Stephen
   Member: Member Feedback |
Mar-06-2001 at 10:26 PM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria) |
Sh'lama Akhi Paul: Stephen Silver wrote: This passage has been a "bone of contention", between Jewish and Christian scholars, for some time, because it seems to teach that Torah has been changed. How is this best translated, from Aramaic into English. Particularly, the word, 0plxw4 which, according to "Lexicon #7206", means "change". Can this have any other meaning, such as "variation", in it's present form? Hebrews 7:12 0plxw4 0whd 0nky0 0l0 0wh 0nkh Fwrmwkb 0swmnb P0 0plxw4 The other peculiar thing about this text, is the word,0swmnb "in (the) law". This word is the same as the Greek, for "law", "nomos". Torah is best translated as "instruction", not "law". II Timothy 3:16, seems to give the best definition of Torah, as "instruction in righteousness". How then, is the Peshitta using "law", since this is the translation of 0swmnb"Lexicon #13132". Fkrwbw 0ml4 Stephen Silver
| |
|
Print Top | | |
|
- RE: Hebrews 7:12,
ShmuelElizer, Mar-06-2001 at 02:46 AM, (1)
- RE: Hebrews 7:12,
ShmuelElizer, Mar-07-2001 at 02:46 AM, (2)
- RE: Hebrews 7:12,
James_Trimm, Mar-07-2001 at 02:55 AM, (3)
- RE: Hebrews 7:12,
Paul Younan
, Mar-07-2001 at 09:53 AM, (4)
- RE: Hebrews 7:12,
James_Trimm, Mar-07-2001 at 11:19 AM, (5)
- RE: Hebrews 7:12,
Paul Younan
, Mar-07-2001 at 11:58 AM, (6)
- RE: Hebrews 7:12,
James_Trimm, Mar-07-2001 at 12:19 PM, (7)
- RE: Hebrews 7:12,
Paul Younan
, Mar-07-2001 at 12:28 PM, (8)
- RE: Hebrews 7:12,
James_Trimm, Mar-07-2001 at 12:35 PM, (9)
- RE: Hebrews 7:12,
Paul Younan
, Mar-07-2001 at 12:44 PM, (10)
- RE: Hebrews 7:12,
Stephen, Mar-07-2001 at 08:13 PM, (14)
- RE: Hebrews 7:12,
Paul Younan
, Mar-07-2001 at 08:21 PM, (15)
- RE: Hebrews 7:12,
Stephen, Mar-07-2001 at 10:08 PM, (16)
- RE: Hebrews 7:12,
Paul Younan
, Mar-08-2001 at 07:59 AM, (17)
- RE: Hebrews 7:12,
sam, Mar-08-2001 at 02:00 PM, (18)
- RE: Hebrews 7:12,
Paul Younan
, Mar-08-2001 at 02:19 PM, (19)
- RE: Hebrews 7:12,
sam, Mar-08-2001 at 10:53 PM, (20)
- Hebrews 7-8 Aramaic issues & Torah,
James_Trimm, Mar-07-2001 at 12:58 PM, (13)
|
ShmuelElizer
    Member: Posts: 91 Member Feedback |
Mar-06-2001 at 02:46 AM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria) |
In reply to message #0
Akhi Stephen: Here is an interesting translation of the verse you have quoted. Being changed(transformed) Metatithemenees For the priesthood of necessity also of law (nomou) a transforming(metathesis) there occurs. In ather words the Greek Nomos meaning law was borrowed from the LXX used to translate Torah meaning instruction and the word meta(meaning with) thesis(of form) could mean that the Torah must be transformed into its fullness which is in Messiah Eashoa , not nescessarily changed. You seeeee how English translations distort the Greek words used and that makes all the difference. I do not know if the Aramiac word can mean to transform that is alter or add to , or only change. Paul is much more qualified to answer that. I hope this helps. Sorry about using the Greek Version, but I feel it might shed some light here. Shalom Shmuel Eliezer
| |
|
Print Top | | |
|
ShmuelElizer
    Member: Posts: 91 Member Feedback |
Mar-07-2001 at 02:46 AM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria) |
In reply to message #0
Akhi Stephen: Therefore, if it had been possible to reach the goal through the system of priesthood derived from Levi what need would there have been for another, different kind of Priest, the one spoken of as to be compared with Malki-Tzedek(King of Righteousness) and not to be compared with Aharon? For is the system of Priesthood is transformed, there must of necessity occur a transformation of Torah.Hebrews 7:11-12 by David Stern the translator. Strongs#3346 metatithemi;fut. metatheso, from meta(3326), denoting change of place or condition, and tithemi(5087), to place. To transpose, put in another place and hence to transport,transfer,translate.Trans;(Acts7:16;Heb.7:12, the priesthood being transfered to Christ or to the tribe of Judah{cf. Heb.7:11,14}11:5 of Enoch who was translated to heaven{cf.2Kings 2:11}; Sept.;Gen.5:24).from page 974 strong's #3346The Complete Word Study Dictionary New Testament by Spiros Zodhiates,Th.D. I hope this helps also clarify this seemingly difficult passage. Shalom, Shmuel Eliezer
