Jump to content

Please read the Forum Rules before posting.

Photo
- - - - -

Your opinion of AHLB?


20 replies to this topic

#11 Katoog

Katoog

    e-Sword Fanatic

  • Members (T)
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,285 posts
Offline

Posted 10 February 2017 - 02:14 PM

Lets look to Jeff A. Benner's commercial of the The Mechanical Translation.


Genesis 15:6
Modern Translations
And he believed in the LORD

From the Hebrew
And he supported Yahweh

1) All translations except his Mechanical using "believed or "trusted". H539
2) This verse is interpreted in Rom 4:3 επιστευσεν G4100 believed.


Genesis 17:1
Modern Translations
I am the Almighty God

From the Hebrew
I am the mighty one of Shaddai

1) The Hebrew words are El Shaddai (God Almighty)
2) El means God or adjective "mighty" but El Shaddai are both nouns.
3) Shaddai is not a place.
4) The Greek translation Theos pantokrator is used in Rev 4:8 Rev 11:17 Rev 15:3 Rev 16:7 Rev 16:14 Rev 19:6 Rev 19:15 Rev 21:22


Exodus 21:24
Modern Translations
Eye for an eye

From the Hebrew
Eye in place of an eye

1) The Hebrew idiom "Eye for eye" is quoted in Mat 5:38 (οφθαλμον αντι οφθαλμου)
"for" or "instead" are both correct but not in this context "his eye for my lost eye, his tooth for my lost tooth".

Deuteronomy 31:26
Modern Translations
The book of the law... is a witness against thee

From the Hebrew
The book of teachings... is a witness with you

1) "ha Torah" means "the Law" and is singular.
2) It is "against" because the next verse said "For I know Thy rebellion, and Thy stiff neck"

Numbers 6:24
Yahweh(he exists) will respect you and he will safeguard you

1) This is a part of the "Priestly Blessing" Num 6:22-27
Jeff A. Benner replaced the word "bless" by "respect".
So Aaron and his sons must have "respect" for the children of Israel in Num 6:23?


Restored Holy Bible 17 and the Restored Textus Receptus

https://rhb.altervis...rg/homepage.htm


#12 Eliran Wong

Eliran Wong

    e-Sword Fanatic

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 283 posts
Offline

Posted 10 February 2017 - 02:32 PM

I think the original question here is question on the accuracy of AHLB, rather than theology of a passage. I like theology, but I am afraid this is not focus of this post. Theology is good but it is more than risky to use a theological concept to read in or affirm a meaning of an original Hebrew word. It don't think it is a way to do lexicon.

I was interested in the first question of this post, as I can see that AHLB is widely circulated. Its acceptance should not only because it is free. In my opinion, extra care should be put on accuracy.

#13 Gary Timm

Gary Timm

    e-Sword Fanatic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 119 posts
  • LocationNashville, TN
Offline

Posted 10 February 2017 - 04:01 PM

I'll agree with all that is mentioned here... and yes, it appears that the AHLB may deviate from the Strong's Concordance, thus lending question to its authenticity.

 

Theology is only as strong as the original Hebrew word, and can only relay proper understanding IF those words are correctly interpreted. That being said, this is the importance of why we always need more than a single source of reference to verify Scripture.

 

Blessings...



#14 Gary Timm

Gary Timm

    e-Sword Fanatic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 119 posts
  • LocationNashville, TN
Offline

Posted 10 February 2017 - 04:27 PM

Lets look to Jeff A. Benner's commercial of the The Mechanical Translation.


Genesis 15:6
Modern Translations
And he believed in the LORD

From the Hebrew
And he supported Yahweh

1) All translations except his Mechanical using "believed or "trusted". H539
2) This verse is interpreted in Rom 4:3 επιστευσεν G4100 believed.


