I really appreciate this. Tovia can be very convincing and I've seen him debate others that are terrible debaters. Finally someone who refutes Tovia's message intelligently.
6:45ish, we know the septuagint text regarding the psalms was a later Christian addition to what they had and thus is biased to appear Christian. The peshitta text was a Christian document of likely the second century CE. So this James Trimme dude is not referencing Jewish texts. Biblia hebraica was authored by Rudolf kittel, who is known to have held antisemic beliefs though is known to have worked with an observant jew, isser kahn in preparing his conclusions. He is also the father of nazi supporter Gerhard kittel, the new testament scholar and Lutheran who william Albright wrote was "Gerhard Kittel must bear the guilt of having contributed more, perhaps, than any other Christian theologian to the mass murder of Jews by Nazis." Oh yes, so far these "works" definitely sound unsuspect.... sure, how oblivious does this guy think we are? The works he cites are Christian authors and additions, some who are actually antisemitic! If people are unfamiliar with the debate between the original text between Christians and Jews and do not do research it becomes just a matter of following whoever promotes your already preconceived beliefs which is the opposite of seeking truth! Let's pretend the text the Christians promote is authentic. You would have to argue why Jews who have such stringent beliefs on the exact transfer of the text would knowing alter the word of Hashem. To knowing change the word and mistrust Hashem is outrageous! Further, the context of the verse, given either version is not about a future messiah Do some studying! The Christians in this account are wrong no matter the translation.
@Phil Andrew Apologies for late reply. I do not see your comment anymore but hope you see this. I believe you are referring to the Nahal hever 5/6 fragment, 5/6 H. ev-Sev4Ps Fragment 11 which was not found in Qumran but many associate with the dead sea scrolls as a whole. It is from the cave of letters, and the dates of the documents is from 94-132 c.e. Some of the documents belonged to Sime’on b. kokhbah himself. I am sure you aware of him and that some proposed he was the messiah to come, though history has proven otherwise, as is the case with Jesus of Nazareth. You have made several errors. First, you assume older means more accurate. This is a fallacy as a single document from antiquity is important, not arguing that at all. But, a discovery of documents from antiquity needs to be understood that it could have an error in it. Age does not make it infallible Or better. The debate is if the word is kari or kru (misspelled as karu). First, karu, is not a word. It appears no where in scripture and if you can reference where it is used as claimed, please cite this as scholars have never found it, even in extra biblical writings. If your going to make the claim it is an alternate spelling of KRU with the aleph, again, you would have to cite where that word is used. Again, it exists nowhere in scripture spelled as such. The existence of the aleph is not disputed. The question is if the word ends in a vav or yod. Kru means to dig, it is used as such numerous times. To pierce is dwkr. The Nahal hever 5/6 fragment, the last letter does look like a vav. But it could be a scribal error. There is also the fact as brought to light by Yosef Feignmen, that many places yod and vav are interchanged such as the dead sea scrolls, an example he uses is Psalm 138 from the great Psalm scroll. Also, on the very fragment in question, we see a vav where a yod is known to be used where it says “all my bones” AND “to my assistance”. So in two places on this very fragment, we see a vav in place of what should be a yod, and the translation is, because we know the only existent words it could be, understood to be a yod. So, to suggest that here it is an alternate spelling of kru, and have zero entries anywhere else in all of scripture and discovered texts, we know what is meant, otherwise you must also change the other instances of this occurrence and it forfeits the entire fragment as false and untrustworthy. So for this to mean pierced, first you have to decide to not use the word for pierced. Instead you use the word dug, as in to dig, then change the spelling of that word to end up with KRU with an aleph added which appears no where in Jewish writings. Are you grasping what your claiming? Your claiming that the word is an error and the error proves it is KRU written improperly and the author chose the word for “dug" and not used the word for “pierced". Further, other texts found nearby demonstrate that in many places a yod appears as a vav, as well as two other places on this very fragment! Then, you are ignoring the context of the entire passage claiming it is a future messianic. I appreciate your perspective but under any scrutiny, it falls apart. Again, the consonant in question is if the word ends in a vav or yod. The word KARU does not exist. The claim by Christian apologists is that it is a misspelled KRU. The argument is that the word itself is an error, containing an Aleph, and that alternate spelling of KRU which exists no where else, is their proof for their claims. I am sorry you have been misled by their credentials but do the research yourself. As pointed out, other texts found among the Nahal hever documents show a vav where a yod is intended, as well as on this very fragment, suggesting the Scribe understood what they were doing or they were untrained. Further, the Septuagint was only of the Torah, not the Psalms. Those translations were added later by Christians, that is not contested among the scholars. So, if anything, your expressing the Septuagint has as evidence for its authority, error filled works.
@@acanadianbear649"platzhirsch4275" is making very interesting comments on the subject in case you want to have a trade. I'm not informed on the subject, so I would like to see the two of you talk to each other.
Scraps from a scroll containing some of the Psalms were discovered at Nachal Hever, and one scrap contained the line from Psalm 22:16 with the word in question well in view. Though the writing on the scrap was faint, under magnification it was easy to see and decipher. The word clearly ended in a vav not a yod, and was therefore a 3rd person plural verb: “they dug” or “they pierced.” Here was evidence that the Lxx translators had not “fooled” with the text, but had faithfully translated the Hebrew original that was before them. Since this scrap is dated (in accordance with the style of letters used) to 50-68 CE, it is almost 1000 years earlier than the Aleppo Codex, the earliest extant manuscript of the Masoretic text, and shows that in at least one of the earliest Hebrew traditions of Psalm 22, the word is not “like a lion” but “they dug” or “pierced.” Dr. Peter Flint, who published the principle edition of the scrap, notes that in the Herodian script, “vav and yod are usually distinguished, with vav generally longer than yod.”1 Indeed, in this instance, we have a perfect example for comparison, since the very next letter following the word in question is a yod: “my hands” (ידיה). The last letter of ka’aru is without doubt a vav when compared with the beginning letter of the next word which is clearly a yod. Here, then, is a Hebrew manuscript, pre-Christian, with “they dug” or “they pierced.” But not everyone is convinced. Some (who apparently have not looked at the photographs of the manuscript) accuse Dr. Flint of misreading the letter. Others have argued that the Hebrew word כאר could never mean “pierce,” and that Christian interpreters have tried to make כאר (ka’ar) some form of כרה, karah, which does mean “to dig” (and by inference) “to pierce.” “But,” say the detractors, “the appearance of the aleph in the word precludes it being a form of karah, ‘to dig’ or ‘to pierce.’” Others have claimed that the word ידיה “my hands” is “misspelled” because it has the final ה, (implying that the text is not to be trusted in matters of spelling). Apparently those who make this judgment are unaware that the Hebrew of the Qumran documents often utilize the final ה to mark final diphthongs
@@revisoerjadi4691well, everyone believes whatever he wants to believe, doesn't he. "Like a Lion they dug my hands and feet" means exactly what? People seem to be so blind....
