Eclectic Topics in no Particular Order
Various Topics Discussed
/>
Michah / Micah 5:1 (2 in Christian translations) says “But as for you, בֵּֽית־לֶ֣חֶם / Beit Lĕḥĕm Ephrathah... (you are too small to be among the thousands of Judah (so small you aren't even counted)- (but) from you [the messiah] shall emerge for Me, to be a ruler over Israel; and his origin is from of old, from early times (days of old).”
This is a real messianic prophecy. Micah is saying that the messiah will be descended from Kings David and Solomon who were of the tribe of Judah, from Beit Lĕḥĕm Ephrathah… NOT that he will be born in the city of Bethlehem. The issue at hand is another problem with missionaries distortion of this verse (as usual read out of context). The issue here is the fact that Micah is telling us that the messiah’s origins will be “from of old” -- ancient days -- a long time ago. This isn’t what a Christian translation will have. See the King James: “But thou, Beth-lehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of bJudah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be cruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.” Old and everlasting are not the same! Interestingly enough the NIV (Christian translation) is correct and says “from ancient times.” One missionary actually wrote “Micah 5:2 means the Messiah is eternal as is eternal the Ancient of DAYS (GOD himself) mentioned in Daniel 7:13.” Ridiculous. The messiah must be a human -- born of a Jewish mother and a Jewish biological father -- he will be a mortal man and he will even eventually die (see the prophet Ezekiel). The prophet Ezekiel refers to "the messiah" as "the prince. Ezekiel 46:16-18 speaks of his son inheriting after his death. Neither Daniel 7:13 or Micah 5:1 say that the messiah will be eternal. This is a mistranslation -- and seemingly one on purpose as Christian translations usually translate these words properly everywhere they don’t paint Jesus into a verse. What the missionary doesn't understand is this: First, the interpretation of the Hebrew vocabulary in the Hebrew Bible is dictated by the CONTEXT of the text surrounding it. Hebrew is based on root words -- and a word can have multiple meanings in translation. Consider the word עֹולָֽם = olam -- which is found in Micah 5:1. It can mean world or eternity or even from “days of yore” (ancient days). Naturally the missionary wants to choose “eternity” in Micah 5:1 and paint Jesus into the verse. The problem is that Hebrew meaning changes with prefixes and suffixes -- and context within a sentence. The phrase in Micah 5:1[2 in Christian versions] is מִימֵי עוֹלָם. The word before עֹולָֽם = olam is מִימֵי = miy’MEI. The first mem = מ is a preposition translated as “from.” (Hebrew is read from right to left). Next comes a yud, another mem and another yud. ימֵי. This should be translated as “days of.” So we have “from days of” and then the next word is עוֹלָם / olam which here should be translated as “long ago.” Five other passages where some variant of מִימֵי עוֹלָם appears in the Hebrew Bible somehow the Christian translators manage to get it right had translate it as "from a long time ago" or "ancient days" -- not forever. At the bottom of this entry is an image from Rabbi Tovia Singer’s book “Let’s Get Biblical" showing these correct translations. In this verse there is another word which comes directly before the phrase we just discussed. This word is מִקֶּ֖דֶם = m’kedem. Again the mem / מ is a preposition which means “from.” Hebrew is based on root words. קֶדֶם in this case is a root which means "to come before" or "preceding." The word קֶדֶם / kedem can be a noun (masculine) or a verb or even a preposition! To know what it is and how to interpret it a person has to read it IN CONTEXT which is something missionaries almost never do! Christian translations usually translate this word correctly in Micah 5:1 (2 in Christian versions). The NASB has “from long ago.” The King James Version has “from of old.” The missionary referenced Daniel 7:13 as “proof” regarding the words we have discussed -- but it simply shows his ignorance. Daniel 7 is not in Hebrew -- it is in Aramaic which is a different language. There is a word here translated as ancient and it is וְעַתִּיק. It is not the same word as in Micah 5:1 and it is not even the same language. The missionary also referenced Chavakuk 1:12 where we again have the word קֶדֶם (Hebrew) which was in Micah 5:1. Here some Jewish translations -- including the Judaica Press translation found at the Chabad website -- use the word “everlasting” as a translation. Artscroll’s Stone Edition uses "from the beginning of time" which isn’t quite eternal since time does have a beginning -- but it seems “awfully close” to what the missionary is trying to infer. Those really are not the best translations of קֶדֶם / kedem -- and it just goes to show how missionaries prey on what can be misunderstood. As a noun קֶדֶם / kedem can be translated as "east" or "ancient times" or even "front" -- it all depends on the context. As I already explained he Hebrew Bible is dictated by the CONTEXT of the text surrounding it. If you read Chavakuk 1 in context you will see that it is Chavakuk asking G-d why the evil prosper. G-d responds that the evil will eventually fall, and then beginning in Verse 12 we have Chavakuk in prayer. Prayer. Not prophecy, not proof of anyone’s immortality (although G-d is immortal, but no human including Jesus ever is or was). Chavakuk is praying to G-d, who is from the beginning of time, and he trusts G-d that the people will not perish - the evil will eventually be punished. In his prayer Chavakuk praises G-d as being “from the beginning of time” -- or “from ancient times” -- not everlasting and not eternal (although G-d most certainly is both of those). Translators, as R’ Tovia Singer is fond of saying, are traitors. No translation is perfect -- and missionaries will often try to pick a word or two out of context and claim it points to Jesus when it obviously does not. The Reuben Alkalay Hebrew/English dictionary has "ancient days", "yore", for the noun קֶדֶם, and the Prof. Menaḥem Dagut Hebrew English dictionary has "antiquity", and for מִקֶּ֖דֶם, which Alkalay doesn't include, it has "from of old.” As usual missionary arguments disappear into the ether when simply examined.
0 Comments
Your comment will be posted after it is approved.
Leave a Reply. |
Categories
All
|