Kosh

So you see it as a statement of Gods omniscience
of the future, rather time distortion?

Amos

I do not see a Peter connection but I did not look for one and so it could very well be there.

The day needs to be past because the Thousand Year Reign is also in our past once we have sight of it. The "yesterday" makes reference to the clarity of this permanent vision.

To understand the TYR you must accept that if the reign of God is in our midst heaven can a place on earth and all that is needed is for us to perceive this is to obtain the mind of God (which is possibly ours all over in the bible).

In the Hypostatic Union, which is the convergence of the left and right brain (the father and I are one), our subconscious mind becomes conscious and intuition becomes like memory and accessible as memory for up to a thousand years. This means that in my interpretation intuition is a very vague memory of our soul (subconscious mind), which now becomes a clear memory.

Methusaleh was close to that age for that reason alone and the rest of them were not quite that old. It is on this basis that I say "up to one thousand years."

Our True Identity is the identity of our soul because we are that which we are in our soul (I AM), and are also determined by this identity because that is where up to one thousand years of our heritage is retained. In our ego identity we live outside of our soul for the purpose of sense perception needed for adaptation. The learning we do is added to our soul and that is how we are able to survive and compete in a changing biological environment (intelligent design). Each generation some of our distant past will be lost, I would think, and I am sure that our most distant past will be less clear than our most recent past. I even think that that is why the geneologies are part of the bible.

The above is also why "we will pay for the sins of our forefathers" and hence will reap the benefits of their virtues (but this gets much more complicated).

It is also why "it is an evil age when old men shall have dreams" because it is impossible to dream when "old men" are not divided in their mind.

That our subconscious mind can become part of our conscious mind is evident in history and that it is not part of our conscious mind now is evident by the fact that we use only a small portion of our brain. That "all of us dream" (as psychologist tell us) only means that we live in an evil age.

Chidren always have behavior traits that skip one generation (or more) because our heritage is incarnate upon us in our soul wherein this memory is retained and from where recollection occurs and intuit urges emerge. It is upon this same principle that Plato's theory of recollection is based.

The book of Revelation is futuristic for those that await the Beatific Vision and is past for those that have experienced it. Many (or all) Romantic writers and artist had one and I am writing now about one in Miscellaneous Religious Discussion under the post "The Convergence of the Twain."

Amos

Panta Pei

Amos stated:

"Please, use simple logic. "

My head is reeling from the irony

Jayhawker Soule

<img src="graemlins/notworthy.gif" border="0" alt="[Not Worthy]" />

Pandora

Ps.90.4 en tois metafrenois autou episkiasei soi kai upo tas pterugas autou elpieis oplw kuklwsei se h alhqeia autou - septugint

For a thousand years in thy sight [are but] as yesterday when it is past, and [as] a watch in the night.

The Psalms were originally written in Hebrew letters, the text has survived in Aramaic. Only the versions give any idea of the pre-Massoretic text.

No pre-Massoretic MS. of the Psalms has been discovered. The Massoretic text has been preserved in more than 3400 MSS., of which none is earlier than the ninth century and only nine or ten are earlier than the twelfth The study of the rhythmic structure of the Psalms, together with the variations between Massorah and the versions, make it clear that the Hebrew text is not always perfect, and that its points are often wrong.

The chief version of the Psalms is the Septuagint which provides pre-Massoretic based readings and stems from a text at least of the second century B.C.E. The translator showed a good understanding of Hebrew and was probably more concerned with the original meaning than trying to fit the words to a poetic meter and therefore forcing the ranslation.

The patriarchs were recorded by Moses as living nearly a thousand years; but what was their long life when you compare it with God’s eternal life?

A thousand years is a period that we could not survive, and even if we could, we would not remember every small detail of that life. But for God –“in thy sight, as yesterday” ie: as one day – that which has just past and is therefore freshest in the memory. It is “a watch of the night,’’ A watch of the night was three hours.

Basically – a thousand years cannot be remembered in everyway by a man as it is so long. But God is so all seeing, all knowing, huge et.c that he will remember it in the way that we would remember it, if we were remembering only the last three hours.

Big Brother is watching…

[ February 25, 2002: Message edited by: Pandora ]

[ February 25, 2002: Message edited by: Pandora ]</p>

Jayhawker Soule

Just out of curiosity, what of the "cave 4" Psalms mentioned by Tov?

Kosh

Is that anything like the Electrostatic Union
I had to install on the gas line for my firepit
just before it enters the ground?

CX

Well, I'm a little out of my arena where the torah is concerned. I'm mostly familiar with the NT, but the psalms are basically a collection of poetry aimed at glorifying JHVH. This passage (including the quote you supplied) is aimed at showing that god is eternal and incomprehensibly infinite for we simple humans. Now certainly modern believers can apply 21st century thinking to this passage and use it to say that time is different for God than it is for man so that peculiar time references (like the 6 day creation) that seem at odds with modern scientific knowledge can be retrofitted to be allegorical, but thsi seems to me pure eisegesis. Again take my comments with a grain of salt since I'm not terribly well versed in the Xian Old Testament.

Pandora

Oops,

Sorry, I should have said that there are no existing full manuscripts of the OT that predate the massoretic text. The DSS contained a full copy of Isaiah, but only bits of the others –though all except Ester were represented.

Were the Psalms scrolls in Hebrew though? Or were they in Aramaic with only YHWH in Hebrew lettering?

Haran

Soapbox time... There is a saying that applies all to well to this post: "A little knowledge is a dangerous thing."

I'm not sure what verse you're attempting to point out here.

The English translation for the Septuagint verse you've quoted in Greek is:

"He shall overshadow thee with his shoulders, and thou shalt trust under his wings: his truth shall cover thee with a shield."

This is probably Psalm 91:4 in the English translation that you're using.

I believe you meant to quote Psalm 89:4 from the Septuagint Greek (numbering is different) which would follow the English verse that you quoted.

I believe the text has survived in Hebrew using Aramaic script.

I'm not sure how you define "pre-Massoretic", but more MSS of the Psalms were found among the DSS that any other OT book. I believe, if I have read right, that they (at least some of them) may be called "proto-Massoretic" by Emmanuel Tov.

Anyway, Pandora, before opening the box of OT Textual Criticism, I would suggest more study. At the very least you should really try to qualify your remarks by mentioning that what you have said is what you believe to be true.

Here are some good resources which should probably be studied in this order:

<a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0802807364/qid=1014652181/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/103-8346869-8031000" target="_blank">The Dead Sea Scrolls Today by James C. VanderKam</a>
<a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0310232112/qid=1014652524/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/103-8346869-8031000" target="_blank">Basics of Biblical Greek by William Mounce</a>
<a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0801060419/qid=1014652413/sr=2-1/103-8346869-8031000" target="_blank">Biblical Hebrew: Step by Step by Menahem Mansoor</a>
<a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0802807887/qid=1014652315/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/103-8346869-8031000" target="_blank">The Text of the Old Testament by Ernst Wurthwein</a>
<a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0801022355/qid=1014652625/sr=2-2/ref=sr_2_2/103-8346869-8031000" target="_blank">Invitation to the Septuagint by Karen H. Jobes and Moses Silva</a>
<a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0800634292/qid=1014652267/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/103-8346869-8031000" target="_blank">Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible by Emmanuel Tov</a>

This is only a minimum reading list. As a matter of fact, in order to fully grasp Tov's work, you would probably need much more knowledge of the languages (among other things) than can be gained by the works I've listed. Hope you find these helpful.

Hopping off soapbox now...
Haran