Genesis 17:1
Modern Translations
I am the Almighty God

From the Hebrew
I am the mighty one of Shaddai

1) The Hebrew words are El Shaddai (God Almighty)
2) El means God or adjective "mighty" but El Shaddai are both nouns.
3) Shaddai is not a place.
4) The Greek translation Theos pantokrator is used in Rev 4:8 Rev 11:17 Rev 15:3 Rev 16:7 Rev 16:14 Rev 19:6 Rev 19:15 Rev 21:22


Exodus 21:24
Modern Translations
Eye for an eye

From the Hebrew
Eye in place of an eye

1) The Hebrew idiom "Eye for eye" is quoted in Mat 5:38 (οφθαλμον αντι οφθαλμου)
"for" or "instead" are both correct but not in this context "his eye for my lost eye, his tooth for my lost tooth".

Deuteronomy 31:26
Modern Translations
The book of the law... is a witness against thee

From the Hebrew
The book of teachings... is a witness with you

1) "ha Torah" means "the Law" and is singular.
2) It is "against" because the next verse said "For I know Thy rebellion, and Thy stiff neck"

Numbers 6:24
Yahweh(he exists) will respect you and he will safeguard you

1) This is a part of the "Priestly Blessing" Num 6:22-27
Jeff A. Benner replaced the word "bless" by "respect".
So Aaron and his sons must have "respect" for the children of Israel in Num 6:23?

 

The word "Faith" (H539) as listed in Strong's is the perfect example of why we can't assign merely a single definition to a Hebrew word. Each word encompasses much more...

 

With searching out understanding on this word, Strong's has it listed as:

Belief, faith, continuance, nursed, verified, assurance, stand, established... and the list goes on, and on. Even "respect" fits in, as we cannot be children of God if we do not love one another. Everyone of these words apply. And without them all, we could never truly define faith and belief. 

 

Blessings,



#15 Keith

Keith

    Liking e-Sword

  • Veterans
  • PipPip
  • 15 posts
  • LocationBloomington, Illinois
Offline

Posted 10 February 2017 - 04:36 PM

Here is a link to Jeff Benner, site.

http://www.ancient-h....org/about.html

 

This description in itself (from the above link) should give one pause:

 

"I am often asked why my definitions of Biblical Hebrew words differ from all other resources available such as Strong's dictionary and why my translations of the Bible are unlike any other English translation. Most people believe that an English translation of the Bible is a fairly good representation of the original Hebrew text. But, have you ever heard the expression "lost in the translation?" Through my research I have found that the original meanings of Hebrew words are not only lost to us in the translations but have long been buried and hidden from our sight. I believe it is time that we read the Hebrew Bible from the perspective of its original authors rather than from our own modern perspective.

 

I am also frequently asked for my "credentials" to teach Hebrew. Well, I guess I don't have any unless you count the thousands of hours I have spent in research and study. I have attempted to use as many resources as I could from the fields of history, linguistics, archeology, anthropology and theology in order to uncover the original Hebrew alphabet, language, thought and culture."

 

The video linked in an earlier post is just as troubling, if not more so.


Edited by Keith, 10 February 2017 - 04:40 PM.

Pastor at Immanuel Baptist Church

Bloomington, Illinois

 

Writer on the Reformed Baptist Blog


#16 Gary Timm

Gary Timm

    e-Sword Fanatic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 119 posts
  • LocationNashville, TN
Offline

Posted 10 February 2017 - 06:17 PM

This description in itself (from the above link) should give one pause:

 

"I am often asked why my definitions of Biblical Hebrew words differ from all other resources available such as Strong's dictionary and why my translations of the Bible are unlike any other English translation. Most people believe that an English translation of the Bible is a fairly good representation of the original Hebrew text. But, have you ever heard the expression "lost in the translation?" Through my research I have found that the original meanings of Hebrew words are not only lost to us in the translations but have long been buried and hidden from our sight. I believe it is time that we read the Hebrew Bible from the perspective of its original authors rather than from our own modern perspective.

 

I am also frequently asked for my "credentials" to teach Hebrew. Well, I guess I don't have any unless you count the thousands of hours I have spent in research and study. I have attempted to use as many resources as I could from the fields of history, linguistics, archeology, anthropology and theology in order to uncover the original Hebrew alphabet, language, thought and culture."

