{"id":8289,"date":"2023-08-05T23:26:39","date_gmt":"2023-08-06T04:26:39","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/abudinen.com\/blog\/?p=8289"},"modified":"2023-08-06T07:15:25","modified_gmt":"2023-08-06T12:15:25","slug":"hebrew","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/abudinen.com\/blog\/2023\/08\/05\/hebrew\/","title":{"rendered":"Hebrew"},"content":{"rendered":"\nWhile Mishnaic Hebrew and later phases of the language exhibit a fairly simple tense-based system with past, present, and future tense expressed by the verb, the system in Biblical Hebrew is more complex, as any verb form can be used in reference to any of the tenses.\n\n\n\nThe name \u2018tenses\u2019 as applied to Hebrew verbs is misleading. The so-called Hebrew \u2018tenses\u2019 do not express the time but merely the state of an action. Indeed were it not for the confusion that would arise through the application of the term \u2018state\u2019 to both nouns and verbs,\u2019states\u2019 would be a far better designation than \u2018tenses.\u2019 It must always be borne in mind that it is impossible to translate a Hebrew verb into English without employing a limitation (viz. of time) which is entirely absent in the Hebrew. The ancient Hebrews never thought of an action as past, present, or future, but simply as perfect, i.e. complete, or imperfect, i.e. as in course of development. When we say that a certain Hebrew tense corresponds to a Perfect, Pluperfect, or Future in English, we do not mean that the Hebrews thought of it as Perfect, Pluperfect, or Future, but merely that it must be so translated in English. The time of an action the Hebrews did not attempt to express by any verbal form.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nHezekiah\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nFirst, Hebrew verbs do not have tense – there is no past, present and future tense in Hebrew. We have various forms of the Hebrew verbs such as Qal, Niphal, Pual, perfect, etc, for which English has no equivalent at [...x]<\/span>
all. In various constructions these imply tense but not rigidly.
Second, the Hebrew prophets almost always spoke about future events as completed acts of God to indicate the certainty of their predictions. Take almost any passage about the future Messiah such as Isa 53 or any of Isaiah’s many other prophecies.
The verbs in Isa 9:6 are as follows:
“born” = Pual perfect
“given” = Niphal perfect
“will be” or “is” or “was” = Qal consecutive perfect
“called” = Qal consecutive perfect
The fact that all these verbs are perfect implies a completed act, ie in English past tense, but that is typical of Hebrew prophecy. Isa 9:1-6 is a messianic hymn praising the future Messiah.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The argument is made that the Hebrew verbs Yalad,<\/em> (is born) and Nathan<\/em> (is given) are both in the perfect tense, indicating a completed action.  The child in reference has already been born and the child has already been given. This will usually be supported by a number of proof verses where Yalad and Nathan in the perfect tense do demonstrate a completed action.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This is true, both verbs are in the perfect tense. The verses that are often used as support are also correct. The fact that Yalad and Nathan are in the perfect tense DOES infer a completed action. This point is conceded. However, to state that this proves the child in Isaiah has already been born is a very simplistic argument and could even be construed as being slightly disingenuous. It certainly gives a very biased and one sided argument that does not give the full facts. 
When it comes to prophetic language it is not unique to find a perfect form of a verb used to denote a completed action that had not yet come to pass. This is because a prophecy that is given about an event that was going to happen could be recorded as if it had already come to completion to denote the prophecy would indeed come to fruition. The prophet who is obviously prophesying looks back at the event from the future as if it has already happened.  The recording of prophecies in the perfect form is simply known as \u201cprophetic perfect\u201d. This is something that is either dishonestly ignored, or simply unknown by those that make the claim regarding the perfect tense found in Isaiah 9:6.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The category of “prophetic perfect” was already suggested by medieval Hebrew grammarians,[2]<\/sup> such as David Kimhi: “The matter is as clear as though it had already passed,”[3]<\/sup> or Isaac ben Yedaiah:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

“[The rabbis] of blessed memory followed, in these words of theirs, in the paths of the prophets who speak of something which will happen in the future in the language of the past. Since they saw in prophetic vision that which was to occur in the future, they spoke about it in the past tense and testified firmly that it had happened, to teach the certainty of his [God’s] words — may he be blessed — and his positive promise that can never change and his beneficent message that will not be altered.” (Isaac ben Yedaiah):[4]<\/sup><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

    \n
  1.  Max F. Rogland, Alleged Non-past Uses of \u00abqatal\u00bb in Classical Hebrew<\/em> (Assen: Royal Van Gorcum, 2003), pp. 53-56.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
  2. ^<\/strong> Bruce Waltke & M. O\u2019Connor, An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax<\/em> (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1990), p. 464, n. 45<\/li>\n\n\n\n
  3. ^<\/strong> Robert Chazan, Daggers of Faith<\/em> (Berkeley: UC Press, 1989), p. 87<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n

