Biblical Translation—Eden, 4

bertot: Actually, it hasn’t! Mr. Snow said:

quote:

---

Clearly, faith is still involved, because only a relatively small part of the Bible consists of already fulfilled prophecies and historical statements that can be compared against other records or archeological discoveries.

---

The Bold font I have inserted indicates the portion of Mr. Snow’s statement I most want you to read and reply to. Actually, that is not an accurate statement! There is considerable archaeological and historical evidence that discredits the Exodus Narration. I will present it in another post. I have enough in the “Biblical Contradiction” phase of this post. Since you are reading the article on the website I the "Biblical Contradiction" phase out of this post. Again. Thanks for going to the website. To you it is one of the “proofs” of the Holy Bible’s divine origin. To me you have not yet made your case. By the way, what is the Hebrew word for “germs”? Surely God told them about “germs”. Please read Leviticus chapters 13 & 14 and tell me how this amounts to divine medical knowledge. You are really missing the point. You have to prove the Holy Bible’s errorless divine accuracy first, and you have not. I have found a Sumerian medical tablet that dates to around 3100 BC. However, before I share its translation with you I need you to help me locate the medical foreknowledge portions of Leviticus. That is not what Mr. Snow said:

quote:

---

Clearly, faith is still involved, because only a relatively small part of the Bible consists of already fulfilled prophecies and historical statements that can be compared against other records or archeological discoveries.

---

Mr. Snow states that “only a relatively small part of the Bible consists of...statements that can be compared against other records or archeological discoveries.” What part of Mr. Snow’s statement do you not understand?Thanks for taking a look at the website I listed. I am looking forward to reading the Christian point of view regarding it.All the best,
Ger

bertot:I have read the article you shared. It was helpful insofar as attaining a grasp of how you perceive and comprehend the biblical texts. I found it rather interesting that on one hand all the biblical texts are regarded as “God Breathed”, and on the other hand an acknowledgement of”“our inability to solve a difficulty does not mean that it cannot be solved. We simply may not have enough information at present””is given. My question is: Why would there be “a difficulty” in the text if the text were in fact “God Breathed”? It does not make any good sense that a “Holy Spirit Inspired” two thousand year old text would convey “a difficulty” that our present information and knowledge cannot solve. We are, after all, in the first decade of the twenty-first century AD.Theodore M. Drange cites twenty-nine examples of inconsistencies in the biblical texts. Below I cite #27 & #28.

quote:

---

27. Did Jesus ascend to heaven from Bethany? Lu 24:50-51{yes); (From Mt. Olivet) Ac 1:9-12; (Jerusalem) Mk 16:14-19 {No).
28. Was Jesus the only one to ascend to heaven? John 3:13 {yes); (Enoch and Elijah too) Heb 11:5; 2Ki 2:11{No).

---

Luke 24:50-51 states that Jesus ascended to heaven at Bethany, however, Mark 16:14-19 indicates Jerusalem, and Acts 1:9-12 states Mt. Olivet. These are three major inconsistencies in the Gospel Texts. What can account for these types of inconsistencies if indeed the Holy Spirit was guiding these different authors?John 3:13 states: “And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven...” Yet, Gen. 5:24 describes God “taking Enoch”, & Hebrews 11:5 states that Enoch did not see death but was taken {a.k.a. translated him}. 2nd Kings 2:11 also states that “Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven.” Clearly there are inconsistencies in these biblical texts. Again, What can account for these types of inconsistencies if indeed the Holy Spirit was guiding these different authors?Let’s just take the two above examples of inconsistencies in the biblical texts and see if they can in fact be resolved in some fashion. Furthermore, I might point out that there is a Topic Heading for this kind of biblical examination; The Bible: Accuracy and Inerrancy. I was hoping to perform Biblical Translation - Eden, but I guess that was not to be. So be it.All the best,
Ger

bertot:

quote:

---

Christians readily admit, however, that there have been 'scribal errors' in the copies of the Old and New Testament. It is beyond the capability of anyone to avoid any and every slip of the pen in copying page after page from any book, sacred or secular. Yet we may be sure that the original manuscript (better known as autograph) of each book of the Bible, being directly inspired by God, was free from all error. Those originals, however, because of the early date of their inception no longer exist.

