Fulfilled Prophecy

no, mike, it's a clash between buz and those who understand how to read. some of buz's opponents here -- such as myself -- happen to believe in god and miracles.

---

exactly. the irony being that he's denying the fulfilled prophecy -- the fall of assyria -- for the distortions.

---

i'll assume that question is rhetorical here.

---

jar, what translation of nahum are you using?

well, i can read a little hebrew... ...and i don't think so. i think the english text is just as clear as the hebrew text (at least in this instance) and buz is simply imagining ambiguities that do not exist. and anyone who can read the text, even in english, can see that.

---

that's why i was asking. they're not in my jps, my kjv, or my masoretic hebrew. i think it's somewhat obvious -- from the introduction and the rest of the book -- who the "you" is. the context definitally indicates nineveh.

---

no, i don't think so. the context of luke has the virgin birth as part of the overall story. changing one word doesn't particularly change the context.

---

i really don't trust the niv. it reads pretty well, but they change around too much to get it to make sense easily. they're a little too idiomatic for my tastes. while nineveh is clearly indicated from the context, randomly inserting the name when it is not present in the original is not exactly honest translation technique.Edited by AdminModulous, : editing tags- dbcodes and html tags aren't able to close each other!

---

oh, i'm sure that's possible. here's an example from earlier in this thread:

quote:

---

Nah 3:2 The noise of a whip, and the noise of the rattling of the wheels, and of the pransing horses, and of the jumping chariots.

---

"chariot" here is ‘, or merkavah. it's the modern word for "tank."this one's a really fun one too:

quote:

---

Gen 17:19 And God said, Sarah thy wife shall bear thee a son indeed; and thou shalt call his name Isaac:

---

sarah is the modern word for "female member of parliament." just for shits and giggles, here's a computer in the bible.

quote:

---

2Ch 2:14 The son of a woman of the daughters of Dan, and his father was a man of Tyre, skilful to work in gold, and in silver, in brass, in iron, in stone, and in timber, in purple, in blue, and in fine linen, and in crimson; also to grave any manner of graving, and to find out every device which shall be put to him, with thy cunning men, and with the cunning men of my lord David thy father.

---

"device" here is ‘, or machshevit. the modern word for "computer" (or sometimes "calculator") is machshev.Edited by arachnophilia, : typos

---

1:1? yes it is. the rest of the chapter, no. nahum 2:8 starts, in hebrew:

quote:

---

​

v'nineveh

​

and ninevah

---

translations are still translations, and in biblical, "and" is customary beginning of verses. translations like to change it up so you don't get bored read three million verses in a row that all begin "and..."tell me your point doesn't hang on this? ...assyria was invading judah. yeah, no, try again. because what nahum said actually happened. assyria fell in 612 bc. judah's splendor was restored ---- until 586 bc, which babylon invaded. i know that's not a long time. but it happened. buz, you're the one asleep. nearest everyone else here can tell, nahum's entire message came true.

---

not exactly. technically, biblical hebrew has two tenses, perfect and imperfect. "past, present, future" is an artifact of this, and the modern system is different. i'm not too clear on which tenses means what, exactly.but "present tense" is a common way of rendering predictive prophecy.

---

i'm not sure about "far" future (as the prophets generally talked about present concerns). but here's a famous messianic one:

quote:

---

Zec 9:9 Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion; shout, O daughter of Jerusalem: behold, thy King cometh unto thee: he is just, and having salvation; lowly, and riding upon an ass, and upon a colt the foal of an ass.

---

it's just a stylistic point, the prophets like pulling their audience into the message and they use present tense for that. i could find a whole flood of examples. it's not a hard and fast rule, though. you can find lots of prominent examples of verses translated in future tense. check some of the more prominent examples used here -- for instance, the rest of nahum (the part that talks about the downfall of nineveh explicitly) is all present tense, iirc. the events clearly must have happened either in the past, or would have happened in the future.

---

sure it does. it's a more "liberal" translation of the vav-prefix, which means "and." we have a separate word for it in modern hebrew, but i don't think it exists in biblical hebrew.

---

assyria.assyria fell in 612 bc, right around the time nahum was written. babylon took over as the dominant kingdom in the area, and conquered judah some 30 or 40 years later.assyria ≠ babylon.

---

yes, it's usually inferred from context. as i understand it, biblical hebrew only has perfect and imperfect verbs. no "tense" in the sense we are used to in english or even modern hebrew, relating to time. so you will likely find multiple translations that differ slightly in tenses.i could be wrong on this, i'll check. most of them kind of go back and forth a bit. i dunno if it's totally possible to find one entirely in one tense. language just doesn't work out like that.

---