 

The video linked in an earlier post is just as troubling, if not more so.

 

It does not mean that the AHLB is necessarily useless. People can make mistakes, or have differing viewpoints. For instance, some people will completely disregard the Septuagint, regarding it as containing no viable information. But on the standpoint of theology, it is indispensable, and provides that needed second witness to the Masoretic.

 

The majority of what I've seen in the AHLB falls directly in line with Scripture, whether you prefer to to include theology, or not. And credentials aren't always necessary as long as you make a determined effort to learn God's Truths. The anointing of God's Teaching (1John 2:27) does not earn you a degree or a diploma upon planet earth, yet it is there for our taking, and is known only to God.

 

So we have to be very careful when it comes to certifications established by man, as this requirement was also hung upon Jesus and His disciples by the elite Sanhedrin because they (Jesus and His followers) were not part of their (the Sanhedrin's) established heritage tradition (John 7:52). And we don't want to repeat that mistake.

 

But when it comes to making mistakes... credentials, or not... none of us are exempt.

 

Blessings,


Edited by Gary Timm, 10 February 2017 - 07:08 PM.


#17 APsit190

APsit190

    e-Sword Tools Developer

  • Members (T)
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,861 posts
  • LocationLand of the Long White Cloud (AKA New Zealand)
Offline

Posted 10 February 2017 - 06:53 PM



You have highlighted one of the problems with this resource, in my opinion. It regularly commits the root fallacy when dealing with the meaning of words. The reason most lexical resources don't give such information as you have just cited is simply because it is irrelevant to the meaning of the word as it was used in the Bible, and it would be entirely misleading to try to read anything into the meaning of the word based on such supposed etymology.

I've heard a lot of arguments along these lines, and the predominant mindset of these arguments come from a non-Jewish perspective. The way Goys (those that are not Jewish, such of the likes of you and me), do not understand Hebrew in the way Jews do. This is not an opinion or a criticism, it just happens to be a matter of fact.

 

The way Jews regard Hebrew, it is a language that God speaks. To you and I, its just another language, and merely the language that the Old Testament was written in, and beyond that it really has no other meaning to it. To actually highlight the significance of Hebrew from the Jewish perspective, Rabbi Mordechai Kraft speaks of the Hebrew Language as the DNA of creation. And in doing so, he links the language to creation itself. I don't expect you to agree with that, but this just highlights the way a Jew believes what the language is about against the way we would.

 

So, what does this have to do with that Jeff Benner has done with the AHLB? Well, quite a fair bit. Actually quite a lot, because what he has done was to look at the language totally from a Jewish perspective, and to understand Hebrew from that perspective. You see, the way a Jew sees things are so totally different from the way we would see things. And with that, from the Jewish Perspective, every part of a letter actually as a meaning, and every letter actually has its own meaning.

 

As to whether I agree with Jeff Benner or not, I have no opinion, thought or belief in this regard. That said, if one actually takes the time out to understand the perspective of where he is actually coming from with his work, that for a Goy (of which Jeff Benner is), you've gotta admire his courage and tenacity for going down the road he as taken to understand Hebrew from a Jewish Hebraist perspective.

 

Blessings,

Autograph.png

X (formerly Twitter)

 


#18 Eliran Wong

Eliran Wong

    e-Sword Fanatic

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 283 posts
Offline

Posted 10 February 2017 - 07:41 PM



I've heard a lot of arguments along these lines, and the predominant mindset of these arguments come from a non-Jewish perspective. The way Goys (those that are not Jewish, such of the likes of you and me), do not understand Hebrew in the way Jews do. This is not an opinion or a criticism, it just happens to be a matter of fact.

