21 replies to this topic

[InChristAlways]

I have just recently started translating Isaiah with the help of Hebrew interlinears and concordances.
What I found interesting was the use of "The Adam" in these verses below which translations leave out.
Is there any significance to this as the article "the" is also used for Adam in these few verses. Thanks.

http://www.scripture4all.org/

Isaiah 2:20 In day the that he shall fling, the Adam , <ath> forbidden idols of silver of him and<ath> forbidden idols of gold of him which they made for him to worship to-mole rats and-to-bats
21 To come in fissures of the rocks and in forks of the crags from face of awe inspiring Yahweh and from honor of pomp of him in rising him to terrify the earth.
22 Leave off! to-you from the Adam which breath in nostril of him that in what account he.

NKJV Isaiah 2:20 In that day a man will cast away his idols of silver And his idols of gold, Which they made, [each] for himself to worship, To the moles and bats,
21 To go into the clefts of the rocks, And into the crags of the rugged rocks, From the terror of the LORD And the glory of His majesty, When He arises to shake the earth mightily.
22 Sever yourselves from such a man, Whose breath [is] in his nostrils; For of what account is he?

Edited by InChristAlways, 08 November 2006 - 05:56 PM.

[Richie]

Do you have any qualifications to do translation work?

[InChristAlways]

Richie, on Nov 8 2006, 12:22 PM, said:

Do you have any qualifications to do translation work?

Nope. Just the Holy Spirit and excellent Greek/Hebrew resources to use. Just depends on how deeply you want to study the Words of the LORD.

Using a greek interlinear, I found this form of the greek word "to cast" is used only 2 times in the NT/NC referring to the 2 covenants in Galatians and that "mysterious" court of the Priest outside the Sanctuary in revelation [which would have contained the Altar of Burnt Offering and the Laver of Water].

Anyway, is that the correct translation of Isaiah 2 as I have posted and how would that translation be in your spiriti led view? Thanks.

Gala 4: 25 for this Hagar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and doth correspond to the Jerusalem that now [is], and is in servitude with her children, 26 and the Jerusalem above is the free-woman, which is the mother of us all, .....30 but what saith the Writing? `Be you casting out! [#1544 ekbale] the maid-servant and her son, for the son of the maid-servant may not be heir with the son of the free-woman;' [Genesis 21:10]

Revelation 11:1 And there was given unto me a reed/ kalamoV, like unto a staff, saying-- Be Arousing!!!, and Measure!!!! the Sanctuary[#3485] of the God, and the Altar[Golden Altar of Incense], and them who are doing homage therein; 2 and, the Court/Palace[Court of High Priest/Altar of Burnt Offerings?][ #833] the one without the Sanctuary[#3485], be you casting out!! [#1544 ekbale] out-side,[exw #1854] and you should not be measuring that, it was given unto the nations/eqnesin <1484>

Edited by InChristAlways, 08 November 2006 - 06:39 PM.

[Jeremy]

InChristAlways, on Nov 8 2006, 06:33 PM, said:

Richie, on Nov 8 2006, 12:22 PM, said:

Do you have any qualifications to do translation work?

Nope. Just the Holy Spirit and excellent Greek/Hebrew resources to use.

One would have thought that if you had the Holy Spirit, the interlinears and concordances would have been rather superfluous.

[InChristAlways]

Jeremy, on Nov 8 2006, 12:39 PM, said:

InChristAlways, on Nov 8 2006, 06:33 PM, said:

Richie, on Nov 8 2006, 12:22 PM, said:

Do you have any qualifications to do translation work?

Nope. Just the Holy Spirit and excellent Greek/Hebrew resources to use.

One would have thought that if you had the Holy Spirit, the interlinears and concordances would have been rather superfluous.

I love to read the Bible casually with the NIV, but as you well know, translations are not the most accurate word for word, otherwise it would be too "awkward" for a caual christian to read.
Is that translation correct or not about "The Adam/soil man" btw?

Edited by InChristAlways, 08 November 2006 - 06:42 PM.

[Richie]

ICA, I suggest you get some sort of qualification to translate before you even begin to attempt it.

[InChristAlways]

Richie, on Nov 8 2006, 12:41 PM, said:

ICA, I suggest you get some sort of qualification to translate before you even begin to attempt it.

You still didn't answer the question on the translation? Is the word "Adam" used or not and is it not the origianl Hebrew word for him? Thanks.

http://www.scripture4all.org/

Isaiah 2:20 In day the that he shall fling, the Adam , <ath> forbidden idols of silver of him and<ath> forbidden idols of gold of him which they made for him to worship to-mole rats and-to-bats
21 To come in fissures of the rocks and in forks of the crags from face of awe inspiring Yahweh and from honor of pomp of him in rising him to terrify the earth.
22 Leave off! to-you from the Adam which breath in nostril of him that in what account he.