---

So, the original manuscripts {a.k.a. autographs, or originals} of each book of the Bible no longer exist, but they were all error free? How can anyone make such a claim with a straight face? We are not talking about “scribal errors”! {Which should not exist either if the English Holy Bible is to be regarded as Holy Spirit guided and/or inspired}. We are discussing at this point two separate examples of absolute “Textual Inconsistencies”! Again, they are as follows:

quote:

---

AM wrote: Luke 24:50-51 states that Jesus ascended to heaven at Bethany, however, Mark 16:14-19 indicates Jerusalem, and Acts 1:9-12 states Mt. Olivet. These are three major inconsistencies in the Gospel Texts. What can account for these types of inconsistencies if indeed the Holy Spirit was guiding these different authors?

---

quote:

---

AM wrote: John 3:13 states: “And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven...” Yet, Gen. 5:24 describes God “taking Enoch”, & Hebrews 11:5 states that Enoch did not see death but was taken {a.k.a. translated} him. 2nd Kings 2:11 also states that, “Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven.” Clearly there are inconsistencies in these biblical texts. Again, What can account for these types of inconsistencies if indeed the Holy Spirit was guiding these different authors?

---

It is incredibly obvious that Luke does not agree with Mark or Acts, in the first example, and that John does not agree with Gen. or Hebrews, or 2nd Kings, in the second example. Either God and/or the Holy Spirit made a number of grievous mistakes, or human beings made these “Textual Inconsistencies”. Either the English Holy Bible is “God Breathed” or it is not.Making up more superstitious stories will not resolve the two above examples of “Textual Inconsistencies” that exist in the English Holy Bible. Inventing or contriving a “supernatural” solution for these obvious “Textual Inconsistencies” is nothing more than an expression of one’s inability to resolve the above “Textual Inconsistencies” in a rational, reasonable, literate, and knowledgeable fashion. Either the English Holy Bible is blemish free or it is with blemish. It certainly appears as though the English Holy Bible is with more than one blemish. If God is without blemish and would not either inspire or guide the reproduction of a God-inspired literary document that was with blemish, then it appears as though human beings performed the “Textual Inconsistencies” we are currently examining. Thus, the English Holy Bible cannot honestly be said to be “God Breathed”!Let’s either resolve the above “Textual Inconsistencies” in a reasonable fashion or let’s admit that they exist.All the best,
Ger

bertot:John 3:13 “and no one has gone up into the heaven {ouranon: the vaulted expanse of the sky with all the things visible in it; the region above the sidereal / starry heavens, the seat of an order of things eternal and consummately perfect, where God dwells and the other heavenly beings.”The Greek term employed in John 3:13 is essentially identical to the Hebrew term used in 2nd Kings 2:1 shamayim: dual of an unused singular; heavens {sky where birds fly & space where stars shine). As well as “the abode of God.”In either case, “one must ascend” to get there. In Acts 2:27 the Greek term for Hell {Aides or Hades: denotes the “underworld”, or “the nether world, the realm of the dead” “nether” means; lower or under”the very depths of the earth. In classical Greek Myths “infernal” also denotes the “underworld.”“One does not ascend to that which is nether.”Therefore, because Elijah is said to have “ascended” {Heb. — ’alah} with the LORD {Heb. YHWH into “the heavens” {Heb. ha shamayim} your above statement makes absolutely no sense what so ever.Heavens or Heaven denotes “above” and any description of Hades denotes “below”. The above is my response to post # 236. My attitude is not one of “acting abusive”. I am trying to respond to your posts and make my point in as straightforward a fashion as I can. My point remains the same. I sense that your superstition {not meant in an abusive way, but in stating the fact that facts are not contained in discussing the supernatural} does not allow you to respond in a rational or reasonable fashion. We really need to get the concepts of “above” and “below” clear in our minds; they are rational opposites.All the best,
Ger

bertot: I am reading the Text as the Scriptures present it. You, on the other hand, are trying to defend the indefensible.Let’s just say, for the sake of your argument, that there is a “Spiritual Realm”. Now, within this “Spiritual Realm” there is Hades {a.k.a. Hell} that exists in the “nether” {a.k.a. beneath, under, lower} part of the “Spiritual Realm”, and there are a number of “heavens” to which one would ascend. “Being cast down into Hades”, would be the terminology used. “Ascending into a particular heaven”, would be the terminology used. Let’s see if a couple examples from the New and Old Testaments confirm this use of terminology:The “Spiritual Realm of Hell” is “down”:
New Testament:

quote:

---

Matthew 11:23 “...shalt be brought down to hell...”(KJV)

---

quote:

---

2nd Peter 2:4 “...but cast them down to hell..." (KJV)

---

Old Testament:

quote:

---

Deuteronomy 32:22 “...unto the lowest hell {Heb. ’ad-she’ol thachethiy=unto underworld lowest}..."(KJV & BHS)

---

The “Spiritual Realm of heaven” is “exulted / up”:
New Testament:

quote:

---

Matthew 11:23 “...which art exalted {Gk. ”lifted up’} unto heaven...”(KJV)

---

quote:

---

John 3:13 “And no man hath ascended up to heaven {Gk. the heaven}...”(KJV & Greek TN)

---

Old Testament:

quote:

---

2nd Kings 2:1 “...the LORD would take up Elijah into heaven{Heb. the heavens}..."(KJV & BHS)

---

In John 3:13 the Greek term for “heaven” is preceded by the article {which serves to distinguish things more exactly}: ton ouranon= the heaven i.e. the abode of God. In 2nd Kings 2:1 the Hebrew term for “heaven” is also preceded by the definite article {when expressing emphasis or definiteness is intended}: hashamaym = the heavens i.e. the abode of God.There is no argument you can make that will change these Textual, and grammatical facts. Elijah was taken by the LORD into the heavens where the LORD resides. Therefore, the statement in John 3:13 is inconsistent with what is clearly stated in 2nd Kings 2:1.You do not have to acknowledge these “Textual Inconsistencies”, but that does not mean they do not exist; for they clearly and plainly do exist.All the best,
Ger

bertot wrote: Yes, my grammatical evaluation is very correct. And it does give a specific description - by employing the definite article {the heaven(s) - where the LORD took Elijah.But, none of that matters! I understand. The Holy Spirit is guiding you to essentially write your own Holy Scriptures and that is all that matters.You are talking nonsense. To suggest that the Holy Spirit guided these other writers but that we are not to translate what they wrote is utter nonsense. To suggest that when someone writes “ascended to heaven” they did not really mean “ascended to heaven” is nonsense.I really do not care. I look at the Hebrew and Greek Scriptures as “ancient literature.” I expect there to be “Contextual Inconsistencies.”For a Christian to accept that there are “scribal errors” even though the rendering of the English Holy Bible was supposedly “guided by The Holy Spirit, is a contradiction. And then to make the claim that the “autograph” of each book of the Bible was originally without error when no one has ever seen these “autographs” because they no longer exist is an absurd claim.Bertot, you are listening to the convoluted words of men. If you are fine with that, so be it.All the best,
Ger

