The Leningrad Codex

[praise_yeshua]

If you check "Wikipedia" concerning the "Leningrad Codex", the first line is blatantly false.

"The Leningrad Codex is the oldest known complete manuscript of the Hebrew Bible in Hebrew"
You might read that line and ask "What is false about it"?

Two things are obvious to me. I know that the supposed "Hebrew Bible" classification is wrong. Historically, the Hebrew Bible has had far more "books" in their "Bible" than what is found in the Leningrad Codex. If you don't know this, then please study the subject. It is worthy of review.

Also, ancient archeological discoveries concerning the very "name of God" show that modern Hebrew has not retained the original "name of God" Also referenced as the "Tetragrammaton"....

Add the fact that the Phoenician language varied by region and era.

The name of God in Hebrew today is "Adonai". This important to remember. The "leap" that modern Judaism makes in the name of God into Adoani is self serving. The argument is "Adonai" is borrowed into Greek. However, the Tetragrammaton itself is proof that it is not.

Pay attention. It is a self serving claim that Adonai came from Hebrew into Greek and not the other way around. The "intermediary" is not known. Don't let anyone tell you differently.

What we do know is that the Tetragrammaton dates to the time of origins of the Greek OT. A time when Hebrew had largely been forgotten due to the sins of Israel and the scattering the Babylonian dispersion. The Phoenician language is also the basis of Greek language itself.

Now tell me where I'm wrong?

 

[praise_yeshua]

There are many modern "Hebrew" words today that can not be understood without other languages. The reason of this is well known. The sin of Israel dispersed the children of Jacob throughout the "world". This division caused the "minute details" of their language and culture to be largely lost. The NT largely correct much of the mistakes to be found in modern Hebrew. Greek is essential to understand the Hebrew language. Other languages are necessary as well. Some sense of rather modern Aramaic along with the extant Old Syriac manuscripts also assist us to know what God has given to humanity.

Also, there are some that believe that "Adonai" is of Ugaritic origin.

When Israel conquered the land of the Canaanites, they did not eliminate the cultures that existed among them. They "intermixed" in the land to the point that what came from Moses changed in how it is expressed. How it is understood.

Some devout Hebrews believe that Adam spoke Hebrew and that Hebrew was the original language of the earth. Which shows you how self serving religious beliefs can be.

If Adam spoke Hebrew then the narrative of the tower of Babel falls apart. How? Well, if everyone knew Hebrew at the time, then how could them ALL have been separated by language......

Gen 11:9 Therefore is the name of it called Babel; because the LORD did there confound the language of all the earth: and from thence did the LORD scatter them abroad upon the face of all the earth.

Whatever immediate language Adam spoke is gone..... Well maybe not entirely. In fact, I'd argue that the gift of tongues "heavenly language" is what Adam spoke and the language of all the earth before the flood.

Languages are complicated. God wanted it that way. He wanted you to spend time seeking Him. So spend time seeking Him.

 

[praise_yeshua]

Meaningful distinctions exist in how modern "Hebrew Onlyists" tell you the Scriptures "say"..... and what God said.

I'll start listing some very meaningful examples. As already mentioned "Adonai".

Zec 6:5 And the angel answered and said unto me, These are the four spirits of the heavens, which go forth from standing before the Lord of all the earth.
Adonai is plural!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It is one of the overwhelming examples of the Holy Trinity in the OT.

Modern Hebrew tries to explain this fact way with the false claims concerning ""Tetragrammaton"... (Which is actually Greek. The word "Tetragrammaton" is of Greek origins. It means "four letters"So what does that tell you about the essentials of Greek in the OT?)

So all you Hebrew experts..... Tell me the Scriptural basis for not pronouncing the "Tetragrammaton". I'll wait. I know what they teach about it. However, it is nothing but an excuse. It is not reason.

So give me the reason why the "Tetragrammaton" can not be uttered?

Don't appeal to tradition. Traditions have meaning or they don't. Traditions are often vain.

1Pe 1:18 Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers;
1Pe 1:19 But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot:

Col 2:8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.

 

[Dizerner]

So give me the reason why the "Tetragrammaton" can not be uttered?

Because, out of a misguided false zeal, the vowels were not passed down, so the word can only be hypothetically reconstructed.

From what I've read Yahweh does seem like the best guess, and the first syllable being "Yah" is practically incontestable.

Adonai is just from putting the wrong vowels on YHWH on purpose to remind scribes not to say it, and (most) Greek went along with it.

There are actually some early Greek manuscripts that keep the Paleo letters of YHWH which is pretty cool, and some Hebrew ones do it too.

There are some inaccuracies in your other posts and people should research this themselves.

 

[praise_yeshua]

More meaningful examples....

Isa 7:14 Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.

You will not find this verse properly translated from the Leningrad Codex nor the DSS (Where is Wes Huff???)

You will only find it properly exhibited from the Greek OT as references by LXX AND the NT Greek source found in

Luk 1:26 And in the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God unto a city of Galilee, named Nazareth,
Luk 1:27 To a virgin espoused to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin's name was Mary.