 

The way Jews regard Hebrew, it is a language that God speaks. To you and I, its just another language, and merely the language that the Old Testament was written in, and beyond that it really has no other meaning to it. To actually highlight the significance of Hebrew from the Jewish perspective, Rabbi Mordechai Kraft speaks of the Hebrew Language as the DNA of creation. And in doing so, he links the language to creation itself. I don't expect you to agree with that, but this just highlights the way a Jew believes what the language is about against the way we would.

 

So, what does this have to do with that Jeff Benner has done with the AHLB? Well, quite a fair bit. Actually quite a lot, because what he has done was to look at the language totally from a Jewish perspective, and to understand Hebrew from that perspective. You see, the way a Jew sees things are so totally different from the way we would see things. And with that, from the Jewish Perspective, every part of a letter actually as a meaning, and every letter actually has its own meaning.

 

As to whether I agree with Jeff Benner or not, I have no opinion, thought or belief in this regard. That said, if one actually takes the time out to understand the perspective of where he is actually coming from with his work, that for a Goy (of which Jeff Benner is), you've gotta admire his courage and tenacity for going down the road he as taken to understand Hebrew from a Jewish Hebraist perspective.

 

Blessings,

 

sometimes, it may be too general to say "Jewish perspective".  I enjoy reading resources on "Jewish perspective".  When someone say "Jewish perspective", I am tempted to ask one more question.  What period of time?  "Jewish perspective" or their way to interpret scripture, or even their understanding on Hebrew languages changes over times.  ...

 

go back to the original concerns of this post, i.e. on the accuracy of AHLB for studying Hebrew bible, we are talking about meanings of Hebrew words in the time of Hebrew bible being written.  You said that AHLB's author applied "Jewish perspective" in his writings.  I am tempted to question if his view of "Jewish perspective" relevant to OT time or not ... I did not read through AHLB, but wonder if author of AHLB aware of potential "anachronism".

 

btw, I had just checked CDCH [Concise Dictionary of Classical Hebrew] on the Hebrew word mentioned in the first question, below is the entry (please note that verbal stem of the word in this verse is "qal"):

 

 

שׂנא 146.19.57 vb.—Qal 129.18.48 Pf. ‏שָׂנֵא‎, ‏שָׂנֵ֫אתִי‎; impf. ‏יִשְׂנָא‎; impv. ‏שִׂנְאוּ‎; ptc. ‏שׂנֵא‎, ‏שׂנְאֵי‎ (‏שׂנְאָיו‎); ptc. pass. ‏שְׂנוּאָה‎; inf. abs. ‏שָׂנֹא‎; cstr. ‏שְׂנֹא‎ (‏שְׂנֹאת)—1. personal, a. hate, loathe, dislike someone Gn 374; specif. in silence, bear a grudge against someone 2 S 1322; take an aversion to woman after sexual intercourse 2 S 1315; despise, shun poor man Pr 197; have enough of, be weary of frequent guest Pr 2517. b. be at enmity with (לְ) someone Dt 442. 2. political, show hostility toward nation Ps 10525. 3a. lack love for child by withholding discipline Pr 1324. b. lack self-love Pr 2924. 4. detest, loathe something, e.g. evil Si 1513, life Ec 217. 5. abs., hate, עֵת לִשְׂנֹא there is a time for hating Ec 38. 6. pass., a. be detested, hateful, of Zion Is 6015, pride Si 107. b. be unloved, of wife Gn 2931. 7. ptc. as noun, a. one who hates, dislikes intensely someone, i.e. political enemy 11QT 5911, personal enemy Si 61, enemy of Y. CD 818, of Y.’s people Is 665. b. one who hates, spurns something, e.g. bribes Pr 1527, the law Si 362, peace Ps 1206. 8. ptc. pass. as noun, a. enemy, i.e. one hated, intensely disliked 2 S 58(Qr). b. fem., unloved wife Pr 3023.

Ni. 2.1.1 Impf. יִשָּׂנֵא1. be hated, disliked, of man of intrigues Pr 1417. 2. be shunned, despised, of poor Pr 1420.