@@platzhirsch4275 So, there's NO primary evidence that in DSS, the word KARU was SEEN clearly?! Only from article, yea?! Right or wrong?! #friendshipmode
That description about Psalm 22 by LXX, Peshitta, Dead Sea Scrolls is remarkably similar to the one in Zechariah 12:10 and Isaiah 53:5, by the way The Babylonian Talmud says: "One holds that it was for the Messiah the Son of Joseph who was killed, as written in Zechariah 12: When they look on me, whom they have pierced, they shall mour for him, as one mourn for an only child" (Tractade Sukkah chapter 5). So James Trimm is right!
It shows each side of a debated issue. Both people gave their interpretation allowing the listener to hear both sides of the argument and come to their own conclusion.
@@christo-chaney See for yourself what the Psalm scroll from Nahal Hever says. The Hebrew word in question ends with a waw [vav] and not a yod, thus the "like a lion" reading is not supported in this manuscript that predates the Masoretic family of texts by 800 or more years. www.deadseascrolls.org.il/explore-the-archive/image/B-366234
@@christo-chaney Among the Dead Sea Scrolls of Bible books, only the great Isaiah scroll is virtually complete. The rest are fragments of varying lengths, including the Nahal Hever Psalms scroll, which is designated 5/6HevPs and is generally dated to the first century. Watch ua-cam.com/video/5cL1l_gmcDg/v-deo.html I find the evidence compelling that the 5/6HevPs scroll does not support the "like a lion" reading.
Let’s look closer at the text. First, the phrase, as it stands in the Masoretic text, seems to lack a verb. Note that the Masoretic punctuation (the atnach under the word ) puts a stop after “surrounded me,” leaving the final phrase of the verse to stand on its own. The Targum felt this problem, and “fixed it” by adding the verb “bite” (נכת, nechat): “biting my hands and my feet like a lion.” But now we see the earliest Hebrew source did not have “like a lion” but wrote the word as a verb. But what verb did the Lxx (as well as the Syriac and the Vulgate) “see” when they translated “they dug (pierced) my hands and my feet?” A verb with the three consonants כאר ka’ar does not show up in the lexicons of biblical Hebrew. Some, however, have suggested that the root is כוּר, kur, and that it was written in an archaic form with aleph instead of with vav. We actually do have examples of verbs with middle vav being spelled with aleph. For instance, the verb קוּם, kum, “to get up” is spelled with aleph in Hosea 10:14, Daniel 2:13; 3:3; 7:16, and the word רוּם, rum, “to be high above” is likewise spelled with aleph in Zechariah 14:10. So there is at least a reasonable possibility that an original verb spelled kur was written with aleph, i.e., ka’ar. One of the verbs in Hebrew that means “to dig” is karah (כרה). Originally that verb could have been spelled כוּר kur (final hey was added as an early “vowel marker”). This being the case, כָּאֲרוּ could be an alternate spelling for כָּרוּ, “they dug.”
I would love Rabbi James Trimm to analyse the Talmud writings Yoma 39. It's so amazing to understand the miracles that happened 40 years prior to the destruction of the Temple in 70 AD. Its actually mind-blowing when you understand Jesus was killed in 30 AD and from that very moment on Hashem didn't accept the sacrifice system in the Temple anymore..... 🙏
Hi! I hope you ll see my message! I have to let know how much I enjoy your channel! You are a true seeker! I’ve tried to find that new channel of yours- Words In Red and I couldn’t. But I saw Red Red on bitchute... is it you? Thank you for what you doing. I found exactly what I was looking for!😔
The lion is licking the hands and feet or piecing them with their teeth? Is this a difference without a distinction? In the big picture either way as i step back I see Jesus. In Psalm 14 there is none good no not one and so Psalm 15 and 24 ask the question who then can climb the mountain of God? and there is a literary mountain Psalm 15 through 24 is there, a chiasm with Psalm 19 at the peak with the righteousness of the law and the heavens. Step to to the top 15 6 17 18 19 and as thou step down 20,21 matches 18 and 22 matches 17 and 21 matches 16 and 24 matches 15. At the end of the hill is Psalm 22, 23, 24 with the Good Shepherd who laid down his life, the King. Jesus. I see mention of Gods right hand in almost all the Psalms 15 though 20 as if God is flexing his hand in salvation.
I'm adding my two shekels of comment in harmony with what "A Canadian Bear" has said in this group of responses. Everyone is speaking here about כארי vs כארו, with the distinction being whether there is a vav (a pronominal suffix which would mean “they”) or if the final letter is a yud. But there’s a more fundamental error here. The word for “they pierced” (actually “dug”) is כרו (karu - not ka’aru). There is no case in the Hebrew Bible where the term כרו karu appears as כארו kaaru (inserting an aleph as the second letter). Dr. Trimm argues for the grammar “to make sense” and that the sentence needs a verb. That’s true for English and not so for Hebrew. There is abundant evidence of single words and phrases written in the style of ktav ma’aleh (complete text) vs ktav khaser (deficient text). In my scholarly opinion (I’ve taught Hebrew for decades), the verse in question is an example of the latter.
"platzhirsch4275" is making very interesting comments on the subject in case you want to have a trade. I'm not informed on the subject, so I would like to see the two of you talk to each other. I Said the same to "a canadian Bear"
he said it already...jews dont change word of God...or the book is a human book and not sacred. when you dont find christian philosophy in the jewish bible...then they try alternative ways to prove their point. manipulate text. e.g. virgin birth insert Jesus into text...(by the way you can replace it with any pagan deity and it could work too) jesus can be god, angel,sabbath or time, some character malchizedek, word plural translated as gods, pick up lines and passages out of context. servant or servants...referred to jews. coming out of egypt..forgetting the jewish exodus. inserting 'The' where nothing spesific Using Capital .....The Messiah.... Using Of different words for same hebrew word...e.g. sometimes anointed and sometimes The Messiah.
and then saying...jews are blinded..or deliberately rejecting even when it is clear...children of devil. We try to learn from our creator....who is involved but not in the creation. We dont bring him down...we go higher to Him
This is dumb, it isn’t even a debate, it’s a post with intent to refute a position and have the last word. Having said that, if you took a 100 Christians and 100 Jews and put them in a room each to explain the text in Hebrew 100 Jews would be able to do it and we would be surprised if 3 Christians could do it. That is not stated to insult but to make a point. The point is, we should speak not as an authority unless we can actually read with comprehension what it says - our thoughts are our opinions, or in some case, echos of others opinions, until we actually study the text with the understanding of the language. Tovia is a Judaic scholar, he is not trying to recruit Christians to Judaism, however, Christians are trying to recruit Jews to Christianity. Lost Jews, wandering Jews returning home should make Christians glad, it fulfills their prophetic ideas in their faith but why then do they debate to call Jews wrong? Is it antisemitism? Is is ego? Is it to keep them from a hell concept that does not even exist in their Old Testament, but is a pagan concept from 750 b.c.. On several levels the Christian misunderstands completely what Judaism really is, and was, and for the most part few want to really know it. It’s easier to say “I was not fooled” than to admit perhaps you have been, but keep in mind, Messiah is by all parties “JEWISH” so don’t you think G-d, who chose the Jewish people would have made it clear to them, and not a mystery, what, who and how Messiah would be?? Hebrew is their language, Hebrew is a holy language and certainly it was also first given to them - so why all this attack on the Jew for their conclusions? What is the objective? This post is nothing but one man’s conclusion - and as they say, don’t take it to heart.
