logo
Welcome Guest! To enable all features please Login or Register.

Notification

Icon
Error

Options
View
Go to last post Go to first unread
Offline Steve in PA  
#1 Posted : Thursday, January 23, 2014 10:05:34 AM(UTC)
Steve in PA
Joined: 3/31/2010(UTC)
Posts: 157
Location: PA

Was thanked: 4 time(s) in 3 post(s)
I'd recently heard Yada say that it was "the adversary" that Ya'aqob wrestled with... and after he overcame whatever temptation Yahowah blessed him and changed his name to Y'israel. ?

I had sent Yada an email asking him about this and he said...

"I translated this passage a long time ago and came to the conclusion that Ya'aqob was tempted by Satan and because he did not capitulate, Yahowah named him Yisrael. It is the same interpretation I have of Abraham. You'll find it in one of the early volumes of YadaYah.com. During the edit of YY, I reconfirmed my earlier translation and remain convinced that this is the only rational interpretation of this story."

I cannot seem to find the chapter/section of YY where this is translated and expounded upon. Does anyone know where this is located in YY? Does anyone understand what Yada meant by "It is the same interpretation I have of Abraham"?
If you know and find those sections, please paste them here in this thread and we can hopefully get a discussion going.

Thanks,

Steve
Offline Mike  
#2 Posted : Thursday, January 23, 2014 3:05:05 PM(UTC)
Mike
Joined: 10/2/2007(UTC)
Posts: 541
Location: Texas

Thanks: 6 times
Was thanked: 24 time(s) in 16 post(s)
eh steve,

Yada Yah Book 3: Going Astray, 6 Shav’ – Desolation page 5:

Now that the battle lines between good and evil have been drawn and we
know who was serving whom, it was time for Ya’aqob to prove himself worthy of
such an auspicious calling. For that, we turn to Genesis 32: “Ya’aqob was left
(yatar – spared and preserved) by himself (bad – set apart) and he wrestled
(‘abaq – grappled with, was physically engaged grabbing and holding) the Man
(‘iysh – one who exists, is extant and present, a male, husband, servant, champion,
and counselor) with him until the time and place the predator and plunderer
(‘ad ) arrived (‘alah – ascended, to take away, to cut off, to cause to burn in a
holocaust), the Shachar (shachar – the sun appeared).” (Genesis 32:24)
The “one who exists and is present, the man, husband, servant, champion, and
counselor” is Yahuweh in human form. That is clearly articulated in the
conclusion of the passage and in the summation provided by Hosea. Ya’aqob
began the evening “spared and preserved,” “set apart” because he was physically
engaged in holding onto” God. But the test was provided by “‘alah Shachar—the
arrival of Satan.” Ya’aqob would have to prove himself worthy of being the
embodiment of the beriyth/relationship just as Yahushua proved Himself worthy
of being our savior. Both were tempted by Satan and prevailed.
Isaiah, in 14:12, tells us that “ben Shachar,” the “son of the Dawn or Morning
Star” is the fallen angel known as Satan. So I came to the conclusion that “‘alah
shachar” describes Satan’s arrival for the following reasons: First, Isaiah, the only
prophet to name the Adversary, defines him as Shachar. Second, “‘alah shachar”
is redundant if describing “dawn.” It would be like saying “the rise of the
sunrise.” Third, “‘alah shachar” appears twice before the “shemesh—the sun, the
brilliant object which provides warmth, light, and life zarah—rose, came forth,
began to shine, came out and appeared.” If there were three sunrises in a single
night, it would be celebrated as such, but it’s not. Fourth, there would be no
reason for God to be pleased with overcoming or prevailing against Ya’aqob,
which would be the unlikely moral of the story if “Shachar” were not Satan. Fifth,
it makes no sense for Ya’aqob to be eager to leave God’s presence. He would be
the least likely person on earth to desire separation. And sixth, the only other use
of “‘alah shachar” is in Sodom—Satan’s playpen—where the angels wanted to
get out of town before “‘alah shachar—Satan arrived” and Lot was swept away
in temptation and punishment.
“When He [Yahuweh/Yahushua] saw (ra’ah – was shown, was delighted to
discover) that he [Shachar] could not overpower and had not prevailed
against (lo – not / yakol – overcome, gained control over, achieved victory over,
possessed power against, conquered, dared or attained) him [Ya’aqob], he
[Yahuweh/Yahushua] touched (naga – came nigh and reached out to) Ya’aqob’s
hand, foot (kaph – palm and sole) and loin (yarek – genitals, the area of
procreation) so it was dislocated (yaqa – wrenched) while he was physically
engaged, grabbing and holding (‘abaq) him.” (Genesis 32:25)