| |
|
Print Top | | |
|
James_Trimm
   Member: Member Feedback |
Mar-07-2001 at 02:55 AM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria) |
In reply to message #0
Aramaic: 0plxw4 Change, transform, renew or revive The Hebrew form of this same root is Strongs word # 2498 Plx . This Hebrew cognate of the word appears in Is. 40:31 & 41:1 let the people renew their strength. The Greek translator misunderstood the word here to mean change however their can be no change of the Torah (Deut. 4:2; 12:32 & Mt. 5:17).
| |
|
Print Top | | |
|
Paul Younan
    Member: Jun-1-2000 Posts: 1,306 Member Feedback |
Mar-07-2001 at 09:53 AM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria) |
In reply to message #0
LAST EDITED ON Mar-07-2001 AT 10:51 AM (CST) Shlama Akhi Steven, If you do a search for word# 7206, you will see that indeed the word can mean 'variation'. The primary meaning of the word is 'change', but it can mean 'variation' and all the English words associated with that concept. On the other topic, I think the problem here is the confusion between the terms 'Namoosa' (#13147) and 'Orayta' (#324). Look at the Lexicon entries closely for each....#324 is Capitalized 'Law', #13147 is lower-case 'law'.....'Orayta' is the equivalent to the Hebrew 'Torah.' I'll let you draw the conclusions! You will have a field-day with this little-known fact when examining all of Paul's letters. I highly suggest you study this very carefully. Fk^rwbw 0ml4
| |
|
Print Top | | |
|
James_Trimm
   Member: Member Feedback |
Mar-07-2001 at 11:19 AM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria) |
In reply to message #4
Oryta is the Aramaic COGNATE of the word Torah. The word ORYTA appears only twice in the Peshitta, both times are in Matthew. ORYTA is also the word for "Torah that appears in the Targums, Talmuds and Zohar. However NAMOSA is ALSO an Aramaic equivelant of the word Torah. Throughout the Peshitta Tanak the Hebrew word TORAH is translated NAMOSA. Also whereever the Peshitta NT quotes the Tanak the word NAMOSA appears for TORAH. In Hebrews 7:12 the Torah and Priesthood are being RENEWED. Trimm
| |
|
Print Top | | |
|
Paul Younan
    Member: Jun-1-2000 Posts: 1,306 Member Feedback |
Mar-07-2001 at 11:58 AM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria) |
In reply to message #5
LAST EDITED ON Mar-07-2001 AT 12:01 PM (CST) Shlama Akhi Yaqub, Just curious - what are your thoughts on the teaching of this passage, that the new High Priest is from the tribe of Judah - and not a Levite. We obviously, since the Temple was torn down (as Messiah prophesied), do not have a Levite as a Rab Kahna offering sacrifices. How is that a renewal rather than a change? Fk^rwbw 0ml4
| |
|
Print Top | | |
|
James_Trimm
   Member: Member Feedback |
Mar-07-2001 at 12:19 PM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria) |
In reply to message #6
Hebrews is an extended commentary on Ps. 110. In context Paul is tieing Ps. 110 to Jer. 31:31f. His basis for doing so is that in Ps. 110 YHWH SWEARS or takes an oath. When YHWH takes an oath we call thisa covenant. Paul ties this covenent to the BRIT KHADASHA (Renewed Covenant) of Jer. 31:31f. Jer. 31:31f prophecises about the Renewal of the Mosaic Covenant promissed in Deut. 30:1f. The priesthood that is renewed in this case is the priesthood after the order of Melchizadek. Melchizadek was both a King and a Priest. He was able to be a priest even though he was not a Levite because he recieved that priesthood BEFORE the Torah limited it to Levites only. The Messiah, who presextisted even before the time of Moses, held the pre-Levitical "priesthood after the order of Melchizadek" which coiuld not be taken from him. Thus making him the ONLY individual who could serve as both King and Priest and fulfill both Messianic roles WITHOUT violating Torah. He is, even now, CECOMING mediator of the Renewed Covenant which he will renew with us upon his return when his enemies are made his footstool and all people will know ELOHIM (see Ps. 110 & Jer. 31:31f). Trimm