Here, in the ancient Psalm of David, the suffering Messiah is prophetically and mystically portrayed. The darkness which came while He hung as the Pesach Lamb demonstrated the manner in which God viewed the sin bearer: He turned the shining of His face away (cf. Numbers 6:25, Psalm 67:1). The trauma He underwent was one which dislocated His bones (vv. 14, 17), and brought dehydration and thirst (v. 15). His hands and feet were bloodied by those who pierced them (v. 16). His enemies divided His clothes like the spoils of war (v. 18). Yet His cries for help to God did not go unheeded. He knew of the victory He would win, and even of His resurrection, for He knew that He would stand as a witness to His brethren and give praises to the Almighty (vv. 22, 25). He knew that by His suffering He would accomplish the salvation of His people. In exchange for the joy of redeeming His bride, He endured the cross, despised the shame, and won the victory. This prophetic picture of David, the sweet psalmist of Israel, was in perfect harmony with the message of the later prophets. Isaiah 53:5 speaks of the Servant being “pierced through” (מְחֹלָל, mecholal) for our transgressions, and Zechariah (12:10) describes the Messiah as “pierced” (דָּקָרווּ, daqaru). We understand, then, that David, in writing Psalm 22, was looking ahead and describing the death of the Messiah. But not only His death, but also the victory which was His, and ours, in resurrection (Acts 2:31)
No one in the early church thought Psalm 22 was Jesus? Jesus did. He cried Psalm 22:1 at the cross!!! My God My God doubled down, Why have you forsaken Me? The tone is suffering at the first half. I like how the animals surrounding the suffering lion, ox, dog in the middle of the Psalm reverses being mentioned as the psalm turns to salvation. Leading to the end where it will be told to future generations that He Has Done I t!!!!
Do you understand that many scholars think that the NT was written to spread and defend Christianity as a belief system? If this was the case, why would someone believe Jesus actually said these words? It is what a person believes that guides how they interpret and translate these passages.
@@brooklynnlou4 BrooklynLou, because it was inspired by God. Both can be true. Inspired by God and meant to spread the gospel. The truth is many scholars are glorified unbelievers. Am I wrong? By the way... love that Brooklyn Papyrus.
@@brooklynnlou4 If someone wrote something to defend it it must not be true? What???? Lou you remind me of my days having Bible Studies for Brooklyn high school kids for 26 years.
@@michaelangelo9119 Yes, both can be true and scholars can be glorified believers as well. They can be biased either way. A good scholar lets the evidence guide what they believe to be true with as little bias as possible.
@@michaelangelo9119 Did not suggest this proves it must NOT BE TRUE. Am suggesting that if someone has an agenda when writing something that they may tweak words to suit their agenda. I think the early Christians believed what they were writing and were pushing a narrative based on this belief. An orthodox Jew does not believe this narrative and DO believe the Hebrew bible written in the Hebrew language - the Masoretic text which says clearly here, "Like a Lion". They do not believe the Christian New Testament, so why would they believe it says, " He was pierced"? What people BELIEVE impacts how they interpret scripture. The early Christians interpreted and translated the New Testament based on what they BELIEVED while the Ancient Hebrews wrote the Old Testament based on what they BELIEVED. What a person BELIEVES shapes how they may interpret and translate passages such as this one. Do you agree with this? Christians simply BELIEVE something that orthodox Jews do not believe. They do not base what they BELIEVE on New Testament translations and interpretations. They will not accept Christian translations that alter what they BELIEVE to be TRUE anymore than a Christian will accept the word for word translations from the Masoretic text without using Christian Beliefs in order to makes sense of the text.
when you dont find christian philosophy in the jewish bible...then they try alternative ways to prove their point. manipulate text. e.g. virgin birth insert Jesus into text...(by the way you can replace it with any pagan deity and it could work too) jesus can be god, angel,sabbath or time, some character malchizedek, word plural translated as gods, pick up lines and passages out of context. servant or servants...referred to jews. coming out of egypt..forgetting the jewish exodus. inserting 'The' where nothing spesific Using Capital .....The Messiah.... Using Of different words for same hebrew word...e.g. sometimes anointed and sometimes The Messiah.
and then saying...jews are blinded..or deliberately rejecting even when it is clear...children of devil. We try to learn from our creator....who is involved but not in the creation. We dont bring him down...we go higher to Him
That’s silly. There is. The argument is what hebrew word is found in psalm 22:17. Is it kaf-aleph-resh-yod or kaf-aleph-resh-vav. (Yod and vav have been mixed up in other parts of translations and is a common scribal error. Its usually obvious in the context of the verse and has been fixed in new renderings) If you believe its ka’ari then please note the verse does not form a full sentence as its missing a verb so translators have to add words to the text (they are at) in order you form a complete sentence. I do not believe the Jesus taught by Christianity. I believe one has eternal life by following the Torah. I believe the Yeshua (Jesus) written about tells people to repent and to get on the derech and start following torah and to be a light and share torah with the world as keeping torah mitzvot is how one connects with God and emulates the ways of God. Many Jews do not share torah with anyone else. But He said to be a light to the nations and the only light we have is torah. Thus we are to share torah with the nations.
so you call this message intelligent... think: who wrote psalms...King David. and the word kaari is in question..but yadai and raglai (my hands and my feet) whose hands and feet....David's. How did this becomes jesus hands and feet ? now show where is mesiach supposed to be crucified ? is this his job description ? No. Just like Moshe came to redeem jews from physical slavery. Mesiach will come to free world from spiritual slavery and confusion( of not recognizing ones own creator) ....and not die and add to the confusion.
I watch Tovia. I like his teachings. However, i have found that he is not always honest with his facts in order to “win” a debate. This isn’t about winning, this is about learning, learning truth. This video shows that Tovia is not being intellectually honest and is accusing a group of people of doing something they did not do. This is breaking the halacha of lashon hara. I don’t consider my self a Christian because christians preach a lawless moshiach when moshiach will be just like Moshe (which I believe Yeshua was/is/will be).
