible, יְמֵ֥י עֹולָֽם / / "days of old" Isaiah 63:9, New American Standard Bible. יְמֵ֥י עֹולָֽם / / "days of old" Isaiah 63:9, International Standard Version In the King James Version they translate this term six times: In Isaiah 63:9 = the days of old; In Isaiah 63:11 = the days of old; In Amos 9:11 "as in days of old"; In Micah 7:14 "as in days of old"; In Malachi 3:4 "as in days of old"; and in Micah 5:2 it suddenly changes to "from ancient days." A truthful Christian should ask themselves "why?" Why does the KJV translate it correctly in five of six locations -- but in one they seek to apply to Jesus it is suddenly a totally different translation? Deceit seems to be the only possible reason for a differing translation. . . Let's look at each word: יְמֵ֥י = y'mei = days of עֹולָֽם = olam = long ago, ancient times Why do those three translations (and many others) incorrectly translate the passage as "eternity" ONLY when they think it points to Jesus, but get it correct in other instances? Isaiah 63:9 is joined by other passages including In Isaiah 63:11 the Holman has "days of the past" while the New American Standard (NASB) has "days of old.." Micah is not saying the messiah is somehow divine: from eternity. No, Micah is stating that the messiah comes from a very old, very long family tree -- pointing back to the tribe of Y'hudah (Judah) and its kings David and Solomon. So, no -- this is not a prophecy that the messiah will be "from eternity." Mistranslation and misapplied.
0 Comments
Your comment will be posted after it is approved.
Leave a Reply. |
Photos used under Creative Commons from dionhinchcliffe, paulasenciogonzalez, paulasenciogonzalez, amy32080, petersbar, Aaron Stokes, amboo who?, Damian Gadal, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service - Midwest Region, SharonaGott, Udo Schröter, paulasenciogonzalez, Joybot, zeevveez, ianmunroe, freeqstyler, quinn.anya, Ivy Nichols, Groman123, UnknownNet Photography, torbakhopper, “Caveman Chuck” Coker, CarbonNYC [in SF!], dgoomany, Lion Multimedia Production U.S.A., oldandsolo, dbeck03