| |
|
Print Top | | |
|
Paul Younan
    Member: Jun-1-2000 Posts: 1,306 Member Feedback |
Mar-07-2001 at 12:28 PM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria) |
In reply to message #7
So the portion of Torah that limited the priesthood to Levites is no longer valid, then? So, as it stands, that part of Torah on paper is changed? This is a yes-or-no question. Fk^rwbw 0ml4
| |
|
Print Top | | |
|
James_Trimm
   Member: Member Feedback |
Mar-07-2001 at 12:35 PM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria) |
In reply to message #8
>So the portion of Torah that >limited the priesthood to Levites >is no longer valid, then? > > >So, as it stands, that part >of Torah on paper is >changed? > >This is a yes-or-no question. > > >Fk^rwbw 0ml4 > Sure its valid. It simply never TOOK the prirsthood from anyone who already HAD it (i.e. Messiah Yeshua) at the time the Mosaic Covenant was given. No one but a Levite can receive the priestood.
| |
|
Print Top | | |
|
Paul Younan
    Member: Jun-1-2000 Posts: 1,306 Member Feedback |
Mar-07-2001 at 12:44 PM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria) |
In reply to message #9
So which Levites are priests now? Where are they offering the sacrifice for our sins? There are none. Akhi, I can understand your zeal for Torah, I have a first cousin who converted to Judaism (the non-Messianic type, circumcision and all), but I cannot understand this position. I see this as a renewal of the Melkizedekian priesthood, not a renewal of the Torah. Fk^rwbw 0ml4
| |
|
Print Top | | |
|
Paul Younan
    Member: Jun-1-2000 Posts: 1,306 Member Feedback |
Mar-07-2001 at 12:51 PM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria) |
In reply to message #11
Please post it, Akhi, I'm at work without my texts. Thanks! Fk^rwbw 0ml4
| |
|
Print Top | | |
|
Stephen
   Member: Member Feedback |
Mar-07-2001 at 08:13 PM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria) |
In reply to message #9
Sh'lama Akhi Paul: Stephen Silver wrote: The Hebrew word "khalaf", "Khet, Lamed, Pe", has the intrinsic meaning of "equivalence". It can mean "change", but according to Numbers 18:21, it is shown to represent "the equivalence of Service to Yahweh Elohim, by the Levitical Priesthood, with tithes, from the people. The Levites were not to have a "land inheritance". Their inheritance was "The Priesthood", and their sustenance came from this. This is exactly what the "exchange" was between Avraham and Melki-Tzedek,(Genesis 14:18-20). Therefore, in Hebrews 7:12, the Aramaic word, 0plxw4is pointing to this "equivalence", not "change". Fkrwbw 0ml4 Stephen Silver
| |
|
Print Top | | |
|
Paul Younan
    Member: Jun-1-2000 Posts: 1,306 Member Feedback |
Mar-07-2001 at 08:21 PM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria) |
In reply to message #14
Shlama Akhi Stephen, Please show me 1 place in the Peshitta Tanakh where 0plxw4 means anything other than 'Change.' If you show me this, I will change my mind, I'm a very reasonable person. I know my own language, and I have never used that word in that way. Neither do any of my sources (all standard dictionaries of the Aramaic language). But again, I'm open to correction. Just 1 place in the Peshitta Tanakh where that word does not mean 'change' is all it will take, and I will concede the point. Fk^rwbw 0ml4
| |
|
Print Top | | |
|
Stephen
   Member: Member Feedback |
Mar-07-2001 at 10:08 PM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria) |
In reply to message #15