@@vrab. just ask who is speaking King David..his hands and feet..how jesus here?...and the speaker will be proved false...he brings claims from various books...all christian translations...septugent is not jewish. rabbi tobia is not adding to win debate...the same debates were won every century and winners killed. when you dont find christian philosophy in the jewish bible...then they try alternative ways to prove their point. manipulate text. e.g. virgin birth insert Jesus into text...(by the way you can replace it with any pagan deity and it could work too) jesus can be god, angel,sabbath or time, some character malchizedek, word plural translated as gods, pick up lines and passages out of context. servant or servants...referred to jews. coming out of egypt..forgetting the jewish exodus. inserting 'The' where nothing spesific Using Capital .....The Messiah.... Using Of different words for same hebrew word...e.g. sometimes anointed and sometimes The Messiah.
and then saying...jews are blinded..or deliberately rejecting even when it is clear...children of devil. We try to learn from our creator....who is involved but not in the creation. We dont bring him down...we go higher to Him
@@jkolet - I apologize but you are arguing about things not mentioned in this video. This video on on the topic of of one word in one chapter of one psalm. And the evidence is quite clear for this particular issue. The other issues you bring up are good things to discuss but are irrelevant for this video. People don’t need to exactly believe how others believe. We all will be judged individually.
@@YourFavoriteSephardi @firstroundboxing - hi guys. I post this video to discuss a topic. I gave two scholars commentaries on the topic. Please refrain from name calling and ad hominem attacks and generality attacks. The topic is over one hebrew word in psalm 22:16. If you have information on that topic, feel free to share. Shalom
God does not share the space with a false deity..you have a free will to choose God or an idol. study that is your only way to get to truth...(till mesiach comes and brings light of truth but then that is not considered your effort...)
Psalm 22:5 Our ancestors trusted in You; they trusted and You rescued them ~ if this psalm is about *esus who was *esus's ancestors. God? *hrstians claim he was the son of god or god in flesh right. Kaaru is gibberish. There is no such word Psalm 22:7 But I am a worm and not a man; a reproach of man, despised by people's ~ *esus was sinless right? How can this passage be about *esus?
First, lay your prejudice aside. We are looking at source text and discussing one letter in one Hebrew word in one verse. The word you claim to be gibberish is actually a real word, whether you like that fact or not. We have shown that there are several source texts prior to Christianity existing that show the letter as a vav and not a yod. This is not a theological issue but a grammer and spelling issue. Just because you don’t like the evidence does not dispute the evidence. Since you want to talk theology and not grammer then understand I do not agree with X-tians. The X-tians believe in a torahless Moshiach which is a false Moshiach. The Moshiach will be teaching Torah to the nations and X-tians believe The Moshiach said the Torah is done away with.
Psalms 22 14 is about David and his enemies not Jesus and the romans who priced Jesus that's silly Jews don't just read small note cards of a verse they read the whole book and Psalms 22 the entire chapter is literally talking about David not jc. But you are holy, you who inhabit the praises of Israel. Our fathers trusted in you. They trusted, and you delivered them. They cried to you, and were delivered. They trusted in you, and were not disappointed. But I am a worm, and no man; a reproach of men, and despised by the people. All those who see me mock me. Again it says all those who see me mock me this is talking about the enemies of King David not your stinky jc dying for your sins which goes against the Tanakh Deuteronomy 24 16 Jeremiah 31 30 Ezekiel 18 20 to 23 Try to read it slowly and understand it okay buddy.
When you continue to read verse 22 in the Hebrew or in Christian bible which is verse 21 you know the context in whom it’s speaking to. Psalm 22 22 Save me from the lion's mouth, as from the horns of the wild oxen You answered me. What Lion’s is David referring here in Psalms 22 17 and Psalms 22 22 well if you go a little further back it tells us who. Psalms 22 14 They opened their mouth against me like a tearing, roaring lion. It will be Psalms 22 13 in the Christian bible and Psalm 22 14 for the Hebrew Bible. When mentions lions he is not referring to an actual Lion he is referring to his enemies that’s the context of Psalms 22 17-22 it is figurative language. But nice try though.
Tovia, let us set aside the Brit Chadashah, and let's assume Yeshua is not yet born. With this being said, please explain Zechariah 12:10, the Hebrew word for pierced is "daqaru" a conclusive word, implying a literal piercing. Can you tell me if this is an event that took place or is it a future invent. If it is an event that took place can you support it with Scriptures?
' Think that the reading " כארי" was absent in the original based on the parallism found in Ps 22:12-13 [ 13-14] Ps 22:21 Ps 22:16 [17] Ps 22:20 [ 21] David compared his enemies attack as of Bulls , Lion , Dogs in his complaints. Interestingly he repeated the same animals in his Supplications , in a reversed way , a sort of " Chiasm". Each animal finds its mate in the parallism ! In v12-13 [ 13-14 ] it has : - Bulls - Lion in v21 it repeats them in a reversed way : - Lion - Wild oxen in v16 [ 17 ] according to the Masoretic reading it has : - Dogs - Lion in v20 [ 21] , we are expecting that both animals are mentioned in a reversed way like the other one above , surprisingly the" Lion " isn't mentioned but only Dog . instead of Lion it has SWORD : - Sword ( Lion is expected to be mentioned in here if it would have been mentioned in the complaint) - Dog. Each animal has its couple : Bulls wild oxen Lion Lion Lion < => Sword ???? ( Problem) Dogs Dog. However if we put : They perforated Sword. That works! I Know there are different Hebrew words , Bulls as " Parim" and Wild oxen as " Remim"but all translations agree this animal " Re"em " ( singular) is part of BOVINE family. So the parallism still works! There is a Sumerian word " Rimu " that is possibly b the equivalent of Re'em , and Rimu is the Auroch. Anyway all translations have this term translated as " Wild oxen" .
I really appreciate this. Tovia can be very convincing and I've seen him debate others that are terrible debaters. Finally someone who refutes Tovia's message intelligently.
6:45ish, we know the septuagint text regarding the psalms was a later Christian addition to what they had and thus is biased to appear Christian.
The peshitta text was a Christian document of likely the second century CE. So this James Trimme dude is not referencing Jewish texts.
Biblia hebraica was authored by Rudolf kittel, who is known to have held antisemic beliefs though is known to have worked with an observant jew, isser kahn in preparing his conclusions. He is also the father of nazi supporter Gerhard kittel, the new testament scholar and Lutheran who william Albright wrote was "Gerhard Kittel must bear the guilt of having contributed more, perhaps, than any other Christian theologian to the mass murder of Jews by Nazis."
Oh yes, so far these "works" definitely sound unsuspect.... sure, how oblivious does this guy think we are? The works he cites are Christian authors and additions, some who are actually antisemitic!
If people are unfamiliar with the debate between the original text between Christians and Jews and do not do research it becomes just a matter of following whoever promotes your already preconceived beliefs which is the opposite of seeking truth!