bertot wrote: Actually, the definite article prefix in 2nd Kings 2:1 does in fact provide a “Specific Description of ”The Heavens’,” according to Hebrew grammar. In Hebrew there is no indefinite article”as “a heaven””and the Hebrew term for “heavens” is always dual whether denoting the “sky”, the “universe”, or “God’s abode”, because the Hebrew dual masculine noun for “heavens” denotes “the sky and the universe” and these constitute “God’s abode.” Luke 16: 19 thru 31 is indeed a parable. The “rich man” died and was buried in a grave in the earth, i.e. he was sent to “hell” The beggar died and was carried by the angels into Abraham’s bosom; i.e. God’s abode.The “grave” is ade, the nether world, the realm of the dead: Orcus, Hades. “Abraham gave up the ghost” and his body was then put into the cave of Machpelah. Abraham’s spirit went to God & the heavens; Abraham’s body was put into a cave. The rich man’s spirit went with his body to the grave, the ade. The beggar’s spirit was taken to the “bosom of Abraham: to partake the same blessedness as Abraham in paradise; to be borne away to the enjoyment of the same happiness with Abraham.” The Greek term “paradise” {used in the definition of “bosom of Abraham”, as well as in Luke 23:43} does in fact refer to “the abode of God” or “God’s heavenly abode” (Rev. 2.7 “...To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the tree of life, which is in the midst of the paradise of God.” See also Gen. 2:9; 3:24 & Ez. 28:13; 31:8). This “paradise” does not denote a purgatory, for the tree of life would not be a part of such a low spiritual realm. The River of Life flows from Eden into the paradise that is in Eden, and here the paradise of Eden refers to God’s heavenly abode. That is not what 2nd Kings 2:1 states, and as yet your attempt to depict “paradise” as “purgatory” does not have a Scriptural basis to stand on. The LORD took Elijah up into the heavens {a.k.a. paradise, where the angels carried the beggar into Abraham’s bosom; where stands the Tree of Life, and into which flows the singular River of Life). The beggar was not buried or his body put into a cave; angels carried him into Abraham’s bosom. Elijah was not buried or his body put into a cave; the LORD took Elijah up into the heavens. Yes! The contradiction between 2nd Kings 2:1 and John 3:13 remains a Textual Inconsistence even when compared to Luke 16:22, 23 as well as Luke 23:43. I do not agree, as explained above. All the best,
Ger

bertot:I have read the article by Mr. Herrell:

quote:

---

The Masoretic Text of the Old Testament
By V. S. Herrell

---

quote:

---

The Hebrew of the 1st century AD was closely akin to the Greek Septuagint that we have today; this is clear because, although the Hebrew was little used, when it was used in ancient writing it was clearly in agreement with the Greek Septuagint rather than the Masoretic Text.

---

The Hellenic Aramaic Scriptures were those texts used by the Sadducees and Pharisees in the Temple. Quite often the Greek Septuagint itself was employed. However, these Hellenic Aramaic and Greek Scriptures were not found among the Dead Sea Scrolls, and it is the Dead Sea Scrolls that scholars have employed to verify the Masoretic Hebrew Texts. So far the Dead Sea Scrolls (fr. 2nd & 3rd centuries BC) and the consonants of the Masoretic Hebrew Scriptures are identical. I have not read anywhere in my research where the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Masoretic Consonantal Text {a.k.a. kethib} are different in any way.Aramaic was the spoken and literary medium employed by Jews in Jerusalem in the first and second centuries BC. Biblical New Hebrew was a dead language at that time, and Modern Hebrew was not brought back as a spoken and literary medium until around 1850 AD. The Masoretic Hebrew kethib was not given vowel points or vocalization marks until the sixth to the ninth centuries AD. The, consonants, were not altered at all according to the Dead Sea Scrolls. Bruce M. Metzger, for the NRSV states:

quote:

---

“...the vowel points are less ancient and reliable than the consonants” (pg. iv)

---

Even Bruce Metzger recognizes the reliability of the Hebrew consonants of the Masoretic Hebrew Scriptures.I would surmise that Mr. Herrell is distorting the facts concerning the Hebrew Consonantal Texts that were current in the first and second centuries BC, and Bruce Metzger as well as the Dead Sea Scrolls attest to Mr. Herrell’s distortions. Another individual who disagrees with Mr. Herrells assertions is Jesus the son of Sirach, who wrote (c. 130 BC):

quote:

---

“For the same things expressed in Hebrew have not an equal force when translated into another language. Not only so, but even the Law, and the prophecies and the rest of the books differ not a little as to the things said in them” (LXX pg. iii)