Sh'lama Akhi Paul: Stephen Silver wrote: I do not yet, have the extensive background knowledge to show that 0plxw4 means anything but "change", as it is used in the modern Aramaic vernacular. Nevertheless, in TaNaK, the same "root" has several meanings, including "equivalence". Moreover, there is also "khalifah", "Khet, Lamed, Yud, Pe, He", which can mean "change",(Job 10:17), and "yikhalif", Yud, Khet, Lamed, Yud, Pe", "shoot, branch",(Job 14:7), and this is a "gazarah shevah/equivalence of expression", to "Tzemakh",(Zechariah 3:8, 6:12), and "Netzer",(Isaiah 11:1). It seems strange to me, that a word, whose Hebrew root means, "renew", "branch", and "equivalence", would be strictly used to connote a contradiction to Yahshua's own words in Matthew 5:17-20, who states clearly, that Torah is "unchangeable". Is it not rather possible, even likely, that the "etymology" of 0plxw4has "changed", since the New Testament was written, and it is now necessary, to affirm the Hebraic useage in TaNaK, to "reestablish" the intrinsic meaning? Just a thought. Fkrwbw 0ml4 Stephen Silver
| |
|
Print Top | | |
|
Paul Younan
    Member: Jun-1-2000 Posts: 1,306 Member Feedback |
Mar-08-2001 at 07:59 AM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria) |
In reply to message #16
LAST EDITED ON Mar-08-2001 AT 08:00 AM (CST) Shlama Akhi Steven, Yes, it is very possible. I just have to see the proof. There is no one who wants this more than I do. Here's what I propose:
- Every time 0plxw4 is used in the Peshitta Tanakh, it means 'Change'
- Every time Plx is used in the Peshitta Tanakh, it means 'Renewal'
- Therefore, the two words should carry the same meaning in the Brit Hadashah (Qyama Khadta)
Please, prove me wrong. If you or Dr. Trimm can find one instance in the Tanakh contradicting these first 2 points, I will concede. I swear it. I want to see that happen. I use this word about 20 times a day since the baby was born.  I know that we have never used that word to mean 'renewal', but you have a point - that could have changed over the centuries. Prove me wrong - and when I get to Sipra Abrait (The book of Hebrews), I will translate it exactly that way. Promise. Fk^rwbw 0ml4
| |
|
Print Top | | |
|
sam
   Member: Member Feedback |
Mar-08-2001 at 02:00 PM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria) |
In reply to message #17
Akhi Paul: Could the word used in the Peshitta for change also mean like its Greek translation does transform? the word renewal in Hebrew is usally the word Khadish or KHadisha in Aramaic not Shukh'lapa which in the hebrew translation of the Peshitta not the Greek it says Shinoy Shin-nun wav-yodh, which can mean transfom ,but not renewal. If it possable to Akhi yaqob is overly zeleaous for his judaic culture and roots and is reading meaning into the text that is simply not there. In Jeremiah 31:31 it says Khadisha meaning renewal possably but that word is abscent in the Peshitta passage of Hebrews 7:12 and abscent from the Hebrew translation of the peshitta as well. Shlama W'Berkhate Shmuel Eliezer
| |
|
Print Top | | |
|
Paul Younan
    Member: Jun-1-2000 Posts: 1,306 Member Feedback |
Mar-08-2001 at 02:19 PM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria) |
In reply to message #18
Shlama Akhi Shmuel, The Aramaic word Shukhlapa, as used by Assyrians, means only 'Change'.....but as you suggested, 'Transformation' is acceptable as well because a transformation is a change. I am still open to the possiblity of being proven wrong, because the Jews may have used it differently. My challenge to Stephen would prove that, either way. If that is the case, we must have dropped that alternate meaning all these years in our dialects. I think Dr. Trimm has a interesting and valid point, but we must prove it from actual examples from the Tanakh, of the word itself, and not it's root, because as you know a root can have many variations and meanings. Fk^rwbw 0ml4
| |
|
Print Top | | |
|
sam
   Member: Member Feedback |
Mar-08-2001 at 10:53 PM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria) |
In reply to message #19
Akhi Paul: Thank you for your reply. Then the Greek translation which means to transform or change is based uponthe same aramiac word, and reading renewal into it is unacceptabel as it amounts to hermanutic gymanastics forcing a meaning upon a word not intended. Shalom, Shmuel Elizer The hebrew word translated from the Peshitta also can mean transformed or change , but not renewal according to Shilo's Modern Hebrew Dictionary. The word Khadesh or Khadeisha means new or renewal and it is not used in this passage as we all see.