Let's pretend the text the Christians promote is authentic. You would have to argue why Jews who have such stringent beliefs on the exact transfer of the text would knowing alter the word of Hashem. To knowing change the word and mistrust Hashem is outrageous!
Further, the context of the verse, given either version is not about a future messiah
Do some studying! The Christians in this account are wrong no matter the translation.
@Phil Andrew
Apologies for late reply. I do not see your comment anymore but hope you see this.
I believe you are referring to the Nahal hever 5/6 fragment, 5/6 H. ev-Sev4Ps Fragment 11 which was not found in Qumran but many associate with the dead sea scrolls as a whole. It is from the cave of letters, and the dates of the documents is from 94-132 c.e. Some of the documents belonged to Sime’on b. kokhbah himself. I am sure you aware of him and that some proposed he was the messiah to come, though history has proven otherwise, as is the case with Jesus of Nazareth.
You have made several errors. First, you assume older means more accurate. This is a fallacy as a single document from antiquity is important, not arguing that at all. But, a discovery of documents from antiquity needs to be understood that it could have an error in it. Age does not make it infallible Or better.
The debate is if the word is kari or kru (misspelled as karu).
First, karu, is not a word. It appears no where in scripture and if you can reference where it is used as claimed, please cite this as scholars have never found it, even in extra biblical writings. If your going to make the claim it is an alternate spelling of KRU with the aleph, again, you would have to cite where that word is used. Again, it exists nowhere in scripture spelled as such. The existence of the aleph is not disputed. The question is if the word ends in a vav or yod.
Kru means to dig, it is used as such numerous times. To pierce is dwkr. The Nahal hever 5/6 fragment, the last letter does look like a vav. But it could be a scribal error. There is also the fact as brought to light by Yosef Feignmen, that many places yod and vav are interchanged such as the dead sea scrolls, an example he uses is Psalm 138 from the great Psalm scroll. Also, on the very fragment in question, we see a vav where a yod is known to be used where it says “all my bones” AND “to my assistance”. So in two places on this very fragment, we see a vav in place of what should be a yod, and the translation is, because we know the only existent words it could be, understood to be a yod. So, to suggest that here it is an alternate spelling of kru, and have zero entries anywhere else in all of scripture and discovered texts, we know what is meant, otherwise you must also change the other instances of this occurrence and it forfeits the entire fragment as false and untrustworthy.
So for this to mean pierced, first you have to decide to not use the word for pierced. Instead you use the word dug, as in to dig, then change the spelling of that word to end up with KRU with an aleph added which appears no where in Jewish writings. Are you grasping what your claiming? Your claiming that the word is an error and the error proves it is KRU written improperly and the author chose the word for “dug" and not used the word for “pierced". Further, other texts found nearby demonstrate that in many places a yod appears as a vav, as well as two other places on this very fragment! Then, you are ignoring the context of the entire passage claiming it is a future messianic.
I appreciate your perspective but under any scrutiny, it falls apart. Again, the consonant in question is if the word ends in a vav or yod. The word KARU does not exist. The claim by Christian apologists is that it is a misspelled KRU. The argument is that the word itself is an error, containing an Aleph, and that alternate spelling of KRU which exists no where else, is their proof for their claims. I am sorry you have been misled by their credentials but do the research yourself. As pointed out, other texts found among the Nahal hever documents show a vav where a yod is intended, as well as on this very fragment, suggesting the Scribe understood what they were doing or they were untrained.
Further, the Septuagint was only of the Torah, not the Psalms. Those translations were added later by Christians, that is not contested among the scholars. So, if anything, your expressing the Septuagint has as evidence for its authority, error filled works.
JAMES tRIMN is lying
@@acanadianbear649"platzhirsch4275" is making very interesting comments on the subject in case you want to have a trade. I'm not informed on the subject, so I would like to see the two of you talk to each other.
Scraps from a scroll containing some of the Psalms were discovered at Nachal Hever, and one scrap contained the line from Psalm 22:16 with the word in question well in view. Though the writing on the scrap was faint, under magnification it was easy to see and decipher. The word clearly ended in a vav not a yod, and was therefore a 3rd person plural verb: “they dug” or “they pierced.” Here was evidence that the Lxx translators had not “fooled” with the text, but had faithfully translated the Hebrew original that was before them. Since this scrap is dated (in accordance with the style of letters used) to 50-68 CE, it is almost 1000 years earlier than the Aleppo Codex, the earliest extant manuscript of the Masoretic text, and shows that in at least one of the earliest Hebrew traditions of Psalm 22, the word is not “like a lion” but “they dug” or “pierced.” Dr. Peter Flint, who published the principle edition of the scrap, notes that in the Herodian script, “vav and yod are usually distinguished, with vav generally longer than yod.”1 Indeed, in this instance, we have a perfect example for comparison, since the very next letter following the word in question is a yod: “my hands” (ידיה). The last letter of ka’aru is without doubt a vav when compared with the beginning letter of the next word which is clearly a yod. Here, then, is a Hebrew manuscript, pre-Christian, with “they dug” or “they pierced.”
But not everyone is convinced. Some (who apparently have not looked at the photographs of the manuscript) accuse Dr. Flint of misreading the letter. Others have argued that the Hebrew word כאר could never mean “pierce,” and that Christian interpreters have tried to make כאר (ka’ar) some form of כרה, karah, which does mean “to dig” (and by inference) “to pierce.” “But,” say the detractors, “the appearance of the aleph in the word precludes it being a form of karah, ‘to dig’ or ‘to pierce.’” Others have claimed that the word ידיה “my hands” is “misspelled” because it has the final ה, (implying that the text is not to be trusted in matters of spelling). Apparently those who make this judgment are unaware that the Hebrew of the Qumran documents often utilize the final ה to mark final diphthongs
lying
"The word clearly ended in a vav not a yod"
I literally CAN'T see it. Confirm again, Which line is from the top? Fragment2?!
@@revisoerjadi4691well, everyone believes whatever he wants to believe, doesn't he. "Like a Lion they dug my hands and feet" means exactly what? People seem to be so blind....
@@platzhirsch4275 So, there's NO primary evidence that in DSS, the word KARU was SEEN clearly?!
Only from article, yea?!
Right or wrong?!
#friendshipmode
@@revisoerjadi4691did you at all read what I wrote above?
That description about Psalm 22 by LXX, Peshitta, Dead Sea Scrolls is remarkably similar to the one in Zechariah 12:10 and Isaiah 53:5, by the way The Babylonian Talmud says: "One holds that it was for the Messiah the Son of Joseph who was killed, as written in Zechariah 12: When they look on me, whom they have pierced, they shall mour for him, as one mourn for an only child" (Tractade Sukkah chapter 5). So James Trimm is right!
The Septuagint did not include the Psalms. It was only the five books of the Torah. So the thing called Septuagint now is a church document.