    <\/p>\n\n\n\n

    The prophet said to the house of David, For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given, and he has taken the law upon himself to keep it. His name is called from before Him who is wonderful in counsel, the mighty God who liveth to eternity \u2014 the Messiah whose peace shall be great upon us in his days.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    \u05e1\u05b7\u05d2\u05b4\u05d9 \u05e8\u05b0\u05d1\u05d5\u05bc \u05dc\u05b0\u05e2\u05b8\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05b5\u05d9 \u05d0\u05d5\u05b9\u05e8\u05b7\u05d9\u05b0\u05ea\u05b8\u05d0 \u05d5\u05bc\u05dc\u05b0\u05e0\u05b7\u05d8\u05b0\u05e8\u05b5\u05d9 \u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05dc\u05b8\u05de\u05b8\u05d0 \u05dc\u05b5\u05d9\u05ea \u05e1\u05d5\u05b9\u05e3 \u05e2\u05b7\u05dc \u05db\u05bc\u05d5\u05bc\u05e8\u05b0\u05e1\u05b5\u05d9\u05d4\u05bc \u05d3\u05b8\u05d5\u05b4\u05d3 \u05d5\u05b0\u05e2\u05b7\u05dc \u05de\u05b7\u05dc\u05b0\u05db\u05d5\u05bc\u05ea\u05b5\u05d9\u05d4\u05bc \u05dc\u05b0\u05d0\u05b7\u05ea\u05b0\u05e7\u05b8\u05e0\u05b8\u05d0 \u05d9\u05b8\u05ea\u05b8\u05d4\u05bc \u05d5\u05bc\u05dc\u05b0\u05de\u05b4\u05d1\u05b0\u05e0\u05b8\u05d0 \u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05b4\u05d9\u05e0\u05b8\u05d0 \u05d5\u05bc\u05d1\u05b4\u05d6\u05b0\u05db\u05d5\u05bc\u05ea\u05b8\u05d0 \u05de\u05b4\u05db\u05b0\u05bc\u05e2\u05b7\u05df \u05d5\u05b0\u05e2\u05b7\u05d3 \u05e2\u05b8\u05dc\u05b0\u05de\u05b8\u05d0 \u05d1\u05b0\u05bc\u05de\u05b5\u05d9\u05de\u05b0\u05e8\u05b8\u05d0 \u05d3\u05b7\u05d9\u05d9\u05b8 \u05e6\u05b0\u05d1\u05b8\u05d0\u05d5\u05b9\u05ea \u05ea\u05b4\u05bc\u05ea\u05b0\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b5\u05d9\u05d3 \u05d3\u05b8\u05d0:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Targum Jonathan<\/strong> (Hebrew: \u05ea\u05e8\u05d2\u05d5\u05dd \u05d9\u05d5\u05e0\u05ea\u05df \u05d1\u05df \u05e2\u05d5\u05d6\u05d9\u05d0\u05dc), otherwise referred to as Targum Yonasan<\/strong>\/Yonatan<\/strong>, is the official eastern (Babylonian) targum (Aramaic translation) to the Nevi’im (“prophets”).[1]<\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    It is not to be confused with “Targum Pseudo-Jonathan“, an Aramaic translation of the Torah, which is often known as “Targum Jonathan” due to a printer’s error or perhaps because it is so stylistically similar to Targum Jerusalem, named “Jonathan” to differentiate the two later translations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    REVIEW Targum Jonathan on Isaiah \u05ea\u05e8\u05d2\u05d5\u05dd \u05d9\u05d5\u05e0\u05ea\u05df \u05e2\u05dc \u05d9\u05e9\u05e2\u05d9\u05d4\u05d5 Targum \u05ea\u05e8\u05d2\u05d5\u05de\u05d9\u05dd Targum Jonathan is an Aramaic translation of the Neviim (Prophets). Authorship of the Targum is attributed to Jonathan ben Uzziel, a prime student of the great Talmudic sage Hillel. In Talmudic times, the Targum was read verse-by-verse, alternating with the Hebrew text of the haftarah. Composed: Talmudic Israel\/Babylon (c.150 BCE – c.350 CE)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    <\/p>\n\n\n\n

    How we identify spurious text<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

    We look for the following reasons. Most verses are declared spurious by having a combination<\/em> of the following reasons. A single<\/strong> internal reason would usually not<\/strong> be enough.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Manuscript reasons:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

      \n
    1. The words are missing from the prominent old manuscripts, especially the great codexes (e.g. Matthew 6:13).
      This is direct evidence that the words were not always accepted as genuine.<\/em><\/li>\n\n\n\n
    2. The wording has different fundamental meanings in different manuscripts (e.g. Acts 7:16).
      This suggests that there was no original to check against, and could be common notes added by different people before being transposed into the text.<\/em><\/li>\n\n\n\n
    3. The words jump around in different places in different manuscripts (e.g. 1 Corinthians 14:33).
      This suggests that earlier copyists knew they were unoriginal, so copied them in different places as marginal notes until, eventually, different copyists transposed it into the text wherever they found it.<\/em><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n

      Internal reasons:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

        \n
      1. The words are out of context and break the narrative (e.g. Matthew 27:52-53).
        Original words would not do this, but later additions would. This, by itself, would not be enough evidence to declare a passage spurious.<\/em><\/li>\n\n\n\n
      2. They say things that are factually incorrect or don\u2019t make sense (e.g. 1 Corinthians 14:34).
        The original inspired writers could not make silly mistakes, but later persons inserting fake words could easily do so.<\/em><\/li>\n\n\n\n
      3. The words reflect later dogmas that nobody believed at the time (e.g. 1 John 5:7-8).
        An original writer would not say something that would require a time machine.<\/em><\/li>\n\n\n\n
      4. Removing the words allows the passage to flow better or to make more sense.
        If a passage is spurious, removing it would either make no difference or actually improve the text. Removing original words could break the passage or worsen it (usually, but not always).<\/em><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        \n\n\n\n

