My point was that the current TVs on the market that display 720p contain those problems. We're not discussing the theoretical possibilities of what the technology could provide, we're discussing TVs on the market now. And anyone who has watched a properly calibrated RP CRT side by side with a DLP or LCD TV knows that the RP CRT wins hands down, no contest.
What's there to back up? Do you read hebrew? No, so there's nothing more I can say. That's the definition of the world almah - period. Just liek the english words "automobile", "table", and "apple" all have definitions of what they mean, such is the case for hebrew words. I'm telling you the definition of "almah." I read hebrew, so I know what it means. But you do not read hebrew, and yous tubbornly hold onto this because it conflicts with your theology. I cannot make you accept it.
Almah means young woman. Period. Nothing to do with sex. Any woman who is young is an "almah." "almah" is the feminie form of the word "elem." "Elem" means "young man." The first time Saul saw David, he said, "Who is that 'elem'?" Do you think Saul inquiring about a virgin boy? Do you think Saul was psychic and knew he was not married? Of course not. Saul was just asking about a young boy.
Almah can be accurately translated to parthenos, because parthenos does not mean a virgin, as I have pointed out already. And religious Jews NEVER relied on anyt ranslation, especially the septuagint. They only used the original hebrew and aramaic.
Genesis 34:3 is where Dinah is called a "parthenos", and it is after her rape.
Some interesting notes on the Septuagint and early corruption:
Origen, an early church father (circa 325 CE) tried to piece together a decent translation by putting 6 different versions side by side (called the Hexapla). Here is what HE says about how bad the Septuagint had become "
Quote:
we are forthwith to reject as spurious the copies in use in our Churches, and enjoin the brotherhood to put away the sacred books current among them, and to coax the Jews, and persuade them to give us copies which shall be untampered with, and free from forgery!" Origen, A Letter from Origen to Africanus, Ante-Nicene Fathers, Volume 4.]
St. Jerome (early 5th century) decided to re-translate from the MT rather than rely on the Septuagint saying:
Quote:
"I was stimulated to undertake the task by the zeal of Origen, who blended (the Septuagint) with the old edition Theodotion's translation"
So Jerome is saying that the "Septuagint" had already been blended with Theodotion's translation by Origen.
Jerome continues in a letter
Quote:
"the Seventy (aka Septuagint) have said more than is found in the Hebrew. But the asterisks indicate what has been added by Origen from the version of Theodotion. "
This reconfirms that what was called the Septuagint by the 5th century CE was NOT the Septuagint as written 300 BCE. It had been highly modified by many . ..whether with good intentions or bad. My point is simply that the Septuagint is unreliable in its current state because we do not possess any copies of the original translation(s).
The website with the Jerome letters goes on to say "The copies of the Septuagint then widely available, according to Jerome, were actually Origen's redaction - and perhaps the editorial symbols that would have allowed one to locate the true Septuagint reading were missing from many of the copies in the libraries. "
Origen's reconstruction of the Septuagint was thought necessary, apparently, because of the diversity of readings in the many copies in circulation. In fact, in addition to Origen's version, two other recensions of the Septuagint were prepared early in the fourth century: one by Lucian of Antioch, and the other by Hesychius of Egypt.
Now -- what does the quality (or lack thereof) have to do with the MT? All the Masoretes did was take the oral vocalization and create visual marks for them. In other words: the Masoretes changed NOTHING, they simply added punctuation for vocalizations.
Here is another Origen quote on the lack of reliabiity of the Septuagint:
Quote:
"Again, through the whole of Job there are many passages in the Hebrew which are wanting in our copies, generally four or five verses, but sometimes, however, even fourteen, and nineteen, and sixteen. But why should I enumerate all the instances I collected with so much labor, to prove that the difference between our copies and those of the Jews did not escape me? "
"I marked with an asterisk those passages in our copies which are not found in the Hebrew. . . sometimes the meaning even does not seem to be akin? And, forsooth, when we notice such things, we are forthwith to reject as spurious the copies in use in our Churches, and enjoin the brotherhood to put away the sacred books current among them, and to coax the Jews, and persuade them to give us copies which shall be untampered with, and free from forgery!" Origen, A Letter from Origen to Africanus, Ante-Nicene Fathers, Volume 4.]
And maybe even better for the fundies, the KJV discredits the Septuagint!
The preface to the original KJV.
Quote:
(The Septuagint) "It is certain, that that Translation was not so sound and so perfect, but it needed in many places correction; and who had been so sufficient for this work as the Apostles or Apostolic men? . . .
. . . the Translation of the Seventy was allowed to pass for current. Notwithstanding, though it was commended generally, yet it did not fully content the learned, no not of the Jews.