---

You might find it informative if you start reading scholarly sources that are not apologetic in nature. There are those scholars who are not trying to prove or disprove anything, but who are merely students of the ancient literary documents we are discussing.All the best,
Ger

bertot: Of course my assertions are just not cutting it. You are thinking and writing in accord with your religious doctrine and subsequent superstition. I am reading, translating and interpreting these ancient literary documents according to what they actually say. I really don’t care what you personally believe. Whatever fires your rocket! But until you transcend your nonsensical mystical view of the literary documents at hand and your distorted view of God’s reality all of my assertions will never cut it for you.The thief and Jesus are hanging on their separate crosses. In Luke 23:42 the thief says to Jesus, “Lord, remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom. 43. Jesus said unto him, “Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise. 46. Jesus then cried out with a loud voice, “Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit”...and he gave up the ghost.Jesus commended his spirit into God’s hands. Jesus, like Abraham, gave up the ghost, died and went to heaven {a.k.a. into God’s hands; in paradise), according to the Gospel of Luke. The Gospel of John describes a very different scenario: Jesus spoke from the cross to his mother, and then he said “I thirst.” And finally he says “it is finished” and Jesus gave up the ghost. There is no mention of the thief, paradise, or Jesus commending his spirit to the hands of his Father. John 20:17 “Touch me not, for I am not yet ascended to my Father” is completely out of context according to the Gospel of Luke. In Luke 23:46 Jesus says, “Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit.” and having said thus, he gave up the ghost. Thus, in Luke, Jesus ghost / spirit is commended into the hands of God. According to John 19:30 Jesus merely states, “It is finished.” And he bowed his head and gave up the ghost. If the scenario described by Luke is correct, at the moment Jesus “gave up the ghost” his spirit was commended into The Father’s hands. But then in John 20:17 Jesus says to Mary, “Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father.”Either Luke is correct, or John is correct. But the two Gospels are not in any state of agreement whatsoever.I am of little doubt that you can somehow make enough sense of these two contrasted scriptures to fulfill the needs of your religious doctrine and superstition. But to me I see only two very different descriptions of the single act of Jesus “giving up the ghost.” Either Jesus’ spirit went into the hands of the Father after he “gave up the ghost”, or Jesus’ spirit did not go into the hands of the Father after he “gave up the ghost.” I would choose the Luke version of these events. To me John’s version doesn’t even make sense from a spiritual or superstitious point of view.All the best,
Ger

bertot: I am of good cheer, and am enjoying our discussion a great deal. Have a good time at the movies. The Hulk is a cool dude, dude. Who could not dig the Hulk.On to the subject at hand:Apparently some the Hellenic Jews in the last half of the first century BC began incorporating Greek Mythology into their understanding of Septuagint’s rendering of “paradise”. This Hellenic fusion into the Septuagint Scriptures is described in the Thayer Gk.-Eng. Lexicon of the NT in this fashion:

quote:

---

paradise (Gk.) That part of Hades which was thought by Hellenic Jews to be the abode of the souls of the pious until the resurrection {Luke 23:43 cf. 16:23). But most understand that passage of the heavenly paradise. Thayer Gk.-Eng. Lexicon; NT

---

Pay close attention to this paradise as being a “part of Hades” and the abode of pious souls. This is precisely the purpose of the Greek mythical place called the Elysian Fields. Larousse World Mythology states:

quote:

---

The ”elect’ souls were sent to the Elysian Fields, a miraculous place of sojourn, where they continued to live a slower mode of life, still full of pleasures, in meadows bedecked with asphodels.

---

The Elysian Fields were still a part of “The Underworld” {a.k.a. Hades}, but it was a paradise filled with pleasures for the “elect or pious” souls.Webster’s Unabridged Dictionary defines Elysian Fields as: “The abode of the blessed after death.”Greek Mythology, my friend.Perhaps this is why the Hebrew author of 2nd Kings 2:1 did think it necessary to clarify the exact place in the heavens {wrongly construed as 'the spirit realm'} where the LORD took Elijah. The Hebrew author of 2nd Kings 2:1 did not abide by Greek Mythology.What do you know!All the best,
Ger

bertot:

quote:

---

Question: "Where did Old Testament believers go when they died?"
Answer: The Old Testament teaches life after death, and that all people went to a place of conscious existence called Sheol. The wicked were there (Psalm 9:17; 31:17; 49:14; Isaiah 5:14), and so were the righteous (Genesis 37:35; Job 14:13; Psalm 6:5; 16:10; 88:3; Isaiah 38:10).

