Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Sheshbazzar · 01-30-2013, 06:32 PM

On reviewing my post I caught this mistake.

Quote:

והאמן ביהוה ויחשבה לו צדקה׃

6. Veh'heh'amin - ba' Yahweh - veh'yah'kah'sheve'ha - leh'O - tz'edakah:

"And the [he] believed - in Yahweh - and he imputed it - to Him - [for] rightiousness:"

Should have been;
"And he believed - in Yahweh - and HE imputed it - to him - [for] rightiousness:"

"And ['he', (v.5) Abraham] believed - in Yahweh - and HE [Yahweh] imputed it - to him [Abraham] - [for] rightiousness:".

Onias · 01-31-2013, 07:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by semiopen

Quote:

Originally Posted by Onias

Note also that Nehemiah's praise of God for his righteousness in fulfilling the promises made to Abram affirm a translation of Gen 15:6 that shows Abram praising the righteousness of God rather than God praising Abram for trusting in God's promises.

Neh 9:7 Thou [art] the LORD the God, who didst choose Abram, and broughtest him forth out of Ur of the Chaldees, and gavest him the name of Abraham;

Neh 9:8 And foundest his heart faithful before thee, and madest a covenant with him to give the land of the Canaanites, the Hittites, the Amorites, and the Perizzites, and the Jebusites, and the Girgashites, to give [it, I say], to his seed, and hast performed thy words; for thou [art] righteous:

That seems to be reading more into the Nehemiah than is actually there.

Allow me to give thee a clearer translation.

Quote:

You are the LORD God, who chose Abram, who brought him out of Ur of the Chaldeans and changed his name to Abraham. (Neh 9:7 TNK)

Finding his heart true to You, You made a covenant with him to give the land of the Canaanite, the Hittite, the Amorite, the Perizzite, the Jebusite, and the Girgashite -- to give it to his descendants. And You kept Your word, for You are righteous. (Neh 9:8 TNK)

I think you are saying that because of word צַדִּ֖יק - Righteous is applied to God, this means that the verse is related to Gen 15:6 which applies צדקה righteous to Abram (or whoever). That is pretty shaky.

I am saying that Nehemiah wrote in these verses that God was righteous in keeping his promises to Abram, and this is consistent with a translation of Gen 15:6 in which Abram imputes righteousness to God for making those promises.

sotto voce · 01-31-2013, 08:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Onias

I am saying that Nehemiah wrote in these verses that God was righteous in keeping his promises to Abram, and this is consistent with a translation of Gen 15:6 in which Abram imputes righteousness to God for making those promises.

It's also consistent with a translation of Gen 15:6 in which God imputes righteousness to Abram for believing those promises.

In Nehemiah, fulfilment of the promise to Abraham was effected 'because you are righteous'. There is no adjudication of deity here, but praise for evidence of what is already assumed to be truth. The words 'thou art' do not convince the scholar into confusing cause with effect. So what one really needs is the same construction of accounting God righteous as is claimed in Ge 15:6. Nehemiah is a long way from Genesis, isn't it. It's almost a confession of failure to have to wander so far; and still get it wrong. Would it not be far more convincing to find an example of the same word for righteousness applied to deity more contemporary with Abram?

semiopen · 01-31-2013, 09:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Onias

Quote:

Originally Posted by semiopen

That seems to be reading more into the Nehemiah than is actually there.

Allow me to give thee a clearer translation.

I think you are saying that because of word צַדִּ֖יק - Righteous is applied to God, this means that the verse is related to Gen 15:6 which applies צדקה righteous to Abram (or whoever). That is pretty shaky.

I am saying that Nehemiah wrote in these verses that God was righteous in keeping his promises to Abram, and this is consistent with a translation of Gen 15:6 in which Abram imputes righteousness to God for making those promises.

Yes, I understood what you are saying. This is not evidence that the verse should be translated differently than the way it is written, nor is it evidence that whoever wrote Nehemiah had this in mind. There are very few religious people who would argue that God is unjust.

A reference to someone supporting your argument should really be provided to take your assertion seriously.

semiopen · 01-31-2013, 10:47 AM

I looked up the Nehemiah idea in conjunction with Genesis 15:6. It appears on some apparently airhead Christian places. Why not find one of these to reference if you venture into this? Especially if you read the idea there, by not giving the reference you are trying to pass off the concept as your own.

The current idea about Abraham is that it was added after the exile. There was a post in this thread awhile back about Abraham's ten tests that I spent some time writing a critique on but finally decided that actually the post was pretty good.