Pi. 15.0.7 Ptc. מְשַׂנְאֶ֫יךָ (Q מסנאיך)—ptc. as noun, one who hates, i.e. political enemy 2 S 2241, personal enemy Jb 3129, enemy of Y. Ps 682, of wisdom Pr 836, of righteousness 1QM 35.

Pu. 0.0.1 Ptc. משונאה—ptc. as noun, one who is (continually) unloved, unloved wife 4QapLamA 1.23.

שִׂנְאָה hatred, שָׂנִיא unloved.




#19 BigPaw

BigPaw

    e-Sword Fanatic

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 151 posts
  • LocationUK
Offline

Posted 23 February 2017 - 04:23 AM

In defence of the AHLB it does correspond with the likes of the BDB in places, how many? I don't know yet. But for example it provides a nice filling out of H1219.
 
Perhaps, as with all things, it's best to "Make sure of all things; hold fast to what is fine" (1Thes 5:21) Cross reference everything just to be sure.
 
AHLB:
 
Strongs #1219: AHLB#: 2033 (V)
2033) Ryb% (Ryb% BTsR) ac: Gather co: Fence ab: ?: A walled, fenced or fortified place for storing up the gathered crop or people. [from: by]
V) Ryb% (Ryb% B-TsR) - Gather: To gather together and confine for protection. [freq. 38] (vf: Paal, Niphal, Piel) |kjv: fence, defense, gather, grapegatherer, fortify| {str: 1219}
Nm) Ryb% (Ryb% B-TsR) - Gold: What is stored away and protected. [freq. 3] |kjv: gold| {str: 1220, 1222}
bm) Riyb% (Riyb% B-TsYR) - Vintage: The gathered crop of grapes. [freq. 7] |kjv: vintage| {str: 1210}
cm) Rfyb% (Rfyb% B-TsWR) - Vintage: The gathered crop of grapes. [freq. 1] |kjv: vintage| {str: 1208}
cf2) Trfyb% (Trfyb% B-TsW-RT) - Drought: A time of storing up water.  [freq. 2] |kjv: dearth, drought| {str: 1226}
hm) Rybm% (Rybm% MB-TsR) - Fence: A walled place of protection. [freq. 37] |kjv: hold, fenced, fortress, defenced, strong| {str: 4013}
ejm) Nfryib% (Nfryib% BY-Ts-RWN) - Stronghold: A walled place of protection.  [freq. 1] |kjv: strong hold| {str: 1225}

 

BDB:

 

H1219
בּצר
bâtsar
BDB Definition:
1) to gather, restrain, fence, fortify, make inaccessible, enclose
1a) (Qal)
1a1) to cut off
1a2) fortified, cut off, made inaccessible (passive participle)
1a3) secrets, mysteries, inaccessible things (substantive)
1b) (Niphal) to be withheld
1c) (Piel) to fortify
Part of Speech: verb
A Related Word by BDB/Strong’s Number: a primitive root
Same Word by TWOT Number: 270

 

 



#20 Gary Timm

Gary Timm

    e-Sword Fanatic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 119 posts
  • LocationNashville, TN
Offline

Posted 23 February 2017 - 07:11 AM

Jeff Benner, author of the AHLB, is one of the pioneers to uncovering the keys of Scripture and biblical roots. He has taken the Hebrew dialect, simplified it, and made it much easier to comprehend. It is with people like him, doing entailed research and spending countless hours, that we are given new understanding to biblical knowledge and allotted a new source of reference.

There are many individuals that fall into this dedication of commitment, such as, James Strong (Strong's Concordance) and Charles Van der Pool (ABP) to name just a couple. But if James Strong had not continued in his effort to give us the Strong's Concordance, just think where we would be today... or maybe better said, where we would NOT be.

Mistakes are bound to happen, but those little nuances should not designate discarding their entire work. After all, if it was given to us for free, then why shouldn't we be eternally grateful?

God bless...


Edited by Gary Timm, 23 February 2017 - 09:34 AM.




Reply to this topic



  


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users




Similar Topics



Latest Blogs