So you're arguing that a person being born of a virgin, and ascending into heaven isn't important? LOL, that's brilliant!
Those are two of christianity's corenerstones. How could something like a woman being knocked up by G-d NOT be important to the author? How is the fact that JC fly into heaven NOT important?
Wow.
You can't be "fully man and fully G-d." The two are mutually exclusive. It's like saying that my pet is fully dog and fully cat. It's one or the other.
And as for your quotes from Mark, I fail to see how they say that Mark thought JC was G-d?
Thus, the Greek word chosen to translate the Hebrew was equivalent to a "virgin".
That's not entirely true, as I pointed out elsewhere. The greek word they translated it to is "parthenos." Dinah was called a "parthenos" after her rape. Was she a virgin? Absolutely not.
That's great and all, but it doesnt change the fact that there is no evidence of any hebrew copied of the NT, only greek ones. It's hard to believe that they even read hebrew, because most of the times they quote from the Hebrew Bible, they quoten a bad translation from the Septuagint, and not the original hebrew.
Couple of problems here. First, almah does not imply virginity. It has nothing to do with sexual experience whatsoever. It denotes age only. Back then, people got married very young. 13 and 14 years old getting married were common. A 14 year old wife would definitely be an almah, but would not be a virgin (betulah.) If the point of this passage was to stress virginity, Isaiah would have used the word that always means virgin - betulah.
Second, we know that a group of Rabbis translated the Torah into greek, and that was the foundation of the Septuagint. History is silent on who translated the rest - it could have been rabbis, assimilated jews, non-jews, etc.
And regardless, despite what you may have read, parthenos does not mean "virgin." After Dinah was raped, she was called a "parthenos" int he Septuagint. Was she a virgin? Absolutely not. That shows us that parthenos also does not mean virgin.
I don't know where you christians get your info from regarding the meanings of various hebrew and greek words, but it's always amusing. Sometimes i think people just make it up as they go along, or deliberately lie about it.
There are more than 4 gospels. There are literally hundreds of them. When the council of nicea formed the NT canon, they simply chose the ones that seemed to all work together.
Ever read the gospel of James? It says that James (not JC) gave the sermon on the mount. quite interesting.
all the council did was take hundreds of contradictory gospels and pieced together the ones that contradicted each other the least
If a "virgin birth" was a messianic sign, then why didn't she run to the Jewish leaders and proclaim that she was pregnant with the messiah? Why did she keep it to herself?
Pre-meditated murder isa crime that carries the death penalty in most places, but it still happens. Using your logic, it never happens because it is punishable by death. Either Mary had sex with Joseph, she was raped, she cheated on him, or the whole thing is made up (probably the case).
I find it funny that the first gospel written (Mark) doesn't make any mention of a "virgin birth" or an ascension to heaven after he resurrected (Mark contains the ascension now, but that was an admitted later addition to the gospel.) Mark protrays a very human messiah.
Contrast that with John, the last gosepl written, and you have a demi-god incarnate born of a virgin, who ascends to heaven after he is resurrected.
Don't you see how the story evolved over time and people began to embellish?
ok, but as i said before, there is nothing indicating that this is also a long time prophecy. and also, 7:16 was also fulfilled, and was not fulfilled bu JC.
And all this is moot anyway, since the hewbrew word there does not denote viriginity. It means "young woman", and nothing more. If Isaiah had wanted it to denote virginity, he would have used the hebrew word "betulah", not "almah."
There is nothing in the text to indicate it is a "foreshadowing" of the messiah. Ahaz was told that he would receive a sign, and Isaiah 7:14 was that sign. That was what this section was about, not a future messiah. What does a guy born 600 years later have to do with Ahaz? Nothing.
And as usual, christians ignore the context. Just look at verse 16:
For, when the lad does not yet know to reject bad "and choose good, the land whose two kings you dread, shall be abandoned."
Did this happened in JC's lifetime? Nope.
If you actually study the history of Ahaz (the King Isaiah made the prophecy FOR), you'll learn that the two kings were Rezin and Pekah.
Israel had been invaded by Assyria. Ahaz was king of Judah, at this crisis refused to co-operate with the kings of Israel and Syria in opposition to the Assyrians. He was attacked and defeated by Rezin of Damascus and Pekah of Samaria (2 Kings 16:5; 2 Chr. 28:5, 6).
THIS is what Ahaz was worried about and THIS is what Isaiah's prophecy was about -- the two kings -- Rezin and Pekah.
Not virgin births.
Read of II Kings (16:9) and you'll see that Isaiah's prophecy in 7 is fulfilled:
"And seized it and exiled its inhabitants to Kir, and he slew Rezin," and in that very year (ibid. 15: 30), "Hoshea the son of Elah revolted against Pekah the son of Remaliah, and he struck him and slew him... in the twentieth year of Jotham,"
I'm the entire IT department, and I assure you that nobody has access to my pc. It's locked down as tight as you can get it. And I don't have any programs on here for downloading files, because it's my work computer.