This is discussed in

Abraham as Paradigm in the Priestly History in Genesis
Author: Joseph Blenkinsopp
Source: Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. 128, No. 2 (Summer, 2009), pp. 225-241

Quote:

The intent of this essay is to argue that the story of Abraham, as an important segment of the Priestly History in the Hexateuch (Genesis
to Joshua), was composed with the purpose of providing those who survived the disaster of 586 b.c.e. with a religious basis on which they
could rebuild their lives...

..A critical consensus now exists that the P History was composed after the fall of Jerusalem in 586 and subsequent deportations.

An interesting article is

Genesis 15: A Conflation of Two Deuteronomic Narratives
Author: Moshe Anbar
Source: Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. 101, No. 1 (Mar., 1982), pp. 39-55

Quote:

Genesis 15 is the conflation of two separate narratives, vv 1-6 and vv 7- 21. This fact is revealed in the well-known contradiction regarding the time of day when God made His promises to Abraham: in v 5 it was at night, in v 12 in the evening, and in v 17 once again at night.

Each of the two narratives is an independent deuteronomic work that
drew its inspiration from earlier sources...

Regarding 15:6, I pointed out above that Nehemia uses tsedek as opposed to tsedaka. This might be of minor importance to a godboy but they are actually two different words. Tsedek means righteous.

Quote:

(V 6) sedaqa It seems that sedaqa here means "merit," as it does in Deut 6:25; (9:4-5?); 24:13; 2 Sam 19:29; Ps (24:5?); 106:31 (112:9?); Neh 2:20. The term appears in the Pentateuch nine times, three times in Genesis (including our chapter) and six times in Deuteronomy, so that it is very likely a deuteronomic expression. The entire phrase wayyahs'beha lo sedaqa "he reckoned it to him to his merit" appears in a psalm which is later than the first temple (Ps 106:31). It is interesting to compare our verse with Deut 6:25 (24:13) and Ps 106:31 (cf. Num 25).39 In Deuteronomy the sedaqa is a reward for fulfilling the commandments, in Psalms it is the answer to a prayer, and in
15:6 a reward for trusting in the Lord. If in this context one may speak about development, then the concept expressed in 15:6 is apparently
the most recent.

In hindsight, the question posed in the OP about 15:6 is weird on account of the much more interesting issues of Genesis 15 in general. 15:6 is probably translated properly, has nothing to do with Yoshke, and has no discernible connection to Nehemiah 9.

Onias · 02-01-2013, 08:17 AM

Since I have for many years been distrustful of Paul's quotes of Tanakh scripture, I had suspicions about Gen 15:6 long before reading other material that supported my view. Usinng 'word searches' it is rather easy to research words and ideas that appear throughout the bible. But if I am not expressing myself clearly, here is a source (from an anti-Paulinist Xian) that may be more clear.

Excerpt from:

http://www.jesuswordsonly.com/books/...nesis-156.html

Quote:

Frequent Mention In Scripture Of the Righteousness Of God

Ramban’s and the Mekilta’s view of Genesis 15:6 fits well with the many passages where the psalmist gives a praise for God’s righteousness. That’s all Abraham was doing in Genesis 15:6. He was simply reckoning the promise from God as more proof of the righteousness of God.

One example is Psalm 7:17: “I will give to the LORD the thanks due to his righteousness, and I will sing praise to the name of the LORD, the Most High.” (See also Ps 5:7-8; 22:30-31; 31:1; 35: 28; 26:5-6,10; 40:11; 51:13-15; 69:27; 71:14-15a, 18b-19, 24; 88:12; 143:1,11).

Also, Ramban’s view matches how God speaks often of His own righteousness: “I will uphold you with the right hand of my righteousness.” (Isaiah 41:10.)

Most important, Ramban’s reading fits both Micah’s and Nehemiah’s depiction of God’s “faithfulness” and “steadfast love” and “righteousness” toward Abraham. This then makes sense of Genesis 15:6 as merely Abraham praising God for the same trait which is prophetically recognized.

Thus, first we read in Micah: “Who is a God like thee, pardoning iniquity and passing over transgression?... Thou wilt show faithfulness to Jacob and steadfast love to Abraham, as thou hast sworn to our fathers from the days of old.” (Micah 7:18-20.) God will show righteousness to the sons.