        Suspected spurious texts we\u2019ve crossed out<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

        We don\u2019t list the many small (usually single-word) additions to the Bible text that were already corrected and removed<\/em> by the time translators produced the first English bibles. We only list spurious texts that are still included<\/em> in many modern Bibles.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        We are not dogmatic about any particular text being spurious. These are only educated guesses<\/em>. That\u2019s one reason why we keep them in our Bible text, visible, but crossed out \u2013 just in case they are genuine after all.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        Levels of certainty<\/h4>\n\n\n\n

        We categorize the spurious texts by certainty:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

         High = These may be missing from all important manuscripts, are not quoted by (genuine) early ancient writers, and may have internal reasons too. These are 99% certain to be fake.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

         Good = These may be missing from most trusted manuscripts and\/or have multiple internal reasons. These are very probably fake, but we can\u2019t prove it.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

         Fair = These are less certain. They may be missing from at least one important codex but not another, or they may have one persuasive internal reason for being spurious. However, these may turn out to be genuine.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

        This section is incomplete<\/strong> and still being prepared. Last updated May 2023.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        TEXT<\/th>REASON(S)<\/th>CERTAINTY<\/th><\/tr><\/thead>
        Joshua 10:15And Joshua returned, and all Israel with him, unto the camp to Gilgal.<\/em>Present in all major translations.<\/td>Missing from most Greek manuscripts and excluded from critical editions. Also breaks the narrative somewhat, unless there is some other explanation not given in the text.<\/td> Good<\/td><\/tr>
        Isaiah 7:16By resisting wicked persuasions,
        He will choose to do what is right.<\/em>Only present in the LXX.<\/td>        		Very likely a scribal duplication error. Since it\u2019s only in the LXX, most Bible readers have never seen this one. See note for details.<\/td> High<\/td><\/tr>
        Isaiah 9:6Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace<\/em>Present in all major translations.<\/td>Not present in our LXX source. These words only appear in the Hebrew text and were not quoted by Early Christians until after the Trinity doctrine was widely adopted (except in fake early texts, e.g. by Pseudo-Ignatius).It\u2019s a real mystery how these words got into the Hebrew text. They are present in the Dead Sea Scrolls. Since we have grown to trust the LXX, we feel that something probably corrupted the Hebrew text here (whether deliberately or accidentally) sometime between the LXX translation and the writing of the Dead Sea Scrolls. Exactly what happened is currently impossible to know.<\/td> Good<\/td><\/tr>
        Jeremiah 27:1It was at the beginning of the reign of JehoiAkim (son of JosiAh) the king of Judah, that these words came to JeremiAh from Jehovah.<\/em>Present in all major translations.<\/td>Missing from the Septuagint version. Also is factually incorrect as it places the narrative in the wrong time. Possibly began as a marginal note accidentally copied into the text by scribes.<\/td> Good<\/td><\/tr>
        Matthew 6:13For Yours is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever. Amen.<\/em>Present in KJV, removed from nearly all others.<\/td>Missing from the Sinaiticus and Vaticanus Codexes. Although it is present in the Aramaic, this may be a later corruption either copied from the Greek or introduced to the Aramaic and then copied into the Greek.<\/td> Good<\/td><\/tr>
        Matthew 6:25or what you will drink<\/em>Present in all major translations.<\/td>Missing from the Sinaiticus Codex.<\/td> Fair<\/td><\/tr>
        Matthew 10:8raise the dead<\/em>Present in all major translations.<\/td>Omitted from \u2018the best manuscripts\u2019 according to Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers.<\/td> Fair<\/td><\/tr>
        Matthew 16:2-3He answered and said to them: \u2018When it\u2019s evening, you say, \u2018The weather will be fair, for the sky is red.\u2019 Then in the morning, \u2018It will be bad weather, because the sky is red and overcast.\u2019 Hypocrites! You know how to read the sky, but you can\u2019t read the signs of the times.\u2019<\/em><\/td>Missing from the Sinaiticus and Vaticanus Codexes. Likely an interpolation of a preacher\u2019s note.<\/td> Good<\/td><\/tr>
        Matthew 17:21However, this kind won\u2019t go out except by prayer and fasting.<\/em><\/td>Missing from the Sinaiticus and Vaticanus Codexes. This is one of many insertions by someone who was really, really into fasting. Possibly copied from Mark 9:29 by someone later on.<\/td> Good<\/td><\/tr>
        Matthew 18:11For the Son of Man came to save that which was lost.<\/em><\/td>Missing from the Sinaiticus and Vaticanus Codexes, and all manuscripts prior to the 5th century. The passage is quoted by Eusebius, Jerome, and other writers, who all fail to mention these words. Probably copied from Luke 19:10 in an attempt to harmonize the four gospels.<\/td> High<\/td><\/tr>
        Matthew 18:12into the mountains<\/em><\/td>Missing from the Sinaiticus and Vaticanus Codexes. Different manuscripts disagree as to which clause the words belong (did he leave the sheep in the mountains, or go off looking into the mountains?).<\/td> Good<\/td><\/tr>