NKJV Isaiah 2:20 In that day a man will cast away his idols of silver And his idols of gold, Which they made, [each] for himself to worship, To the moles and bats,
21 To go into the clefts of the rocks, And into the crags of the rugged rocks, From the terror of the LORD And the glory of His majesty, When He arises to shake the earth mightily.
22 Sever yourselves from such a man, Whose breath [is] in his nostrils; For of what account is he?

Quote

[Young LT] 1 corin 15:45 so also it hath been written, `The first man Adam became a living creature,' the last Adam [is] for a life-giving spirit, 46 but that which is spiritual [is] not first, but that which [was] natural, afterwards that which [is] spiritual. 47 The first man [is] out of the earth, earthy; the second man [is] the Lord out of heaven; 48 as [is] the earthy, such [are] also the earthy; and as [is] the heavenly, such [are] also the heavenly; 49 and, according as we did bear the image of the earthy, we shall bear also the image of the heavenly. 50 And this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood the reign of God is not able to inherit, nor doth the corruption inherit the incorruption;

Edited by InChristAlways, 08 November 2006 - 06:58 PM.

[Richie]

I suggest you ask some linguistic experts and not us. There are probably some forums somwhere where there are people who actually have the right qualifications.

[InChristAlways]

Richie, on Nov 8 2006, 12:50 PM, said:

I suggest you ask some linguistic experts and not us. There are probably some forums somwhere where there are people who actually have the right qualifications.

What does qualifications have to do with it? All I am asking is why is not "The Adam" used in those verses as shown in the original Hebrew? Why do you suppose Paul made mention of Adam in 1 corinthians 15? That is what "Harmonization is about I think.

http://www.awitness....ess/daniel.html

Whether or not we can all tolerate suffering through two ends of the world is a good question, but this would be required to salvage the doctrine of 'Biblical inerrancy.' I have found that most interpreters focus on chapter nine, and, it would seem, just ignore chapter 11. It is, after all, a simpler solution to their problem here.) Harmonization usually requires one to endure laborious 'explanations' and sheer rationalizations, and even a few pure, one hundred per cent speculative inventions, and to prove something that never will and never can be proved - that the Bible is single source and that it is 'infallible.' The simple explanation is that the Bible is riddled with false prophecy, and that Daniel contains two different varieties is no big surprise.

Edited by InChristAlways, 08 November 2006 - 07:13 PM.

[Gileade]

In semitic languages like Arabic and Hebrew the definite article is much more used than in English. Some phrases do require the article and is not to make the noun any more special. There is no indefinite article so 'adam' means 'a man', man or the man can only be "ha'adam'".

According to the dictionary the word 'adam' can mean man, human species, Adam.

[InChristAlways]

Gileade, on Nov 8 2006, 01:25 PM, said:

In semitic languages like Arabic and Hebrew the definite article is much more used than in English. Some phrases do require the article and is not to make the noun any more special. There is no indefinite article so 'adam' means 'a man', man or the man can only be "ha'adam'".

According to the dictionary the word 'adam' can mean man, human species, Adam.

There is a definite article before Adam in this case though. There is no definite article before "Beginning" in Genesis 1:1 or before "Revlation" in revelation 1:1. Sorry, but I am a stickler concerning the Hebrew and Greek definite article and if it is in the original it should also be translated that way.
I have also been looking into this new translation being worked on:

http://originalbible.com/2005/04/30/why-an...tion.htm#more-9

Quote

Genesis 2:7 And Yahweh 'elohiym is forming/yatsar the 'adam with soil/dust/`aphar from the ground/'adamah, and he is blowing/naphach in nostrils of him breath/n@shamah of living ones and the 'adam is becoming, to soul of living............
............21 And Yahweh 'elohiym is causing to fall stupor on the 'adam, and he is sleeping and he is taking one of from on side-wall/tsela`of him and he is shutting up flesh under her.
22 And Yahweh 'elohiym is building/banah [with] the side-wall/tsela` which he takes from the 'adam to/into [a] woman and he is bringing her to the 'adam.
23 And the 'adam is saying: "this one/step/foot, the once bone/`etsem from bones of me, and flesh from flesh of me, to this he shall call woman/'ishshah, that from man/'iysh he took her, this one,

Isaiah 2:20 In day the that he shall fling, the Adam , <ath> forbidden idols of silver of him and<ath> forbidden idols of gold of him which they made for him to worship to-mole rats and-to-bats
21 To come in fissures of the rocks and in forks of the crags from face of awe inspiring Yahweh and from honor of pomp of him in rising him to terrify the earth.
22 Leave off! to-you from the Adam which breath in nostril of him that in what account he.