I haven't used IE at all in months. Never once clicked it. Yesterday I ended up with a piece of spyware called "ISTbar". I don't know how it could have got there other than through Firefox.
Slashdot Mirror
As of this posting, I now have 1 on my list.
My point was that the current TVs on the market that display 720p contain those problems. We're not discussing the theoretical possibilities of what the technology could provide, we're discussing TVs on the market now. And anyone who has watched a properly calibrated RP CRT side by side with a DLP or LCD TV knows that the RP CRT wins hands down, no contest.
1080i RP CRT > *
Almah means young woman. Period. Nothing to do with sex. Any woman who is young is an "almah." "almah" is the feminie form of the word "elem." "Elem" means "young man." The first time Saul saw David, he said, "Who is that 'elem'?" Do you think Saul inquiring about a virgin boy? Do you think Saul was psychic and knew he was not married? Of course not. Saul was just asking about a young boy.
Almah can be accurately translated to parthenos, because parthenos does not mean a virgin, as I have pointed out already. And religious Jews NEVER relied on anyt ranslation, especially the septuagint. They only used the original hebrew and aramaic.
Genesis 34:3 is where Dinah is called a "parthenos", and it is after her rape.
Origen, an early church father (circa 325 CE) tried to piece together a decent translation by putting 6 different versions side by side (called the Hexapla). Here is what HE says about how bad the Septuagint had become "
Quote: we are forthwith to reject as spurious the copies in use in our Churches, and enjoin the brotherhood to put away the sacred books current among them, and to coax the Jews, and persuade them to give us copies which shall be untampered with, and free from forgery!" Origen, A Letter from Origen to Africanus, Ante-Nicene Fathers, Volume 4.]
St. Jerome (early 5th century) decided to re-translate from the MT rather than rely on the Septuagint saying: Quote: "I was stimulated to undertake the task by the zeal of Origen, who blended (the Septuagint) with the old edition Theodotion's translation"
So Jerome is saying that the "Septuagint" had already been blended with Theodotion's translation by Origen.
Jerome continues in a letter Quote: "the Seventy (aka Septuagint) have said more than is found in the Hebrew. But the asterisks indicate what has been added by Origen from the version of Theodotion. "
This reconfirms that what was called the Septuagint by the 5th century CE was NOT the Septuagint as written 300 BCE. It had been highly modified by many . . .whether with good intentions or bad. My point is simply that the Septuagint is unreliable in its current state because we do not possess any copies of the original translation(s).
The website with the Jerome letters goes on to say "The copies of the Septuagint then widely available, according to Jerome, were actually Origen's redaction - and perhaps the editorial symbols that would have allowed one to locate the true Septuagint reading were missing from many of the copies in the libraries. "
Origen's reconstruction of the Septuagint was thought necessary, apparently, because of the diversity of readings in the many copies in circulation. In fact, in addition to Origen's version, two other recensions of the Septuagint were prepared early in the fourth century: one by Lucian of Antioch, and the other by Hesychius of Egypt.
Now -- what does the quality (or lack thereof) have to do with the MT? All the Masoretes did was take the oral vocalization and create visual marks for them. In other words: the Masoretes changed NOTHING, they simply added punctuation for vocalizations.
Here is another Origen quote on the lack of reliabiity of the Septuagint:
Quote: "Again, through the whole of Job there are many passages in the Hebrew which are wanting in our copies, generally four or five verses, but sometimes, however, even fourteen, and nineteen, and sixteen. But why should I enumerate all the instances I collected with so much labor, to prove that the difference between our copies and those of the Jews did not escape me? "
"I marked with an asterisk those passages in our copies which are not found in the Hebrew. . . sometimes the meaning even does not seem to be akin? And, forsooth, when we notice such things, we are forthwith to reject as spurious the copies in use in our Churches, and enjoin the brotherhood to put away the sacred books current among them, and to coax the Jews, and persuade them to give us copies which shall be untampered with, and free from forgery!" Origen, A Letter from Origen to Africanus, Ante-Nicene Fathers, Volume 4.]
And maybe even better for the fundies, the KJV discredits the Septuagint!
The preface to the original KJV.
Quote: (The Septuagint) "It is certain, that that Translation was not so sound and so perfect, but it needed in many places correction; and who had been so sufficient for this work as the Apostles or Apostolic men? . . .
. . . the Translation of the Seventy was allowed to pass for current. Notwithstanding, though it was commended generally, yet it did not fully content the learned, no not of the Jews.