This is not a debate between Rabbi Singer and James Trimm. The title is misleading.
It shows each side of a debated issue. Both people gave their interpretation allowing the listener to hear both sides of the argument and come to their own conclusion.
@@christo-chaney i apologize but everything he said was accurate and is researchable.
@@christo-chaney See for yourself what the Psalm scroll from Nahal Hever says. The Hebrew word in question ends with a waw [vav] and not a yod, thus the "like a lion" reading is not supported in this manuscript that predates the Masoretic family of texts by 800 or more years. www.deadseascrolls.org.il/explore-the-archive/image/B-366234
@@patrickdearenauthor that is not a Psalms scroll. That is a small fragment. Where exactly is the word כארו in that image?
@@christo-chaney Among the Dead Sea Scrolls of Bible books, only the great Isaiah scroll is virtually complete. The rest are fragments of varying lengths, including the Nahal Hever Psalms scroll, which is designated 5/6HevPs and is generally dated to the first century. Watch ua-cam.com/video/5cL1l_gmcDg/v-deo.html I find the evidence compelling that the 5/6HevPs scroll does not support the "like a lion" reading.
Let’s look closer at the text. First, the phrase, as it stands in the Masoretic text, seems to lack a verb. Note that the Masoretic punctuation (the atnach under the word ) puts a stop after “surrounded me,” leaving the final phrase of the verse to stand on its own. The Targum felt this problem, and “fixed it” by adding the verb “bite” (נכת, nechat): “biting my hands and my feet like a lion.” But now we see the earliest Hebrew source did not have “like a lion” but wrote the word as a verb. But what verb did the Lxx (as well as the Syriac and the Vulgate) “see” when they translated “they dug (pierced) my hands and my feet?”
A verb with the three consonants כאר ka’ar does not show up in the lexicons of biblical Hebrew. Some, however, have suggested that the root is כוּר, kur, and that it was written in an archaic form with aleph instead of with vav. We actually do have examples of verbs with middle vav being spelled with aleph. For instance, the verb קוּם, kum, “to get up” is spelled with aleph in Hosea 10:14, Daniel 2:13; 3:3; 7:16, and the word רוּם, rum, “to be high above” is likewise spelled with aleph in Zechariah 14:10. So there is at least a reasonable possibility that an original verb spelled kur was written with aleph, i.e., ka’ar. One of the verbs in Hebrew that means “to dig” is karah (כרה). Originally that verb could have been spelled כוּר kur (final hey was added as an early “vowel marker”). This being the case, כָּאֲרוּ could be an alternate spelling for כָּרוּ, “they dug.”
I would love Rabbi James Trimm to analyse the Talmud writings Yoma 39. It's so amazing to understand the miracles that happened 40 years prior to the destruction of the Temple in 70 AD. Its actually mind-blowing when you understand Jesus was killed in 30 AD and from that very moment on Hashem didn't accept the sacrifice system in the Temple anymore..... 🙏
Hi! I hope you ll see my message! I have to let know how much I enjoy your channel! You are a true seeker! I’ve tried to find that new channel of yours- Words In Red and I couldn’t. But I saw Red Red on bitchute... is it you? Thank you for what you doing. I found exactly what I was looking for!😔
Here is a link to my other channel:
ua-cam.com/channels/koBPWnB5aIEeMh-JL4fGsg.html
Also, thank you for the kind words!
Shalom😊
This is not a debate involving James Trimm? Not sure why they are using his name and image here.
The lion is licking the hands and feet or piecing them with their teeth? Is this a difference without a distinction? In the big picture either way as i step back I see Jesus. In Psalm 14 there is none good no not one and so Psalm 15 and 24 ask the question who then can climb the mountain of God? and there is a literary mountain Psalm 15 through 24 is there, a chiasm with Psalm 19 at the peak with the righteousness of the law and the heavens. Step to to the top 15 6 17 18 19 and as thou step down 20,21 matches 18 and 22 matches 17 and 21 matches 16 and 24 matches 15. At the end of the hill is Psalm 22, 23, 24 with the Good Shepherd who laid down his life, the King. Jesus. I see mention of Gods right hand in almost all the Psalms 15 though 20 as if God is flexing his hand in salvation.
Outside the Nahal Hever fragment, are there any ancient examples of the word in question being spelled with an aleph?
It doesn't say ka'ari (Like a lion). It says ka'aru (to dig; dug).
"Pierced" is the wrong translation but it's not "like a lion". That makes no sense.
There is no Hebrew word "ka'aru".
In order to turn כארי into "dug" is to remove the aleph, and change the yod into a waw, leaving you with כרו.
@@ixHeretic That's not true. It's clear as day in the Hebre manuscripts.
Point remains it and many verses was translated that way and never in another way.
I'm adding my two shekels of comment in harmony with what "A Canadian Bear" has said in this group of responses.
Everyone is speaking here about כארי vs כארו, with the distinction being whether there is a vav (a pronominal suffix which would mean “they”) or if the final letter is a yud. But there’s a more fundamental error here. The word for “they pierced” (actually “dug”) is כרו (karu - not ka’aru).
There is no case in the Hebrew Bible where the term כרו karu appears as כארו kaaru (inserting an aleph as the second letter).
Dr. Trimm argues for the grammar “to make sense” and that the sentence needs a verb. That’s true for English and not so for Hebrew. There is abundant evidence of single words and phrases written in the style of ktav ma’aleh (complete text) vs ktav khaser (deficient text). In my scholarly opinion (I’ve taught Hebrew for decades), the verse in question is an example of the latter.
"platzhirsch4275" is making very interesting comments on the subject in case you want to have a trade. I'm not informed on the subject, so I would like to see the two of you talk to each other.
I Said the same to "a canadian Bear"
Rabbi Tovia Singer telling the truth
So....what does Tovia say to that?
he said it already...jews dont change word of God...or the book is a human book and not sacred.
when you dont find christian philosophy in the jewish bible...then they try alternative ways to prove their point.
manipulate text. e.g. virgin birth
insert Jesus into text...(by the way you can replace it with any pagan deity and it could work too)
jesus can be god, angel,sabbath or time, some character malchizedek, word plural translated as gods,
pick up lines and passages out of context.
servant or servants...referred to jews.
coming out of egypt..forgetting the jewish exodus.
inserting 'The' where nothing spesific
Using Capital .....The Messiah....
Using Of different words for same hebrew word...e.g. sometimes anointed and sometimes The Messiah.
and then saying...jews are blinded..or deliberately rejecting even when it is clear...children of devil.
We try to learn from our creator....who is involved but not in the creation.