Lastly, we read in Nehemiah, this account of God’s dealing with Abraham:

Thou art Jehovah the God, who didst choose Abram, and... gavest him the name of Abraham, (8) and foundest his heart faithful before thee, and madest a covenant with him to give the land of the Canaanite,...., to give it unto his seed, and hast performed thy words; for thou art righteous. (Neh 9:7-8 ASV.)

The pattern is identical between Genesis 15:6, Micah and Nehemiah: there is mention of the promise of seed to Abraham which is then followed by praise of God as “faithful,” having “steadfast love” and He is “righteous.” Thus, it makes perfect sense that Genesis 15:6 is saying Abraham believed God about the promise and then he (Abraham) reckoned it to Him (God) as righteousness.
Similarly, the Apocryphal book of Jubilees has a reference to Abraham as the recipient of God’s righteousness. It follows the normal Hebrew structure of Genesis 15:6 that Hamilton noted. However, this time, there is no room to argue. The text reads: “And Isaac blessed the God of his father Abraham, who had not withdrawn his mercy and his righteousness from the sons of his servant Isaac.” Pastor/Professor Gaston interprets this to mean “Abraham and his seed were the recipients of God’s righteousness.”59

All these commentaries and scriptural references simply repeat what the textual evidence and grammar dictates is the meaning of Genesis 15:6. Abraham was noting God’s righteousness. There was nothing more profound in the passage than that. Hence, it was never a passage having anything to do with God’s imputing any righteousness to Abraham.

sotto voce · 02-01-2013, 09:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Onias

Since I have for many years been distrustful of Paul's quotes of Tanakh scripture

<edit>

Quote:

Paul relied upon a mistranslation of Genesis 15:6 in the Greek Septuagint

How is that known?

Quote:

Twice, Paul quotes from the Septuagint

That proves nothing at all.

Let's not dig up and fling free internet shit here, Onias. Let's not merely repeat proven shit, Onias. That's for demagogues. Let's deal with the questions posed and the objections made here.

<edit>

Sheshbazzar · 02-01-2013, 09:35 AM

So the choices are;

a. 'HE counted it to him for righteousness.'

b. 'he counted it to HIM for righteousness.'

c. 'he counted it to him for righteousness.'

Interestingly, even the JPS (Jewish Publication Society) Bible renders Genesis 15:6 as;

Quote:

And he believed in HaShem; and He counted it to him for righteousness.

And The Complete Jewish Bible; (Chabad.com)

Quote:

6. And he believed in the Lord, and He accounted it to him as righteousness.

(bold is added.)

One might presume that the Jewish scholars know how to properly render their own Torah texts?

And that this provision of capitalization was arrived at only after intense Jewish discussion among Jewish textual scholars?

Did anyone twist their arms to ever make them capitalize that particular 'He' in this verse?

It is NOT capitalized in the KJV English text on which the JPS was based.

The clear understanding with that 'He' so capitalized, is that HaShem imputed or found Abraham to be righteous.

_Or it could be understood that HaShem here imparted a portion of His righteousness to Abraham,
Not that Abraham had attained to any righteousness by his own works,
but for Abrahams sinciere faith and effort, was here gifted with a portion of righteousness of HaShem, by HaShem.

Anyway, Choice c. as it is rendered into English in the KJV effectively encompasses all persuasions.

Onias · 02-01-2013, 09:44 AM

Quote:

Did anyone twist their arms to make them capitalize that 'He' in this verse?

Yes, of course you must realize the Jews of Europe were under the control of the Roman Church, and the Church could not allow an interpretation of Gen 15:6 that undermined Romans 4:3 and Paul's 'justification by faith' theology, one of the primary theologies of Xianity.

Meanwhile, Ramban left Europe for Israel where he could speak his mind freely without fear of persecution and burning by the Roman Pauline Church. Hence, he was able to disagree with Rashi (who had to be a toadie to the Church for fear of his life).

Onias · 02-01-2013, 09:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sotto voce

Quote:

Originally Posted by Onias

Since I have for many years been distrustful of Paul's quotes of Tanakh scripture

<edit>

Quote:

Paul relied upon a mistranslation of Genesis 15:6 in the Greek Septuagint

How is that known?

Quote:

Twice, Paul quotes from the Septuagint

That proves nothing at all.

Let's not dig up and fling free internet shit here, Onias. Let's not merely repeat proven shit, Onias. That's for demagogues. Let's deal with the questions posed and the objections made here.

<edit>.

I am not a demogogue, and I will not allow you to bully me.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.