        Matthew 20:16for many are called, but few chosen.<\/em><\/td>Missing from Sinaiticus and Vaticanus Codexes, and several ancient translations. The words are copied from Matthew 22:14, so they are genuine, just not here.<\/td> Good<\/td><\/tr>
        Matthew 23:14Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you devour widows\u2019 houses, and for a pretense make long prayer. Therefore, you shall receive the greater damnation.<\/em><\/td>Missing from the Sinaiticus and Vaticanus Codexes, plus ancient translations into other ancient languages. In many manuscripts it moves around in some manuscripts, being before verse 13! It was probably copied from Luke 20:47.<\/td> High<\/td><\/tr>
        Matthew 24:3of your coming and the end of the world?<\/em><\/td>The parallel accounts in Mark and Luke do not mention these words, yet they speak of something incredible: the end of the world. It seems odd, to say the least, that such important words would be left out. Also, like many spurious words, they are out of context, and removing them causes the passage to flow better (and indeed, they do not exist in Mark and Luke and those accounts do not suffer).See the translator note.<\/td> Good<\/td><\/tr>
        Matthew 24:41women shall be<\/em><\/td>Missing from the Sinaiticus and Vaticanus Codexes. However, in what may be the original Aramaic, the words are feminine, so \u2018women\u2019 would be implied.<\/td> Fair<\/td><\/tr>
        Matthew 27:52-5352<\/sup> and the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised 53<\/sup> and came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many<\/em><\/td>Despite the incredible events described, they are missing from the parallel account in Luke 23:45, and not mentioned anywhere else in the Bible. The words are out of context and break the chronology. The words contradict other Bible statements, such as 1 Corinthians 15 where the Apostle argues that nobody has been resurrected yet. There are also some differences in the wording in the oldest manuscripts, especially the Sinaiticus Codex.See the translator note.<\/td> Good<\/td><\/tr>
        Matthew 28:19baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit<\/em><\/td>These words are missing from the parallel accounts at Luke 24:47 and Acts 1:6.All other instructions for baptism in the Bible omit these words (Acts 2:38, Acts 8:15-16, Acts 10:48, Acts 19:5, Romans 6:3, Galatians 3:27).The ancient Christian writer Eusebius quoted this verse 18 times over a period of 36 years. The spurious words did not appear in his quotes made before the Council of Nicaea; they only appeared afterwards. Ironically, this man may be the one responsible for inserting these spurious words.See the translator note.<\/td> High<\/td><\/tr>
        Mark 4:37until it was (nearly) full<\/em><\/td>Missing from the Sinaiticus Codex. Different wording in different manuscripts (full, vs nearly<\/em> full).<\/td> Good<\/td><\/tr>
        Mark 6:11Truly I say to you, it shall be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrah in the Day of Judgement, than for that city.<\/em><\/td>Missing from the Sinaiticus and Vaticanus Codexes, plus some ancient translations. Duplicated from Matthew 10:15.<\/td> Good<\/td><\/tr>
        Mark 7:16If any man have ears to hear, let him hear.<\/em><\/td>Missing from the Sinaiticus and Vaticanus Codexes. Seems to be copied from elsewhere in Mark.<\/td> Good<\/td><\/tr>
        Mark 9:44Where the worm doesn\u2019t die, and the fire isn\u2019t quenched.<\/em><\/td>Missing from the Sinaiticus and Vaticanus Codexes. The words appear to be genuine, but are copied from verse 48, probably as some sort of poetic flourish.<\/td> Good<\/td><\/tr>
        Mark 9:46Where the worm doesn\u2019t die, and the fire isn\u2019t quenched.<\/em><\/td>See above.<\/td> Good<\/td><\/tr>
        Mark 10:30houses and brethren and sisters and mothers and children and lands with persecutions<\/em><\/td>Missing from the Sinaiticus Codex.<\/td> Fair<\/td><\/tr>
        Mark 11:26But if you don\u2019t forgive others, your Father in heaven won\u2019t forgive your sins.<\/em><\/td>Missing from the Sinaiticus and Vaticanus Codexes, plus some manuscripts of ancient translations. The sentiment is copied from Matthew 6:15.<\/td> Good<\/td><\/tr>
        Mark 15:28And the scripture was fulfilled, which says, \u2018And he was numbered with the transgressors.\u2019<\/em><\/td>Missing from the Sinaiticus and Vaticanus Codexes, plus all manuscripts prior to the late 6th century. Copied from Luke 22:37.<\/td> Good<\/td><\/tr>
        Mark 16 \u2013 the short endingBut they reported briefly to Peter and those with him all that they had been told. And after this, Jesus himself (appeared to them and) sent out by means of them, from east to west, the sacred and imperishable proclamation of eternal salvation.<\/em><\/td>Missing from the Sinaiticus and Vaticanus Codexes, plus the vast majority of manuscripts. Only appears in a very small number.Most manuscripts have the longer ending (shown below).The Vaticanus Codex deliberately leaves a blank column where the Gospel\u2019s ending should be.Ancient writers Eusebius and Jerome tell us that any text after verse 8 is spurious.The Gospel of Mark was probably never finished, and this was added later to give it a conclusion.<\/td> High<\/td><\/tr>
        Mark 16:9-20 \u2013 the long ending9<\/sup> Now when Jesus had risen early on the first day of the week, he first appeared to Mary Magdalene, from out of whom he had cast seven demons. 10<\/sup> And she went and told them that had been with him, as they mourned and wept. 11<\/sup> When they had heard that he was alive, and that she\u2019d seen him, they didn\u2019t believe it.