Edited by InChristAlways, 08 November 2006 - 10:20 PM.

[Richie]

Apparently the definite article isn't that important. But I am no expert.

[Gileade]

InChristAlways, on Nov 8 2006, 10:12 PM, said:

Gileade, on Nov 8 2006, 01:25 PM, said:

In semitic languages like Arabic and Hebrew the definite article is much more used than in English. Some phrases do require the article and is not to make the noun any more special. There is no indefinite article so 'adam' means 'a man', man or the man can only be "ha'adam'".

According to the dictionary the word 'adam' can mean man, human species, Adam.

There is a definite article before Adam in this case though. There is no definite article before "Beginning" in Genesis 1:1 or before "Revlation" in revelation 1:1. Sorry, but I am a stickler concerning the Hebrew and Greek definite article and if it is in the original it should also be translated that way.

I am sorry but this reasoning is not correct. You can't compare the use of the article in two different languages much less comparing a semitic language with a language like greek.

Tell me the word for beginning in Genesis one please.

[InChristAlways]

Quote

Isaiah 2:20 In day the that he shall fling, the Adam , <ath> forbidden idols of silver of him and<ath> forbidden idols of gold of him which they made for him to worship to-mole rats and-to-bats
21 To come in fissures of the rocks and in forks of the crags from face of awe inspiring Yahweh and from honor of pomp of him in rising him to terrify the earth.
22 Leave off! to-you from the Adam which breath in nostril of him that in what account he.

Richie, on Nov 8 2006, 04:22 PM, said:

Apparently the definite article isn't that important. But I am no expert.

That depends. If it is in the original and is not translated, that is "subtracting" from the Words. This verse would imply that the Lord is talking about the original Adam and not those who are Adam in likeness for example. Notice the greek word "en/in" used here before Adam and Christ.

1 Corinthians 15:22 for even as in the Adam all are dying, so also in the Christ all shall be being made alive,

1 Corinthians 15:22 wsper gar en tw adam panteV apoqnhskousin outwV kai en tw cristw panteV zwopoihqhsontai

Edited by InChristAlways, 09 November 2006 - 12:12 AM.

[InChristAlways]

Does anyone know the significance of the LORD speaks to the "ground" of Israel then mentions the "Land" next? Only Young's LT used the correct word and I only saw it because I was reading it with an interlinear.

[Young LT]Ezekiel 7:1 Moreover the word of the LORD came to me, saying, 2 "And you, son of man, thus says the Lord GOD to the GROUND [0127 'adamah] of Israel: 'An end! The end has come upon the Four Corners of the LAND [0776 'erets] [Revelation 20].

http://www.scripture4all.org/

ISA 1 And he is becoming, word of Yahweh to me to say
2 "And you son of adam, thus He says, Lord of me, Yahweh, to ground of Israel: "End he comes, the end on four-of wings of the land
3 Now the end on you and I send anger of me in you and I judge you as ways of you and I give on you <ath> all of aborrences of you.

The words son of man occur in 270 verses, including 192 exact phrase matches shown first:

(Young) Numbers 23:19 God [is] not a man [0376 'iysh ]--and lieth, And a son of man [0120 'adam]--and repenteth! Hath He said--and doth He not do [it]? And spoken--and doth He not confirm it?

Edited by InChristAlways, 09 November 2006 - 11:03 PM.

[The Areopagite]

Quote

All I am asking is why is not "The Adam" used in those verses as shown in the original Hebrew? Why do you suppose Paul made mention of Adam in 1 corinthians 15? That is what "Harmonization is about I think.

It is because "ha'adam" is not a proper name. In Hebrew, proper names do not take the definite article. Therefore, if you see a word with the definite article, it is not a proper name. So, one does not translate "ha'adam" as "Adam" but as either "the man" or "mankind".

In Greek, proper names do take the definite article.

[InChristAlways]

The Areopagite, on Nov 25 2006, 04:13 PM, said:

Quote

All I am asking is why is not "The Adam" used in those verses as shown in the original Hebrew? Why do you suppose Paul made mention of Adam in 1 corinthians 15? That is what "Harmonization is about I think.

It is because "ha'adam" is not a proper name. In Hebrew, proper names do not take the definite article. Therefore, if you see a word with the definite article, it is not a proper name. So, one does not translate "ha'adam" as "Adam" but as either "the man" or "mankind".

