Hebrews vs Psalms
yoel core@rof.net
Sat, 30 Aug 1997 12:28:51 -0600 (00872987331, v01540b0db02e01328c2a@[209.38.34.200])
Curt-
>During a recent exchange with my brother over the Hebrews 10:5/Psalms 40:6
>problem (i.e. the fact that Hebrews quotes the Septuagint, which differs
>from the Hebrew in the crucial phrase),
yoel-
Well, here it is:
Hebrew 10:5 NIV)
Therefore when Christ came into the world, He said:
"Sacrifice and offering you did not desire,
but a body you prepared for me; (reminds me of Anne Rice's "Witching Hour")
with burnt offerings and sin offerings
you were not pleased
Then I said, 'Here I am- it is written about me in the scroll-
I have come to do your will, O God."
Uhgh! The NIV gives the following footnote: Ps 40: 6-8 (see Septuagint).
But of course, even the NIV cannot claim to have made an accurate
translation of the Jewish scriptures and somehow fit that mistranslation
in. For some reason, however, they have no qualms about doing such a thing
with Isaiah 7, Isaiah 9, Psalm 22. I guess Psalm 40:6-8 isn't really so
crucial to their argument like those other verses are, so they can afford a
little honesty.
Anyway, here is the NIV translation of Psalm 40:6-8:
"Sacrifice and offering you did not desire
but my ears you have pierced;
burnt and sin offerings you did not require (well then, why Jesus?)
Then I said, "Here I am, I have come-
It is written about me in the scroll.
I desire to do your will, O my God;
Your law is within my heart."
Well, as you can see, the bottom is perfectly in line with Judaism (though
the translation is still faulty). The top line. with "a body you have
prepared for me" reflects the Zombiesque incarnation of God in a foetus.
Here is from the Hebrew Bible:
zevakh uminHah lo Hafatzta
sacrifice and offering not you desired
oznayim karita li
Ears you have opened* for me
'olah veHata'ah lo sha'alta
burnt oferings and sin offering not you required
az amarti hineh bati
thus I said here!/look! I came (have come)
bimgilat sefer katuv alai
in the scroll (of) a book (is) written upon me (or 'about me')
la'asot retzonkha elohai Hafatzti
to do your will my God I desired
Vetoratkha betokh me'ai
and your torah (is) within my intestines
*this root (k-r-h) literally means "to cut out, to dig out, to unstop". The
term "likhrot ozen" (used here), means 'to open one's ears so that he can
hear.' Sort of like "to pay attention" or "to notice" through hearing. It
means "You have opened my ears [so that I can hear]." It does not mean that
the ears were pierced. Pierce is d-q-r. "My ears you have pierced" would be
"oznayim daqarta li."
The psalmist is saying that God has opened his ears so that he can
understand that sacrifice is not the most important thing, but rather
following the Torah. The Psalmist is having these problems. He has been in
a slimy pit (Ps 40:1-2) and God has helped and comforted him (Ps 40:2-3).
He is now afraid of people waiting to kill him (Ps 40:14). He has realised
that sacrifice is not the most important thing, but rather, that following
God's Torah is more important. And he takes comfort in God's Torah, which
he follows and which is inside of him. (remember, 'Torah' means a lot more
than 'law'. It also means 'instruction', 'direction'.
Curt-
he came up with the following "solution":
The Septuagint is actually a legitimate paraphrase of the Hebrew. The
phrase "opened my ears" is a reference to the ancient slave-owning policies
of the Jews, wherein the master of the house would bore through the slave's
ear if the slave elected lifetime service.
yoel-
No. It means that the Psalmists ears have been opened. "You have opened my
ears".
Curt-
Thus, the phrase "a body hast thou prepared me" is a reference to this
mutiliation, and thus means a lifetime of sacrificial service.
yoel-
No, I have no idea how they came up with "a body thou hast prepared for
me". The Hebrew is pretty clear. I have seen other Septuagint
mistranslations where the reason for the mistake is obvious.
Is it certain that the Septuagint copies being used are not copies that
have already been altered by Christians? I mean, were the copies that
existed before Christianity? You see, it would be harder for Christians to
subvert actual Hebrew masoretics because:
1. The overwhelming majority of Christians do not know Hebrew
2. Jews also have copies of the OT in Hebrew. And they know Hebrew. That
is, copies of the Old Testament exist, zealously guarded outside the realm
of Christian control.
To alter the Septuagint would be easier because:
1. Christians did know Greek
2. Jews had rejected the Septuagint, so it was not zealously guarded.
I know nothing, I just ask, since the Septuagint translation is
unacceptable and incomprehensible. Unlike other Septuagint errors (like
Jeremiah's arab/crow), there is no way that one can accidentally get
"a body thou hast prepared for me"
from
oznayim karita li
Ears you have opened for me
If the septuagint says this, then this is more proof that it was not a good
translation. The "a body thou hast prepared for me" makes no sense in
context and does not appear in the Hebrew, while the "you have opened my
ears" makes sense in context.
Look:
David (if it is David) tells of the groovy things God has done:
"He heard my cry" (1)
"He lifted me out" (2)
"He set my feet" (2)
"He gave me a firm place" (2)
"He put a new song in my mouth" (3)
Then he breaks, saying "blessed is the man" who trusts in the Lord.....
Then he speaks to God:
"[You have] done many wonders" (5)
"[You have] planned [many] things." (5)
"YOU HAVE OPENED MY EARS" (6) not "a body you have prepared for me"
Then, after David's ears have been opened and he has realised that
sacrifice is not necessary, but rather that following God's Torah is
necessary, he makes his case, listing the things he has not done (9-10).
Then he closes by makes a plea for God's further asistence in his present
turmoil (11-17).
Then
Curt-
Personally, I find this rather weak, but can anybody confrim my feeling.
(maybe Yoel?). What is the possibility that we are dealing with a genuine
paraphrase, and not simply a translation mistake?
yoel-
No way.