        12<\/sup> After that, he appeared in another form to two of them as they walked, and went into the country. 13<\/sup> So they went and told it to the others: who didn\u2019t believe them either.
        14<\/sup> Afterwards, he appeared to the eleven as were eating a meal, and scolded them for their disbelief and hardness of heart, because they didn\u2019t believe the ones who saw him after he had risen. 15<\/sup> And he said to them: \u2018Go into all the world, and preach the gospel to everyone. 16<\/sup> He that believes and is baptized shall be saved; but he that doesn\u2019t believe will be damned. 17<\/sup> And these signs will follow those who believe: In my name they\u2019ll cast out demons; they\u2019ll speak in different languages; 18<\/sup> they\u2019ll pick up snakes; and if they drink something poisonous, it won\u2019t hurt them; they\u2019ll lay their hands on sick people, and they\u2019ll recover.\u2019
        19<\/sup> Then, after the Lord had spoken to them, he rose up into heaven, and sat at the right hand of God. 20<\/sup> And they went out and preached everywhere, the Lord working with them, and confirming his words with miraculous signs. Amen.<\/em><\/td>        		Missing from some of our oldest codexes, the Sinaiticus and Vaticanus.Missing from the Syriac Sinaiticus, and the two oldest Georgian manuscripts.Ancient writers Eusebius, Jerome, Gregory of Nyssa, Hesychius of Jerusalem, and Severus of Antioch state that these words are not original.No one has (yet) found papyrus fragments containing these words, which is odd if they were genuine.In many ancient manuscripts, these words are separated from the main text by extra spaces or in some way marked out as being different. So people widely understood that it was not part of the original text, even if they still accepted it as scripture.One Armenian manuscript from 989 CE (Matenadaran 2374) says that the words were written by a man named \u201cAriston the Priest\u201d \u2013 traditionally a colleague of Peter.The words themselves reflect later beliefs in miracles like picking up snakes, and drinking poisons, something that developed much later, probably the 2nd century CE.These words introduce a contradiction, since it says in verse 9 that Jesus appeared to Mary from Magdala, but verse 2 in the same chapter (of the non-disputed part) explicitly says that she did not see him.The writing style of these extra verses is different from the rest of Mark, even seeing a sudden appearance of unique words and phrases not found elsewhere. Some argue that these verses were taken from some other uninspired history of Jesus that is now lost.The Gospel of Mark was probably never finished, or the ending was lost somehow. Some say that Mark was martyred in Rome before he could finish it, others say the last leaf from a folio was lost. Nobody knows what really happened.<\/td> High<\/td><\/tr>
        Luke 4:8Get behind me, Satan, for…<\/em><\/td>Missing from the Sinaiticus, Alexandrinus, and Vaticanus Codexes, plus many others. Probably copied from Matthew 4:10 or Mark 8:33.<\/td> Good<\/td><\/tr>
        Luke 9:55-56and said, You don\u2019t know what kind of spirit you are. For the Son of man didn\u2019t come to destroy men’s lives, but to save them.<\/em><\/td>Missing from the Sinaiticus, Alexandrinus, and Vaticanus Codexes, plus many other later ones.<\/td> Good<\/td><\/tr>
        Luke 17:12who stood at a distance<\/em><\/td>Missing from the Sinaiticus Codex.<\/td> Fair<\/td><\/tr>
        Luke 17:36Two men shall be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left.<\/em><\/td>Missing from most Greek manuscripts, including the Sinaiticus and Vaticanus Codexes. Probably repeated from Matthew 24:40.<\/td> Good<\/td><\/tr>
        Luke 23:5teaching<\/em><\/td>Missing from the Sinaiticus Codex.<\/td> Fair<\/td><\/tr>
        Luke 23:17For of necessity he must release one unto them at the feast.<\/em><\/td>Missing from the Alexandrinus and Vaticanus Codexes, plus some others. It also moves around, depending on the source, sometimes after verse 18. Contradicts Matthew, Mark, and John by saying it\u2019s a necessity<\/em> for Pilate to release a criminal rather than a custom<\/em>.<\/td> High<\/td><\/tr>
        Luke 23:34Then said Jesus, Father, forgive them; they don\u2019t know what they\u2019re doing.<\/em><\/td>Missing from the Sinaiticus and Vaticanus Codexes, but present in earlier manuscripts.<\/td> Fair<\/td><\/tr>
        John 4:9Jews have no dealings with Samaritans<\/em><\/td>Missing from the Sinaiticus and Vaticanus Codexes. Factually incorrect. See note.<\/td> Good<\/td><\/tr>
        John 5:3-4…waiting for the moving of the water. 4<\/sup>For at a certain time, an Angel would go into the pool and disturb the water; whoever was first to step in the water after its disturbance was cured of whatever disease he had.<\/em><\/td>Missing from the Sinaiticus and Vaticanus Codexes, plus the Alexandrianus in the original hand. Many other early manuscripts also leave the words out. The exact wording also differs between manuscripts. Further, the wording itself uses words and terms not found anywhere else in John.<\/td> High<\/td><\/tr>
        John 5:25and it is now<\/em><\/td>Missing from the Sinaiticus Codex. Is self-contradictory: \u2018is coming\u2019 vs \u2018is now,\u2019 indicating that it\u2019s an interpolation.<\/td> Good<\/td><\/tr>
        John 5:53And every man went to his own home.<\/em><\/td>Missing from the Sinaiticus and Vaticanus Codexes, plus the Alexandrianus. Not in the Aramaic.<\/td> Good<\/td><\/tr>