In Greek, proper names do take the definite article.

Ok thanks. So would the use of the article imply that it is a symbolic "nature" or title. I am currently working on the genealolgy of the Lord and why I was asking about it. Peace.

http://www.scripture4all.org/

Abraham generates/egennhsen/1080 the Isaac
1080. gennao ghen-nah'-o from a variation of 1085; to procreate (properly, of the father, but by extension of the mother); figuratively, to regenerate:--bear, beget, be born, bring forth, conceive, be delivered of, gender, make, spring.

Isaac yet generates the Jacob,
Jacob yet generates the Judas and the brothers of him.

Judas yet generates/egennhsen the Phares/#06557 and the Zara/#02226
out of the Thamar/#08559, Phares yet generates the Esrom

Esrom yet generates the Aram.
Aram yet generates the Aminadab
Aminadab yet generates the Naasson
Naasson yet generates the Salmon
Salmon yet generates the Boaz
Out of the Rahab Boaz yet generates the Obed
Out of the Ruth Obed yet generates the Jesse
Jesse yet generates the David

The King David yet generates the Solomon Out of the one of the Uriah
Solomon yet generates the Roboam [Rehoboam = "enlarger of the people"
1) the son of Solomon by an Ammonite princess Naamah

[The Areopagite]

Quote

Ok thanks. So would the use of the article imply that it is a symbolic "nature" or title. I am currently working on the genealolgy of the Lord and why I was asking about it. Peace.

It is being used with indeclinable nouns in order to make the reader (or, listener) aware of the case of the noun. Declension means a kind of augmentation of a word to show how it is being used. For example, "kurios" is the nominative form of the word. So, it means "lord". Suppose you wanted to express a kind of belonging to, as in a possessive. You want to say "lord's". Well, to do this, you use a declension, and so you drop the "os" which makes the word nominative and you add an "ou", and now you have the word "kuriou" which means "of lord" or "lord's".

Now suppose you were talking about a familar lord, you say, "ho kurios". Easy enough. Now, if you want to talk about something belonging to him, you use a declension (it's called genitive), and it becomes, "tou kuriou" which means "of the lord".

But now something occurs. You come to a proper name like "Israel". This is called "indeclinable". It refuses to augment like the common noun "kurios". But you want to speak of something belonging to "Israel"- how will you do it? In this case, you will use the definite article to show that declension, and so you have, "tou Israel". And so in the Luke geneology you have the genitive aspect being conveyed through the genitive declension of the article.

In Matthew, you have the accusative being used because you want to show that the act of "begetting" is being directed at the object; and that is what the accusative is for. So, you have the article showing the declension of the indeclinable again and you get "Abraam egennesen ton Isaak" to show that Isaak is in the accusative of the "egennesen" of "Abraam".

The function of the article does not imply symbolism or the use of a title. Also, you would not translate that as "Abram beget the Isaac" because that is not the function of the definite article in the statement. The function is that it is showing you the declension of the indeclinable noun, and not being used like the English definite article "the".

Edited by The Areopagite, 10 December 2006 - 02:02 PM.

[Netsach Yisrael]

InChristAlways, on Nov 8 2006, 06:44 PM, said:

Richie, on Nov 8 2006, 12:41 PM, said:

ICA, I suggest you get some sort of qualification to translate before you even begin to attempt it.

You still didn't answer the question on the translation? Is the word "Adam" used or not and is it not the origianl Hebrew word for him? Thanks.

I second Richie's suggestion. To answer your question, "Adam" is both the name of the first man, and also the generic word for humankind. It's one of several words that can be translated "man." It would be unwarranted to connected that word with Mr. Adam every time it is used.

As for the definite article, Gileade is right. It has several different uses in Hebrew. You can't map them directly to English, where the word "the" has very few uses.

As an aside, you transliterated "<ath>" which is properly pronounced 'et. Its function is to mark definite direct objects. Thus the phrase " 'et hatapuah" means "the apple," and tells you further that someone is doing something to or with the apple. You'll seldom find 'et without the definite article ha-; the exception is proper names, which are already definite and so don't usually take the article--in the phrase " 'et David" for example.

There are lots and lots of things one needs to know to make a translation. Some can be gotten from reference books, albeit slowly and painstakingly, but others are more subtle, and are best learned by learning the language. If you're really interested in that, I strongly suggest you study modern, spoken Hebrew, and then branch into Biblical Hebrew. In that way you'll handle Hebrew as a living language.