| |
|
Print Top | | |
|
James_Trimm
   Member: Member Feedback |
Mar-07-2001 at 12:58 PM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria) |
In reply to message #0
Heb. 7:11-12 If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,) what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron? For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law. (Heb. 7:11-12 KJV) There are two words that need to be looked at closely here. The first is the word "perfection" which in the Aramaic is G'MIRA'IT a form of the Aramaic word G'MARA. This word is better translated "completion. To give you some idea how this word is used in Aramaic let us look at another common usage of the word G'MARA. The Jewish book known as the Talmud is made up of the MISHNA which was edited around 250 C.E. and the G'MARA which was written about 550 C.E. The G'MARA is commentary on the MISHNA. The G'MARA does not change, replace or do away with the MISHNA. The G'MARA completes and complements the MISHNA. In the same way the Melchizadek priesthood of Messiah completes and complements the Levitical priesthood. It does not change, replace or do away with the Levitical priesthood. Now let us look at the word "change". The Aramaic word here is SHUKH'LAFA which means "change, transform renew or revive." The Hebrew form of the same Semitic root is Strong's 2498 KHALAF. This Hebrew version of the same word appears in Is. 40:31, 41:1 which reads "...let the people renew their strength..." Now as we have already shown it would be a Torah violation to change any part of the Torah (Deut 4:2; 12:32) so if we were to understand this passage to mean that Yeshua changed the Torah, we would be making Yeshua a Torah violator. However the context of this passage is one of renewal, and in fact in the section of Hebrews Paul comments on the "Renewed Covenant" of Jer. 31:31f. Heb. 7:18-19 For there is verily a disannulling of the commandment going before for the weakness and unprofitableness thereof. For the law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did; by the which we draw nigh unto God. Heb. 7:18-19 KJV Now the key word here is "disannulling" which in the Aramaic is SHUKH'LAFA which is better translated here as "renewal" (see comment to Heb. 7:11-12. The word for "perfect" here is G'MARA which is better understood as "complete" (see note to Heb. 7:11-12). Heb. 8:7 For if the first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second. (Heb. 8:7 KJV) A better translation for "faultless" is "without blame." The "fault" or "blame" involved is not a fault with the Torah. The scripture tells us the Torah is perfect ( Ps. 19:7; James 1:25). The fault or blame is ours for having violated Torah. As the following passage elaborates: For finding fault with them... Heb. 8:8 KJV The fault was not with the Torah but with the people who violated it. This takes us to our next commonly misunderstood passage. Heb. 8:13 In that he saith, A new covenant, he has made the first old, Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away. Heb. 8:13 KJV This passage immediately follows the quotation from Jer. 31:31f which followed Heb. 8:8 above. The Aramaic reads: By that which he called renewed, he made the first antiquated, and that which is antiquated and old is near to corruption. Heb. 8:13 from Aramaic Now the context is that in Heb. 8:8 Paul has said that there was fault with the people and that that caused a need for the covenant to be renewed. In the Torah we are told that if we as a people do not keep the Torah there will be consequences for us (Lev. 26; Deut. 28-29) but there is also a promise of a renewal of the covenant in Deut. 30 which closely parallels Jer. 31:31f. Paul is saying in Heb. 8:7-8 what the Renewal of the covenant spoken of by Jer. 31:31f resulted from our fault in not keeping Torah. Paul concludes in 8:13 to state that the existence of a renewed covenant proves that we had corrupted the first covenant, thus substantiating the case he made in Heb. 8:7-8.
| |
|
Print Top | | |
|
|