        John 8:1 through to John 8:11 (the woman caught in adultery, known as the \u2018Pericope adulterae\u2019)8<\/strong> 1<\/sup>Jesus went to the mount of Olives. 2<\/sup> And early in the morning, he again went into the temple, and all the people came to him. He then sat down and taught them. 3<\/sup> Then the scribes and Pharisees brought to him a woman who was found committing adultery. After they\u2019d presented her to everyone, 4<\/sup> they say to him: \u2018Master, this woman was found committing adultery, caught in act! 5<\/sup> Now, in the Law, Moses commanded us that such a person should be stoned [to death]; but what do you say?\u2019 6<\/sup> They asked this to trap him, so they might get [something] to accuse him with. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as if he hadn\u2019t heard them. 7<\/sup> So when they continued asking him, he lifted himself up, and said to them: \u2018Whoever among you that has no sin, let him be the first one throw a stone at her.\u2019 8<\/sup> And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground. 9<\/sup> And those who heard him, being convicted by their own conscience, went away, one by one; first the oldest, right up to the last one. Then Jesus was left alone, with the woman standing there. 10<\/sup> When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw nobody except the woman, he said to her: \u2018Woman, where are your accusers? Has anyone condemned you?\u2019 11<\/sup> She said: \u2018No one, Lord.\u2019 And Jesus said unto her: \u2018Neither do I condemn you. Go, and don\u2019t sin anymore.\u2019<\/em><\/td>Missing from the Sinaiticus and Vaticanus Codexes, plus the Alexandrianus. Not in the Aramaic.Widely regarded as spurious, even if the story may be a true folktale about Jesus, it is not authentic to John\u2019s Gospel.It moves around in different manuscripts, with some putting it in Luke.It slightly contradicts the context in John, as before John 7:53, he was talking to a group of men, and after the account he appears to be talking to the same group again. Yet if we believe the spurious account, an entire day has passed in between, and one moment he is alone with the woman, and is then suddenly back with the same Pharisees he was talking to the previous day. While it\u2019s possible that things happened this way, it could just be a symptom of this story being inserted later.<\/td> High<\/td><\/tr>
        John 21:25And there are many other things that Jesus did, and if they were all written down, I suppose that even the world itself couldn\u2019t contain the books that would be written. Amen.<\/em><\/td>Missing from the Sinaiticus and Vaticanus Codexes. Also, what it says is illogical, although it could be speaking in hyperbole to make a point.<\/td> Good<\/td><\/tr>
        Acts 7:16And their bodies were taken to Shechem, where they were laid in the tomb that Abraham had purchased with silver from the sons of Hamor in Shechem.<\/em><\/td>Multiple manuscript families contradict each other on the wording and meaning. Factual inaccuracies. Breaks the narrative. See the translator note.<\/td> High<\/td><\/tr>
        Acts 8:37And Philip said: \u2018If you believe it with all your heart, you may.\u2019 And he answered and said: \u2018I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.\u2019<\/em><\/td>Missing from all early manuscripts, and appears in no ancient translation. It only entered modern Bibles because 15th century scholar Erasmus found it scribbled in the margin of a manuscript, and therefore only entered Western European Bibles. The words may be true, but only passed down by tradition, and were not in the original text of Acts.<\/td> High<\/td><\/tr>
        Acts 9:5-6It\u2019s hard for you to kick against the cattle prods.\u2019 And he, trembling and astonished, said, \u2018Lord, what would you have me do?\u2019 And the Lord said to him:<\/em><\/td>Found in no ancient documents. Copied and combined from Acts 22:10 and Acts 26:14. Was added by 15th century Erasmus, and therefore only entered Western European Bibles in recent centuries.<\/td> High<\/td><\/tr>
        Acts 13:42…the Jews … the Synagogue … the Gentiles…<\/em><\/td>Missing from every manuscript prior to the 9th century. Interestingly, the added words, \u2018the Gentiles,\u2019 have been used by some to support the idea that modern Christians should worship on the Sabbath, or Saturday because Gentiles are supposedly in the Synagogue.<\/td> Good<\/td><\/tr>
        Acts 15:34However, it seemed good to Silas to remain there.<\/em><\/td>Missing from all the oldest manuscripts, and some ancient translations. There are also different variants, with some ending the text with \u2018and Judas traveled alone,\u2019 and some then add, \u2018to Jerusalem.\u2019 What it says may actually be factually correct, but these words are not original.<\/td> Good<\/td><\/tr>
        Acts 23:9Let us not fight against God.<\/em><\/td>Missing from all the oldest manuscripts, only appears in the 9th century. Copied from Acts 5:39.<\/td> Good<\/td><\/tr>
        Acts 24:6-8…and would have judged according to our law. But the chief captain, Lysias, came upon us, and with great violence took him away out of our hands, commanding his accusers to come to you,…<\/em><\/td>Missing from all the oldest manuscripts, and have slight variations in those in which it does appear. The words may be a traditional explanation, and what they say may be true, but they are not part of the original text.<\/td> Good<\/td><\/tr>
        Acts 28:29And when he had said these words, the Jews left, and greatly arguing among themselves.<\/em><\/td>Missing from all the oldest manuscripts and many ancient translations. What is said may be true, but the words are not original.<\/td> Good<\/td><\/tr>
        Romans 11:6But if it be of works, then it is no more grace; otherwise work is no more work.<\/em><\/td>Missing from the Sinaiticus and Vaticanus Codexes.<\/td> Good<\/td><\/tr>