For not lo
Those are two of christianity's corenerstones. How could something like a woman being knocked up by G-d NOT be important to the author? How is the fact that JC fly into heaven NOT important?
Wow.
You can't be "fully man and fully G-d." The two are mutually exclusive. It's like saying that my pet is fully dog and fully cat. It's one or the other.
And as for your quotes from Mark, I fail to see how they say that Mark thought JC was G-d?
That's not entirely true, as I pointed out elsewhere. The greek word they translated it to is "parthenos." Dinah was called a "parthenos" after her rape. Was she a virgin? Absolutely not.
wow, if that doesn't exemplify the typical mindset of a christian....
That's great and all, but it doesnt change the fact that there is no evidence of any hebrew copied of the NT, only greek ones. It's hard to believe that they even read hebrew, because most of the times they quote from the Hebrew Bible, they quoten a bad translation from the Septuagint, and not the original hebrew.
Second, we know that a group of Rabbis translated the Torah into greek, and that was the foundation of the Septuagint. History is silent on who translated the rest - it could have been rabbis, assimilated jews, non-jews, etc.
And regardless, despite what you may have read, parthenos does not mean "virgin." After Dinah was raped, she was called a "parthenos" int he Septuagint. Was she a virgin? Absolutely not. That shows us that parthenos also does not mean virgin.
I don't know where you christians get your info from regarding the meanings of various hebrew and greek words, but it's always amusing. Sometimes i think people just make it up as they go along, or deliberately lie about it.
Actually, the Hebrew bible (old testmanet) was written in hebrew and aramaic, but mostly hebrew. The NT was written completely in greek.
Ever read the gospel of James? It says that James (not JC) gave the sermon on the mount. quite interesting.
all the council did was take hundreds of contradictory gospels and pieced together the ones that contradicted each other the least
But you're assuming the NT is right. I tend to ignore "holy books" that contract the jewish bible left and right.
Pre-meditated murder isa crime that carries the death penalty in most places, but it still happens. Using your logic, it never happens because it is punishable by death. Either Mary had sex with Joseph, she was raped, she cheated on him, or the whole thing is made up (probably the case).
I find it funny that the first gospel written (Mark) doesn't make any mention of a "virgin birth" or an ascension to heaven after he resurrected (Mark contains the ascension now, but that was an admitted later addition to the gospel.) Mark protrays a very human messiah.
Contrast that with John, the last gosepl written, and you have a demi-god incarnate born of a virgin, who ascends to heaven after he is resurrected.
Don't you see how the story evolved over time and people began to embellish?
And all this is moot anyway, since the hewbrew word there does not denote viriginity. It means "young woman", and nothing more. If Isaiah had wanted it to denote virginity, he would have used the hebrew word "betulah", not "almah."
And as usual, christians ignore the context. Just look at verse 16:
For, when the lad does not yet know to reject bad "and choose good, the land whose two kings you dread, shall be abandoned."
Did this happened in JC's lifetime? Nope.
If you actually study the history of Ahaz (the King Isaiah made the prophecy FOR), you'll learn that the two kings were Rezin and Pekah.
Israel had been invaded by Assyria. Ahaz was king of Judah, at this crisis refused to co-operate with the kings of Israel and Syria in opposition to the Assyrians. He was attacked and defeated by Rezin of Damascus and Pekah of Samaria (2 Kings 16:5; 2 Chr. 28:5, 6).
THIS is what Ahaz was worried about and THIS is what Isaiah's prophecy was about -- the two kings -- Rezin and Pekah.
Not virgin births.
Read of II Kings (16:9) and you'll see that Isaiah's prophecy in 7 is fulfilled:
"And seized it and exiled its inhabitants to Kir, and he slew Rezin," and in that very year (ibid. 15: 30), "Hoshea the son of Elah revolted against Pekah the son of Remaliah, and he struck him and slew him... in the twentieth year of Jotham,"
I'm using Lotus Notes 6.5 as my email client. I'm sure I didn't get it through that. Notes may be a virus, but it is pretty safe from them.
I'm the entire IT department, and I assure you that nobody has access to my pc. It's locked down as tight as you can get it. And I don't have any programs on here for downloading files, because it's my work computer.
I haven't used IE at all in months. Never once clicked it. Yesterday I ended up with a piece of spyware called "ISTbar". I don't know how it could have got there other than through Firefox.
It's like a traffic jam, when you're already late.
Thank you for proving my point.
No thanks, I'm a Jew, and very involved in the counter-missionary movement.
It's the end of the world! Repent and ye shall be saved!
I are not under stand what you is try ing to said hear.
No, it doesn't have that function. It has 3 speeds of fast forward, and I can get through commericals in about 5-7 seconds.