If you aren't interested in learning Hebrew, then I suggest a different route entirely: forget the Hebrew and Greek, and study the chapter in the best available translations. Then produce a version in your own words that reflects your best understanding of the passage. It will usually follow one or the other of your translations, but you'll sometimes change a word or phrase to clarify the meaning of a passage. The result can be rewarding for yourself, although it usually won't be of much interest to others.

--Len.

[Netsach Yisrael]

The Areopagite, on Nov 25 2006, 10:13 PM, said:

It is because "ha'adam" is not a proper name. In Hebrew, proper names do not take the definite article. Therefore, if you see a word with the definite article, it is not a proper name...

Usually right. They sometimes can, though, for example to say, "the Moses who came from Midian." English works similarly. There are other cases that the definite article can be used which aren't analogous to English, but all such cases are fairly rare.

--Len.

[InChristAlways]

Quote

http://www.scripture4all.org/

Isaiah 2:20 In day the that he shall fling, the Adam , <ath> forbidden idols of silver of him and<ath> forbidden idols of gold of him which they made for him to worship to-mole rats and-to-bats
21 To come in fissures of the rocks and in forks of the crags from face of awe inspiring Yahweh and from honor of pomp of him in rising him to terrify the earth.
22 Leave off! to-you from the Adam which breath in nostril of him that in what account he.

The words son of man occur in 270 verses, including 192 exact phrase matches shown first:

(Young) Numbers 23:19 God [is] not a man [0376 'iysh ]--and lieth, And a son of man [0120 'adam]--and repenteth! Hath He said--and doth He not do [it]? And spoken--and doth He not confirm it?

Quote

I second Richie's suggestion. To answer your question, "Adam" is both the name of the first man, and also the generic word for humankind. It's one of several words that can be translated "man." It would be unwarranted to connected that word with Mr. Adam every time it is used.

Ok thanks. How do you know it would be unwarranted to the OC Jews where Paul explained the Old Adam and New Adam? I prefer rendering the words the way they are in the Hebrew.

Btw, could you explain what the difference is between "ground" and "land" as used in Ezekiel 7 as this helps me in my discussions with Jews [who do not have a concept of "2 comings"], Muslims and ex-christian atheists? Thanks.

[Young LT]Ezekiel 7:1 Moreover the word of the LORD came to me, saying, 2 "And you, son of man [0120 'adam], thus says the Lord GOD to the GROUND [0127 'adamah] of Israel: 'An end! The end has come upon the Four Corners of the LAND [0776 'erets] [Revelation 20].

Quote

Reve 20:8 and will go out to deceive the nations which are in the four corners of the land, Gog and Magog,

Edited by InChristAlways, 10 December 2006 - 09:17 PM.

[Netsach Yisrael]

InChristAlways, on Dec 10 2006, 08:46 PM, said:

Quote

I second Richie's suggestion. To answer your question, "Adam" is both the name of the first man, and also the generic word for humankind. It's one of several words that can be translated "man." It would be unwarranted to connected that word with Mr. Adam every time it is used.

Ok thanks. How do you know it would be unwarranted to the OC Jews where Paul explained the Old Adam and New Adam?

Your question doesn't make any sense. For starters, Paul's writings have come to us in Greek, and it's speculation whether he ever wrote anything in Hebrew. So Paul's comments about the first and second Adam have nothing whatsoever to do with Hebrew. In Greek, Paul clearly said "The first Adam, and the Second Adam."

Quote

I prefer rendering the words the way they are in the Hebrew.

It's a good way to confuse yourself, unless you know Hebrew. And if you know Hebrew, you can simply read the Masoretic text and skip rendering anything at all.

Quote

Btw, could you explain what the difference is between "ground" and "land" as used in Ezekiel 7 as this helps me in my discussions with Jews [who do not have a concept of "2 comings"], Muslims and ex-christian atheists? Thanks.

In the words of Roger Lewis, you should spend your energy on CONtextual scholarship, not textual scholarship. The meaning of Ezekiel 7 can be gotten without any recourse to the Hebrew. I can tell you that almost every occurrence of "land" in Ezekiel 7 is the same word; in Genesis 1:1 the same word is translated "earth", but in many places it means "the Land of Israel," and in other places it means "land" generally. So the Hebrew is completely ambiguous, and only context can help you.

In one place a different word is used: "concerning the land of Israel" in verse 2 uses a word that can only mean "ground" and never "country." But since it's used in the phrase "the land of Israel," it's completely unambiguous.

Bottom line: even a quick reading of the chapter makes it clear that almost every reference to "the land" in Eze 7 is about the land of Israel. There might be an exception in there; I didn't reread carefully enough to check.

--Len.