---

Gen. 37:35 “I will go down into the grave.” Jacob was very much alive, saying, “I will go down into the grave.” The Hebrew term for “grave” is — she>olah used literally and figuratively. Don’t get the applications confused.Psalms 9:17 “They shall be turned, the wicked {plural} —— lishe>olah into the grave.”Job 14:13 “That thou wouldest hide me ‘— bishe>ol in a grave.”Psalms 31:17 “let them {the wicked {plural} —— lishe>ol unto the grave.”Psalms 6:5 “For in death there is no remembrance of thee: ‘— bishe>ol in the grave who shall give thee thanks.”Psalms 49:14 “Like sheep they are laid —— lishe>ol in the grave.”Psalms 16:10 “For not you will leave my breath —— lishe>ol at the grave.”Isaiah 5:14 “wide — she>ol the grave will open”Psalms 88:3 “and my life draweth nigh —— lishe>ol unto the grave.Isaiah 38:10 “I said in the cutting off of my days, I shall go to the entrance of — she>ol the grave.”Nowhere in any of these passages does the Hebrew term — she>ol ever denote Hades or Hell or any other supernatural location. In the above passages the Hebrew term — she>ol is only referring to the grave.I have nothing to gain by trying to deceive you. I don’t even know you. It is my opinion, however, that someone (or many such individuals) are not giving you all the literary insights you need to make an informed decision.All the best,
Ger

bertot: You have got to be kidding. I went through all of those verses provided in you previous post for nothing?You can have your superstition: Hell, the devil, demons, walking on water, raising the dead, whatever. Just don’t try to claim it as fact or truth.This is all way too much work for way too little reward.Again, I don’t care what you believe in.When the text says God took Elijah up into the heavens; that is precisely what the author is saying. Elijah did not go up into “paradise”, “sheol”, hades, or any other place other than “the heavens” and the LORD took him up there.When the Gospel of John claims “And no man has ascended up to heaven”; the Gospel of John is sadly mistaken.Now then, you can make up any stories out of the Bible or Strong’s dictionary that you wish. Christians should be really good at making up stories by now; they’ve had two thousand years to practice their Hellenic-Roman Faith.Have a good one,
Ger

bertot:
In my personal opinion you are a very fine person. I do not agree with your Christian belief system, but I would fight and die for your right to believe as you see fit. The only thing that causes me considerable concern is when someone expects me to “believe” as they do because they claim that their “belief” happens to be “The Truth.”I base my research on lexicographic and grammatical foundations. And I employ objective reality to my interpretations of the ancient texts I study. I do not claim to be correct and am open to other ideas that are also based on lexicographic, grammatical, and realistic foundations. I cannot discuss superstitious ideas, or beliefs that I know to be unrealistic and fanciful regardless of how old the text may be or how many years that religious doctrine has been influencing human minds.If you do not believe that there is a Textual Inconsistency existing between 2nd Kings 2:1 and John 3:13 that is fine with me. I, on the other hand, do perceive a Textual Inconsistency existing between 2nd Kings 2:1 and John 3:13. That is as far as I can take our discussion.Your wrote: That has never been my contention. The “grave” is a fact. “Hell” and the “Devil” are not. According to your Christian superstition “Hell” is below, and “heaven” is above. One does not ascend to that which is below. If that makes me “correct” then so be it. If you can’t handle the facts then just stay with your superstition and be happy. But don’t try to claim that it is “Truth”. Honest studies, personal beliefs, personal opinions and ideologies are absolutely correct as long as they are conveyed as “personal.” No one has to fall in line with my position. If someone wants to proclaim “dust” as being wet, I could care less. Dust is dry. That is how reality works. After the whole surface of the ground is irrigated one would not go out and say, “Boy is it dusty today.” My position is that “dust” is dry, the “grave” is real, and noone ascends into the “grave.” The definite article prefixed form of “the heavens” does not describe Hades, and “paradise” does not describe a lower level of the spiritual realm. Someone who knew that “dust was dry.” That’s a plus insofar as I’m concerned. Absolutely none. Dull witted superstition has won the day. When Jesus comes back everything will be better.All the best,
Ger

bertot:We have 36 posts left. It will more than likely take all thirty-six posts to arrive at a collective comprehension of the Masoretic Hebrew Text and the Alexandrian-Greek Septuagint translation of the Hebrew Scriptures.I am up to it if you are.All the best,
Ger

bertot: The following is some information I found at the Jewish Virtual Library and the Bible & Science web sites. You will probably find it interesting and informative.History & Overview of the Dead Sea Scrolls

quote:

---

The biblical texts display considerable similarity to the standard Masoretic (received) text. This, however, is not always the rule, and many texts diverge from the Masoretic. For example, some of the texts of Samuel from Cave 4 follow the Septuagint, the Greek version of the Bible translated in the third to second centuries B.C.E. Indeed. Qumran has yielded copies of the Septuagint in Greek.

---

IBSS - Biblical Archaeology - Dead Sea Scrolls

quote:

---

Biblical Texts that need to be changed as a result of the Dead Sea Scrolls.
Genesis 1:9
4QGenk has added "and dry land appeared" indicating that the longer reading of the LXX is from an ancient Hebrew text that the MT lost by haplography. The LXX addition says, "and the waters below heaven gathered into their gathering place and dry land appeared" (See Charlesworth, 2000, p.200).
Genesis 4:8
Genesis 4:8 leaves us with the unanswered question about What did Cain say to Abel? The Samaritan Pentateuch and the LXX have what Cain said. The LXX says, "Let us go out into the field." 4QGenb does not have this reading, but scholars think the sentence dropped out because of scribal error (Ibid., 15).
Exodus 1:3
4QExodb in Exodus 1:3 has "Joseph and Benjamin" while the MT, SP, and LXX have only "Benjamin." Frank Cross thinks 4QExodb reading should be preferred (Ibid., 201-203).
Deuteronomy 32:8
4QDeutj and the LXX say, "according to the number of the sons of God" while the MT and SP say, "according to the number of the sons of Israel." "Sons of Israel" does not make sense here. This is probably a theological change. The 4QDeutj and the LXX seem to preserve the older reading that implies a god, or guardian angel for each nation.
Joshua 8:34-35
4QJosha locates the paragraph about Joshua's construction of an altar (Joshua 8:30-35, MT) at the beginning of Joshua 5. The LXX locates this paragraph at Joshua 9:7-8. Josephus follows the 4QJosha tradition which is probably the earliest or original order of Joshua.
Judges 6:6-11
4QJudga is different from the MT and the LXX in that it lacks Judges 6:7-10. These missing verses are said to be a literary insertion added by an editor. Here is clear evidence of scribal expansion of the MT.
Psalms
There are a number of additional Psalms in the DSS than in our Bible. Psalms 1-89 are basically the same as ours in the DSS (Psalm 32, and 70 are absent). From Psalm 91 on there are radical differences in arrangement, and/or in different Psalms that have never been seen before (Psalm 90 is not preserved). There are a total of 15 different Psalms which are not included in our present Bible, nine of which were completely unknown. None of the Psalm scrolls found has our present day arrangement of the Book of Psalms.
Psalm 22
Psalm 22:17 in the MT "like a lion are my hands and feet" which does not make sense. The LXX and 5/6HevPs read "They have pierced my hands and feet."
Psalm 145 is an alphabetical psalm. Each verse begins with the next letter in the alphabet, but "N" verse is missing in the MT and KJV. In the DSS it is there, so somehow a scribe left this verse out.
Ezekiel
The oldest known texts of Ezekiel are from the Dead Sea Scrolls. The Dead Sea Scroll Bible states, Small fragments from six manuscripts of Ezekiel were found at Qumran and another atop Masada. All of them and the traditional Masoretic Text fairly uniformly attest the same textual tradition. Only seven minor variants are clearly preserved, though reconstruction according to spatial requirements indicates that in two places (5:13 and 23:16) the scrolls may have had a shorter text than the Masoretic Text" (page 407).
Discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls

---

All the best,
Ger