We dont bring him down...we go higher to Him
This is dumb, it isn’t even a debate, it’s a post with intent to refute a position and have the last word. Having said that, if you took a 100 Christians and 100 Jews and put them in a room each to explain the text in Hebrew 100 Jews would be able to do it and we would be surprised if 3 Christians could do it. That is not stated to insult but to make a point. The point is, we should speak not as an authority unless we can actually read with comprehension what it says - our thoughts are our opinions, or in some case, echos of others opinions, until we actually study the text with the understanding of the language. Tovia is a Judaic scholar, he is not trying to recruit Christians to Judaism, however, Christians are trying to recruit Jews to Christianity. Lost Jews, wandering Jews returning home should make Christians glad, it fulfills their prophetic ideas in their faith but why then do they debate to call Jews wrong? Is it antisemitism? Is is ego? Is it to keep them from a hell concept that does not even exist in their Old Testament, but is a pagan concept from 750 b.c.. On several levels the Christian misunderstands completely what Judaism really is, and was, and for the most part few want to really know it. It’s easier to say “I was not fooled” than to admit perhaps you have been, but keep in mind, Messiah is by all parties “JEWISH” so don’t you think G-d, who chose the Jewish people would have made it clear to them, and not a mystery, what, who and how Messiah would be?? Hebrew is their language, Hebrew is a holy language and certainly it was also first given to them - so why all this attack on the Jew for their conclusions? What is the objective? This post is nothing but one man’s conclusion - and as they say, don’t take it to heart.
Here, in the ancient Psalm of David, the suffering Messiah is prophetically and mystically portrayed. The darkness which came while He hung as the Pesach Lamb demonstrated the manner in which God viewed the sin bearer: He turned the shining of His face away (cf. Numbers 6:25, Psalm 67:1). The trauma He underwent was one which dislocated His bones (vv. 14, 17), and brought dehydration and thirst (v. 15). His hands and feet were bloodied by those who pierced them (v. 16). His enemies divided His clothes like the spoils of war (v. 18).
Yet His cries for help to God did not go unheeded. He knew of the victory He would win, and even of His resurrection, for He knew that He would stand as a witness to His brethren and give praises to the Almighty (vv. 22, 25). He knew that by His suffering He would accomplish the salvation of His people. In exchange for the joy of redeeming His bride, He endured the cross, despised the shame, and won the victory.
This prophetic picture of David, the sweet psalmist of Israel, was in perfect harmony with the message of the later prophets. Isaiah 53:5 speaks of the Servant being “pierced through” (מְחֹלָל, mecholal) for our transgressions, and Zechariah (12:10) describes the Messiah as “pierced” (דָּקָרווּ, daqaru).
We understand, then, that David, in writing Psalm 22, was looking ahead and describing the death of the Messiah. But not only His death, but also the victory which was His, and ours, in resurrection (Acts 2:31)
No one in the early church thought Psalm 22 was Jesus? Jesus did. He cried Psalm 22:1 at the cross!!! My God My God doubled down, Why have you forsaken Me? The tone is suffering at the first half. I like how the animals surrounding the suffering lion, ox, dog in the middle of the Psalm reverses being mentioned as the psalm turns to salvation. Leading to the end where it will be told to future generations that He Has Done I t!!!!
Do you understand that many scholars think that the NT was written to spread and defend Christianity as a belief system? If this was the case, why would someone believe Jesus actually said these words? It is what a person believes that guides how they interpret and translate these passages.
@@brooklynnlou4 BrooklynLou, because it was inspired by God. Both can be true. Inspired by God and meant to spread the gospel. The truth is many scholars are glorified unbelievers. Am I wrong? By the way... love that Brooklyn Papyrus.
@@brooklynnlou4 If someone wrote something to defend it it must not be true? What???? Lou you remind me of my days having Bible Studies for Brooklyn high school kids for 26 years.
@@michaelangelo9119 Yes, both can be true and scholars can be glorified believers as well. They can be biased either way. A good scholar lets the evidence guide what they believe to be true with as little bias as possible.
@@michaelangelo9119 Did not suggest this proves it must NOT BE TRUE. Am suggesting that if someone has an agenda when writing something that they may tweak words to suit their agenda. I think the early Christians believed what they were writing and were pushing a narrative based on this belief. An orthodox Jew does not believe this narrative and DO believe the Hebrew bible written in the Hebrew language - the Masoretic text which says clearly here, "Like a Lion". They do not believe the Christian New Testament, so why would they believe it says, " He was pierced"? What people BELIEVE impacts how they interpret scripture. The early Christians interpreted and translated the New Testament based on what they BELIEVED while the Ancient Hebrews wrote the Old Testament based on what they BELIEVED.
What a person BELIEVES shapes how they may interpret and translate passages such as this one. Do you agree with this?
Christians simply BELIEVE something that orthodox Jews do not believe. They do not base what they BELIEVE on New Testament translations and interpretations. They will not accept Christian translations that alter what they BELIEVE to be TRUE anymore than a Christian will accept the word for word translations from the Masoretic text without using Christian Beliefs in order to makes sense of the text.
Jews suppose to stand alone! You are listing translations
when you dont find christian philosophy in the jewish bible...then they try alternative ways to prove their point.
manipulate text. e.g. virgin birth
insert Jesus into text...(by the way you can replace it with any pagan deity and it could work too)
jesus can be god, angel,sabbath or time, some character malchizedek, word plural translated as gods,
pick up lines and passages out of context.
servant or servants...referred to jews.
coming out of egypt..forgetting the jewish exodus.
inserting 'The' where nothing spesific
Using Capital .....The Messiah....
Using Of different words for same hebrew word...e.g. sometimes anointed and sometimes The Messiah.
and then saying...jews are blinded..or deliberately rejecting even when it is clear...children of devil.
We try to learn from our creator....who is involved but not in the creation.
We dont bring him down...we go higher to Him
No such word as ka’aru in Hebrew.
That’s silly. There is. The argument is what hebrew word is found in psalm 22:17. Is it kaf-aleph-resh-yod or kaf-aleph-resh-vav. (Yod and vav have been mixed up in other parts of translations and is a common scribal error. Its usually obvious in the context of the verse and has been fixed in new renderings)
If you believe its ka’ari then please note the verse does not form a full sentence as its missing a verb so translators have to add words to the text (they are at) in order you form a complete sentence.
I do not believe the Jesus taught by Christianity. I believe one has eternal life by following the Torah. I believe the Yeshua (Jesus) written about tells people to repent and to get on the derech and start following torah and to be a light and share torah with the world as keeping torah mitzvot is how one connects with God and emulates the ways of God. Many Jews do not share torah with anyone else. But He said to be a light to the nations and the only light we have is torah. Thus we are to share torah with the nations.
so you call this message intelligent...
think:
who wrote psalms...King David.
and the word kaari is in question..but yadai and raglai (my hands and my feet)
whose hands and feet....David's.
How did this becomes jesus hands and feet ?
now show
where is mesiach supposed to be crucified ?
is this his job description ? No.
Just like Moshe came to redeem jews from physical slavery.
