Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And Brenton's is an English translation of the Septuagint and did you notice that verse is not future tense?...
There is no such thing as "tense" in biblical Hebrew. (Modern Hebrew, on the other hand, does have tenses.) Biblical Hebrew is not a "tense" language. Modern grammarians recognize that it is an "aspectual" language. This means that the same form of a verb can be translated as either past, present, or future depending on the context and various grammatical cues. The most well known grammatical cue is the "vav-consecutive" that makes an imperfective verb to refer to the past.
Therefore it is wrong to say that Isaiah 53 or other prophecies are in the "past tense." Biblical Hebrew has no tenses. There are many examples of what is wrongly called the "past tense" form (properly called "the perfective" or "perfect") being used for future time.
This fact was recognized by the medieval commentators as well as by modern grammarians.
Here is an example:
Contemporary Jewish commentator Nahum Sarna on Exodus 12:17, "for on this very day I brought your ranks out of the land of Egypt":
This is an example of the "prophetic perfect." The future is described as having already occurred because God's will inherently and ineluctably possesses the power of realization so that the time factor is inconsequential.
How wrong to presume that God always has to speak on our limited and 21st Century mindsets.!
There is no such thing as "tense" in biblical Hebrew. (Modern Hebrew, on the other hand, does have tenses.) Biblical Hebrew is not a "tense" language. Modern grammarians recognize that it is an "aspectual" language. This means that the same form of a verb can be translated as either past, present, or future depending on the context and various grammatical cues. The most well known grammatical cue is the "vav-consecutive" that makes an imperfective verb to refer to the past.
Therefore it is wrong to say that Isaiah 53 or other prophecies are in the "past tense." Biblical Hebrew has no tenses. There are many examples of what is wrongly called the "past tense" form (properly called "the perfective" or "perfect") being used for future time.
This fact was recognized by the medieval commentators as well as by modern grammarians.
Here is an example:
Contemporary Jewish commentator Nahum Sarna on Exodus 12:17, "for on this very day I brought your ranks out of the land of Egypt":
This is an example of the "prophetic perfect." The future is described as having already occurred because God's will inherently and ineluctably possesses the power of realization so that the time factor is inconsequential.
How wrong to presume that God always has to speak on our limited and 21st Century mindsets.!
You plagerized your post....Here I'll help you.... - Hebrew Tenses
Again, that site is biased...The man knows nothing of Hebrew Grammar...
You plagerized your post....Here I'll help you.... - Hebrew Tenses
Again, that site is biased...The man knows nothing of Hebrew Grammar...
Yes and the grammar site you provided clearly states that Hebrew verbs are not marked for tense and that you cannot tell just by looking at the verb form without context when the action occurs.
However you state in another reply that special markers are used to indicate future tense...
This is not stated in the link you gave me. Surely it would have been stated and things made alot less complicated it that were the case.
Yes and the grammar site you provided clearly states that Hebrew verbs are not marked for tense and that you cannot tell just by looking at the verb form without context when the action occurs.
However you state in another reply that special markers are used to indicate future tense...
This is not stated in the link you gave me. Surely it would have been stated and things made alot less complicated it that were the case.
I'll find it for you...they use imperfect or present to be verb to imply future....
There is no such thing as "tense" in biblical Hebrew. (Modern Hebrew, on the other hand, does have tenses.) Biblical Hebrew is not a "tense" language. Modern grammarians recognize that it is an "aspectual" language. This means that the same form of a verb can be translated as either past, present, or future depending on the context and various grammatical cues. The most well known grammatical cue is the "vav-consecutive" that makes an imperfective verb to refer to the past.
Therefore it is wrong to say that Isaiah 53 or other prophecies are in the "past tense." Biblical Hebrew has no tenses. There are many examples of what is wrongly called the "past tense" form (properly called "the perfective" or "perfect") being used for future time.
This fact was recognized by the medieval commentators as well as by modern grammarians.
Here is an example:
Contemporary Jewish commentator Nahum Sarna on Exodus 12:17, "for on this very day I brought your ranks out of the land of Egypt":
This is an example of the "prophetic perfect." The future is described as having already occurred because God's will inherently and ineluctably possesses the power of realization so that the time factor is inconsequential.
How wrong to presume that God always has to speak on our limited and 21st Century mindsets.!
Interesting.
I don't think anything is new, what has happened has always happened and always will happen.
I don't think anything is new, what has happened has always happened and always will happen.
Quote:
On the first day you shall have a holy assembly, and another holy assembly on the seventh day; no work at all shall be done on them, except what must be eaten by every person, that alone may be prepared by you. 17You shall also observe the Feast of Unleavened Bread, for on this very day I brought your hosts out of the land of Egypt; therefore you shall observe this day throughout your generations as a permanent ordinance. 18In the first month, on the fourteenth day of the month at evening, you shall eat unleavened bread, until the twenty-first day of the month at evening...
Of course, if the writers wrote it after-the-fact, then they'd have nothing better to do than use the past for a description of a cyclical event they already celebrated. The writers and editors were probably afraid that if they wrote "will bring you out" then people would take it prophetically as a prophecy of what might again happen on that holiday: that the Egyptians would again expel the migrant jews as they did the Hyksos herders.
Of course, if the writers wrote it after-the-fact, then they'd have nothing better to do than use the past for a description of a cyclical event they already celebrated. The writers and editors were probably afraid that if they wrote "will bring you out" then people would take it prophetically as a prophecy of what might again happen on that holiday: that the Egyptians would again expel the migrant jews as they did the Hyksos herders.
LOl, what is that?
Manetho?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