        Romans 16:24-2724<\/sup> So may the loving care of our Lord Jesus the Anointed One be with you all. Amen. 25<\/sup> Now, to the One that can make you strong in the good news that I declare through my preaching about Jesus the Anointed One and about the revelation of the mystery that has remained a secret through the ages, 26<\/sup> but which have now been made known through the prophetic scriptures and which is being seen among all the nations by the command of the God of ageless time to promote obedience by faith; 27<\/sup> Yes, to God who is the only truly wise One, be the glory through Jesus (the Anointed) through the ages. May it be so.<\/em><\/td>This very wordy and flowery ending may have been created and added sometime in the 2nd century. We don\u2019t have any manuscripts with it absent (it\u2019s too early), but we do have some other evidence from both the manuscripts and recorded history. Consider the following:History records that around the year 144, Marcion, founder of his own Marcionite sect, decided to remove all of chapters 15 and 16 from Romans, and placed a version of these spurious words on to the end of chapter 14. He was considered a heretic and excommunicated for his views that Jesus\u2019s Father was a different god from that in the Old Testament (similar to some Gnostic beliefs). Perhaps he took offence to the words at Romans 15:20 or Romans 16:17, 18, and so removed the final two chapters and wrote his own new ending.Verse 24 is missing from all the oldest manuscripts.Verse 24 has variants \u2013 some not saying \u2018Christ\u2019 (the Anointed One), and some not adding \u2018Amen.\u2019Verse 24 is largely copied from verse 20 of the same chapter.Some manuscripts move the words in verse 24 to after verse 27.Verse 25 appears in some manuscripts after verse 14. So the words jump around a lot \u2013 typical of spurious additions.There exist fifteen slightly different versions<\/em> of these words in different manuscripts. Again, very typical of spurious additions.Romans actually ends with a perfectly good and complete goodbye in verses 20-23. This extra ending is superfluous.These words have a different style, and contains some unique phrases not found elsewhere, such as \u2018God of ageless time,\u2019 and \u2018obedience by faith.\u2019 Again, typical of spurious additions.What the words say, and their sentiment, may well be true. However, that\u2019s irrelevant. We want to know whether they\u2019re genuine, and it seems that they might not be. Even if the entire passage is not spurious, verse 24 very likely is.For more information on the Marcionites, see the note for 1 Corinthians 15:29, further below.<\/td> Good (verse 24) Fair (the rest)<\/td><\/tr>
        1 Corinthians 14:34-3534<\/sup> The women should remain silent in the congregation\u2026 they shouldn\u2019t be allowed to speak out. Rather (as the Law says), they should be submissive. 35<\/sup> And if they wish to know something, let them ask their men [when they get] home; for it\u2019s disgraceful for a woman to speak out in a congregation.<\/em><\/td>These verses are not missing from any manuscript, but:The words move around in different manuscripts, sometimes appearing at the end of the chapter. This usually suggests that a text began as a marginal note which was later interpolated into the text.The words directly contradict other statements by Paul \u2013 even in the same letter, e.g. 1 Corinthians 11:5, 13The words contain a factual inaccuracy, the Law does not say what it claims.Removing it makes the passage flow better.See the translator note.<\/td> Good<\/td><\/tr>
        1 Corinthians 15:29Also, if none of the dead will be raised, then what will those who are baptized for the dead do? Yes, why are they baptized for the dead?<\/td>This is a unique declaration by us, because it\u2019s the only time we\u2019ve declared a text spurious simply based on what it says and the historical circumstances.There is no manuscript evidence to doubt this verse, but there is nothing else in the Christian books to suggest that the Early Christians performed baptisms on behalf of dead people. It is, in fact, an extraordinary and bizarre statement. Yet there appears to be no mistranslation, it really does say what it appears to say.However, once you learn some basic Christian history, the picture becomes clear. There was a sect called the Marcionites, originating with a rich shipping magnate called Marcion, who was also the son of a bishop. This arose some time in the middle of the 2nd century.His sect had many heretical and Gnostic teachings, but it was also most responsible for promoting the writings of Paul as scripture. They even made copies of Paul\u2019s letters and sent them to different congregations. But most interestingly for us, they also had another quirk… they baptised dead people!<\/em>So there is a reasonable possibility that this verse is an interpolation added by a Marcionite preacher, or perhaps even by Marcion himself. Like most interpolations, it was probably added to the main text by accident \u2013 starting as a marginal note (only meant to be read by the preacher giving his sermon) that later people mistakenly moved into the main narrative upon copying the text.Since the Marcionites were the main guardians, promoters, and publishers of Paul\u2019s letters, any accidental interpolations added by them would be spread abroad throughout the entire Christian community \u2013 especially at this early point in history. It spread in both the Greek and Aramaic manuscripts.However, you may notice that the Marcionites got their start in Rome, among Greek and Latin-speakers… So why would the same spurious text appear in the (possibly original) Aramaic version?Well, it seems likely that the Marcionites also sent out Aramaic copies of Paul\u2019s letters, not just Greek. After all, Marcion himself was from Pontus in modern-day north-east Turkey, which, being in the East, we know had both Greek and Aramaic-speakers \u2013 and the Marcionite sect actually lasted longest in the Aramaic-speaking East.So we could actually expect<\/em> their interpolations to exist in both the Aramaic and Greek copies.This raises some questions. Firstly, if this is a Marcionite interpolation, are there others fake additions by Marcion? Well, yes. The ending of Romans (listed here on this page) is highly likely to be a Marcionite corruption.What about any others? None others seem very likely because Paul had a very strong personality and distinct writing style, so a sudden change of style (as happens at the end of Romans) is quite easy to spot. However, since we can\u2019t be 100% sure, we should keep an open mind.<\/td> Good<\/td><\/tr>