Mesiach will come to free world from spiritual slavery and confusion( of not recognizing ones own creator) ....and not die and add to the confusion.
Even if people think Tovia Singer lost this “debate” the score is now
Tovia Singer 10000000
Christians 1
😂😂😂
I watch Tovia. I like his teachings. However, i have found that he is not always honest with his facts in order to “win” a debate. This isn’t about winning, this is about learning, learning truth. This video shows that Tovia is not being intellectually honest and is accusing a group of people of doing something they did not do. This is breaking the halacha of lashon hara.
I don’t consider my self a Christian because christians preach a lawless moshiach when moshiach will be just like Moshe (which I believe Yeshua was/is/will be).
@@vrab. just ask who is speaking King David..his hands and feet..how jesus here?...and the speaker will be proved false...he brings claims from various books...all christian translations...septugent is not jewish.
rabbi tobia is not adding to win debate...the same debates were won every century and winners killed.
when you dont find christian philosophy in the jewish bible...then they try alternative ways to prove their point.
manipulate text. e.g. virgin birth
insert Jesus into text...(by the way you can replace it with any pagan deity and it could work too)
jesus can be god, angel,sabbath or time, some character malchizedek, word plural translated as gods,
pick up lines and passages out of context.
servant or servants...referred to jews.
coming out of egypt..forgetting the jewish exodus.
inserting 'The' where nothing spesific
Using Capital .....The Messiah....
Using Of different words for same hebrew word...e.g. sometimes anointed and sometimes The Messiah.
and then saying...jews are blinded..or deliberately rejecting even when it is clear...children of devil.
We try to learn from our creator....who is involved but not in the creation.
We dont bring him down...we go higher to Him
@@jkolet - I apologize but you are arguing about things not mentioned in this video. This video on on the topic of of one word in one chapter of one psalm.
And the evidence is quite clear for this particular issue.
The other issues you bring up are good things to discuss but are irrelevant for this video. People don’t need to exactly believe how others believe. We all will be judged individually.
@@YourFavoriteSephardi @firstroundboxing - hi guys. I post this video to discuss a topic. I gave two scholars commentaries on the topic. Please refrain from name calling and ad hominem attacks and generality attacks. The topic is over one hebrew word in psalm 22:16. If you have information on that topic, feel free to share.
Shalom
@@vrab. amen
King James is not a good version has been changed.
God does not share the space with a false deity..you have a free will to choose God or an idol.
study that is your only way to get to truth...(till mesiach comes and brings light of truth but then that is not considered your effort...)
Psalm 22:5 Our ancestors trusted in You; they trusted and You rescued them ~ if this psalm is about *esus who was *esus's ancestors. God? *hrstians claim he was the son of god or god in flesh right.
Kaaru is gibberish. There is no such word
Psalm 22:7 But I am a worm and not a man; a reproach of man, despised by people's ~ *esus was sinless right? How can this passage be about *esus?
First, lay your prejudice aside. We are looking at source text and discussing one letter in one Hebrew word in one verse. The word you claim to be gibberish is actually a real word, whether you like that fact or not. We have shown that there are several source texts prior to Christianity existing that show the letter as a vav and not a yod.
This is not a theological issue but a grammer and spelling issue.
Just because you don’t like the evidence does not dispute the evidence.
Since you want to talk theology and not grammer then understand I do not agree with X-tians. The X-tians believe in a torahless Moshiach which is a false Moshiach.
The Moshiach will be teaching Torah to the nations and X-tians believe The Moshiach said the Torah is done away with.
@@vrab. I think you are mixing up *aul and *esus
The word kaaru does not exist
Can you respond to the questions I raised
Psalms 22 14 is about David and his enemies not Jesus and the romans who priced Jesus that's silly Jews don't just read small note cards of a verse they read the whole book and Psalms 22 the entire chapter is literally talking about David not jc. But you are holy, you who inhabit the praises of Israel. Our fathers trusted in you. They trusted, and you delivered them. They cried to you, and were delivered. They trusted in you, and were not disappointed. But I am a worm, and no man; a reproach of men, and despised by the people. All those who see me mock me. Again it says all those who see me mock me this is talking about the enemies of King David not your stinky jc dying for your sins which goes against the Tanakh Deuteronomy 24 16 Jeremiah 31 30 Ezekiel 18 20 to 23
Try to read it slowly and understand it okay buddy.
It’s in Hebrew! In the Hebrew Bible! I trust the Hebrews on that.
When you continue to read verse 22 in the Hebrew or in Christian bible which is verse 21 you know the context in whom it’s speaking to. Psalm 22 22 Save me from the lion's mouth, as from the horns of the wild oxen You answered me. What Lion’s is David referring here in Psalms 22 17 and Psalms 22 22 well if you go a little further back it tells us who. Psalms 22 14 They opened their mouth against me like a tearing, roaring lion. It will be Psalms 22 13 in the Christian bible and Psalm 22 14 for the Hebrew Bible. When mentions lions he is not referring to an actual Lion he is referring to his enemies that’s the context of Psalms 22 17-22 it is figurative language.
But nice try though.
Tovia, let us set aside the Brit Chadashah, and let's assume Yeshua is not yet born. With this being said, please explain Zechariah 12:10, the Hebrew word for pierced is "daqaru" a conclusive word, implying a literal piercing. Can you tell me if this is an event that took place or is it a future invent. If it is an event that took place can you support it with Scriptures?
'
Think that the reading " כארי" was absent in the original based on the parallism found in
Ps 22:12-13 [ 13-14] Ps 22:21
Ps 22:16 [17] Ps 22:20 [ 21]
David compared his enemies attack as of Bulls , Lion , Dogs in his complaints.
Interestingly he repeated the same animals in his Supplications , in a reversed way , a sort of " Chiasm".
Each animal finds its mate in the parallism !
In v12-13 [ 13-14 ] it has :
- Bulls
- Lion
in v21 it repeats them in a reversed way :
- Lion
- Wild oxen
in v16 [ 17 ] according to the Masoretic reading it has :
- Dogs
- Lion
in v20 [ 21] , we are expecting that both animals are mentioned in a reversed way like the other one above , surprisingly the" Lion " isn't mentioned but only Dog . instead of Lion it has SWORD :
- Sword ( Lion is expected to be mentioned in here if it would have been mentioned in the complaint)
- Dog.
Each animal has its couple :
Bulls wild oxen
Lion Lion
Lion < => Sword ???? ( Problem)
Dogs Dog.
However if we put :
They perforated Sword.
That works!
I Know there are different Hebrew words ,
Bulls as " Parim" and Wild oxen as " Remim"but all translations agree this animal " Re"em " ( singular) is part of BOVINE family. So the parallism still works!
There is a Sumerian word
" Rimu " that is possibly b the equivalent of Re'em , and Rimu is the Auroch.
Anyway all translations have this term translated as " Wild oxen" .
Isaiah 53.
😆