If you ask your AI of choice, you'll find that Codex Alexandrinus reads.....

According to the Codex Alexandrinus, Isaiah 7:14 reads as "Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel,"

The DSS and Leningrad Codex denies the Virgin birth.

 

[praise_yeshua]

Because, out of a misguided false zeal, the vowels were not passed down, so the word can only be hypothetically reconstructed.

From what I've read Yahweh does seem like the best guess, and the first syllable being "Yah" is practically incontestable.

Adonai is just from putting the wrong vowels on YHWH on purpose to remind scribes not to say it, and (most) Greek went along with it.

There are actually some early Greek manuscripts that keep the Paleo letters of YHWH which is pretty cool, and some Hebrew ones do it too.

There are some inaccuracies in your other posts and people should research this themselves.

By all means, point out my "inaccuracies" and tell me why. Please use archeological evidence. If you can't provide such, then reference manuscripts themselves.

Please establish that "Adonai is just from putting the wrong vowels on YHWH"? What is your source?

Also feel free to deal with my example of the importance of Adonai. You discard the importance of Adonai above. In fact, you're claiming Adonai is wrong. Realize what you're doing.

 

[praise_yeshua]

How many know that Hebrew hasn't always been written from right to left?

How Hebrew Came to Be Written From Right to Left

Hebrew was once written in both directions. How did it fix its direction, and what does that show about the history of writing in general?

mosaicmagazine.com

To take Mr. Grossman’s first question first, one of the things that can be learned from the recently deciphered 1700 BCE Canaanite inscription found on an unearthed ivory comb in southwest Israel, and discussed in my previous column, is that Hebrew, in its most protean stage, was not exclusively written from right to left. Nor was it exclusively written from left to right. The comb’s two rows of seventeen letters were written in both directions. As described by the Jerusalem Journal of Archeology article on which my column was based:

The archeological evidence is rather interesting.... The article is a good read..... pay attention to references of how the Greeks influenced Hebrew. At least "this" Hebrew.

 

[praise_yeshua]

Emanuel Tov

Here is a link to buy the third volume of his essays.

Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible, Qumran, Septuagint

https://brill.com/display/title/25187?language=en

You can find it for less on Amazon. I'm not telling you to buy his book. In my view, you don't really need it to understand the issue. I'm simply sharing that there are people who have dedicated their lives to know this issue.

There is a reason that many are not satisfied with the work of the Mosartes found in the Leningrad Codex. No one should consider the Leningrad Codex as being "authoritative".

Evidence..... why certainly. The definitive "authority".... NO... NO.NO.

 

[Dizerner]

No single text should be the definitive authority.


None.

 

[praise_yeshua]

Example of the NT identifying its superior source material.....

Act 8:32 The place of the scripture which he read was this, He was led as a sheep to the slaughter; and like a lamb dumb before his shearer, so opened he not his mouth:
Act 8:33 In his humiliation his judgment was taken away: and who shall declare his generation? for his life is taken from the earth.

Wes Huff should pay attention.....

Isa 53:7 He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth: he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he openeth not his mouth.
Isa 53:8 He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare his generation? for he was cut off out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people was he stricken.

Notice how sheep and lamb are reversed in Isa 53:7. Above Isa 53:7 comes from the MT represented in the Leningrad Codex.

Lamb to the slaughter and sheep to the shearers. Not lamb to the shearer and sheep the slaughter. Also pay attention to "his" and "her" distinctions.

I know some are going to say this doesn't matter. However, let me tell you why it matters. There is a distinct word in "Hebrew" for "ewe" or a female sheep.

רָחֵל

It is why Isaiah 53:7 in the surviving Hebrew translates to "her shearers. Which is dead wrong.

Thank God we have a Greek witness that fixes this mistake.

 

[praise_yeshua]

No single text should be the definitive authority.


None.

I know I've called you a "Hebrew Onlyist".... You're not the first person I've ever said that too. I was once a KJVOist. When I was a very young Christian. My battles in that "war" that existed taught me many things. It taught me how I was wrong and why I wrong. I've meet many people in my life that will insist that there shouldn't be a single "authority"....

Yet when they defend the Scriptures they only consider a single source.....

I hear what "you're saying".... but I don't see anything different in what you practice. Maybe I'm wrong. Please correct me. Do you use any Greek OT sources and what are they?

 

[Dizerner]

Do you use any Greek OT sources and what are they?

All sources available should be consulted, including:

Greek, Hebrew, Aramaic, Latin, Syriac, Coptic, Ge'ez (Ethiopic), Armenian, Georgian and Slavonic.

But apparently I'm "Hebrew Onlyist"?! Lol.

 

[praise_yeshua]

All sources available should be consulted, including:

Greek, Hebrew, Aramaic, Latin, Syriac, Coptic, Ge'ez (Ethiopic), Armenian, Georgian and Slavonic.

But apparently I'm "Hebrew Onlyist"?! Lol.

The question was easy to answer. It should have been effortless. I've detailed superior Greek sources above. It wasn't hard for me. I did it rather quickly given the subject.

Yet you answer like this?

Will you not "lift/resolve" this issue with "one of your fingers"?