        Colossians 1:14through his blood<\/em><\/td>These words are missing from the oldest manuscripts. They seem to be copied from Ephesians 1:7, where the words are genuine. So they were either added to create some sort of harmony, or had started as a marginal note, like so many of these spurious additions.<\/td> High<\/td><\/tr>
        1 John 5:7-8For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Breath, and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness on the earth…<\/em><\/td>Missing from every ancient Greek, Aramaic, Syriac, Slavic, Georgian, Coptic, and Arabic manuscript.Did not appear in any Greek manuscript of the Bible until the 14th or 15th century \u2013 approximately 1,400 years after the Apostle wrote this Bible book.It does appear in one 10th century Greek manuscript, but it\u2019s clearly been added by someone later on, believed to be in the 19th century!The words themselves have three significant variants, typical for a spurious addition.The Church fathers did not mention this verse, even when collecting verses that they argued supported the Trinity doctrine.Clement of Alexandria quoted these verses and didn\u2019t include these words.These words first appeared in the 4th century, but not in a Bible manuscript \u2013 they are found in a homily called Liber Apologeticus<\/em> by a writer called Priscillian of \u00c1vila.The words were first added to the Latin Vulgate translation, where it remained alone until recent centuries. However, even then, they are missing from the two oldest Vulgate manuscripts, the Codex Fuldensis and the Codex Amiatinus. This suggests that Jerome, the creator of the Vulgate, did not recognize the words. One quote of his that mentions it, is thought to be from a pseudo-Jerome, a later impostor.Even several Catholic Bibles now omit the \u2018verse,\u2019 including the Jerusalem Bible and the New American Bible.Easily the most well-known fake verse in the Bible. Entire books have been written about it.Also see the translator note.<\/td> High<\/td><\/tr>
        Revelation 10:6and the sea, and the things which are therein<\/em><\/td>Missing from the Sinaiticus Codex (the earliest Greek) and the Crawford Codex (the earliest Aramaic).<\/td> Good<\/td><\/tr>
        Revelation 16:11of their sores … of their deeds<\/em><\/td>Missing from the Sinaiticus Codex.<\/td> Fair<\/td><\/tr>
        Revelation 16:17from (before) the throne<\/em><\/td>Missing from the Sinaiticus Codex. Variants between manuscripts. Some including \u2018before.\u2019<\/td> Good<\/td><\/tr>
        Revelation 18:22of whatsoever craft he be … and the stone of a millstone shall be heard no more at all in thee<\/em><\/td>Missing from the Sinaiticus Codex, and the Aramaic texts.<\/td> Good<\/td><\/tr>
        Revelation 20:5The rest of the dead didn\u2019t come to life until the end of the thousand years<\/em><\/td>Missing from the Sinaiticus Codex, the Vaticanus, and the Aramaic texts.Also see the translator note.<\/td> High<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n<\/div>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

        While Mishnaic Hebrew and later phases of the language exhibit a fairly simple tense-based system with past, present, and future tense expressed by the verb, the system in Biblical Hebrew is more complex, as any verb form can be used in reference to any of the tenses. The name \u2018tenses\u2019 as applied to Hebrew verbs is … Leer m\u00e1s<\/a><\/p>\n\n

        \n Sharing is caring<\/span><\/strong> \n <\/i> Share<\/span><\/a>\n <\/i> +1<\/span><\/a>\n <\/i> Tweet<\/span><\/a>\n <\/i> Share<\/span><\/a>\n <\/i> Share<\/span><\/a>\n 6421 words 147 views<\/w>\n <\/p>","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[17],"class_list":["post-8289","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-sin-categoria","tag-isaiah9_6"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/abudinen.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8289","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/abudinen.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/abudinen.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/abudinen.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/abudinen.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=8289"}],"version-history":[{"count":14,"href":"https:\/\/abudinen.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8289\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":8303,"href":"https:\/\/abudinen.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8289\/revisions\/8303"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/abudinen.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=8289"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/abudinen.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=8289"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/abudinen.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=8289"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}