Ya’aqob wasn’t a very courageous fellow, but when it came to trusting
Yahuweh, to being passionate and engaged, he was exemplary. “Then he
[Ya’aqob] said, ‘Let me go (shalach – send me out, dispatch me, set me free,
deliver and direct me) because Shachar [Satan] has come to rise and burn
(‘alah).’ But he [Ya’aqob] said, ‘I will not go until you truly (kiy im – unless,
indeed, surely) bless me.’ So He [Yahuweh/Yahushua] said to him, ‘What is
your name (shem)?’ He answered, ‘Ya’aqob.’ Then he said, ‘Your name shall
no longer be Ya’aqob, but Yisra’el (to stand upright, straight and be righteous,
to be correct and pleasing, to be agreeable, right, justified, and straightforward
with el meaning god), for you have striven (sarah – exerted yourself and
endured) with God (elohim – the Mighty One, the Judge, the Almighty Spirit)
and with men and have prevailed (yakol – attained success, been shown
capable, have understood and been able to grasp the meaning of life).’” (Genesis
32:26-28)……..

(HOT+) (32:25) ויותרH3498 יעקבH3290 לבדוH905 ויאבקH79 אישׁH582 עמוH5973 עדH5704 עלותH5927 השׁחר׃H7837

H5927
עלה
‛âlâh
BDB Definition:
1) to go up, ascend, climb
1a) (Qal)
1a1) to go up, ascend
1a2) to meet, visit, follow, depart, withdraw, retreat
1a3) to go up, come up (of animals)
1a4) to spring up, grow, shoot forth (of vegetation)
1a5) to go up, go up over, rise (of natural phenomenon)
1a6) to come up (before God)
1a7) to go up, go up over, extend (of boundary)
1a8) to excel, be superior to
1b) (Niphal)
1b1) to be taken up, be brought up, be taken away
1b2) to take oneself away
1b3) to be exalted
1c) (Hiphil)
1c1) to bring up, cause to ascend or climb, cause to go up
1c2) to bring up, bring against, take away
1c3) to bring up, draw up, train
1c4) to cause to ascend
1c5) to rouse, stir up (mentally)
1c6) to offer, bring up (of gifts)
1c7) to exalt
1c8) to cause to ascend, offer
1d) (Hophal)
1d1) to be carried away, be led up
1d2) to be taken up into, be inserted in
1d3) to be offered
1e) (Hithpael) to lift oneself
Part of Speech: verb

H7837
שׁחר
shachar
BDB Definition:
1) dawn
1a) dawn
1b) at dawn (as adverb)
Part of Speech: noun masculine


I think that “It is the same interpretation I have of Abraham” is from the story of the Covenant that Yada has been talking about on Shattering Myths lately.

Gen 15:11 And the birds of prey came down on the carcasses, and Aḇram drove them away.
Gen 15:12 And it came to be, when the sun was going down, and a deep sleep fell upon Aḇram, that see, a frightening great darkness fell upon him.

Shalom
Offline StevePaige  
#3 Posted : Monday, August 11, 2014 7:58:51 PM(UTC)
StevePaige
Joined: 10/11/2011(UTC)
Posts: 14
Man
Location: Summerville, South Carolina

Nowhere is H7837 translated Satan. Dawn, at dawn, possibly day break. And since both YHWH and Yahshua both say that no one has seen the YHWH, then Ya'aqob was dealing with a messenger as YHWH's proxy.
Offline James  
#4 Posted : Tuesday, August 12, 2014 8:11:08 AM(UTC)
James
Joined: 10/23/2007(UTC)
Posts: 2,616
Man
Location: Texas

Thanks: 5 times
Was thanked: 216 time(s) in 149 post(s)
No, shachar does not mean Satan. But in Yashayah Yahowah names the adversary as Helel Ben Shachar, meaning the arogant and prideful son of dawn. Yada's translation is an extrapolation based upon that. In the exceprt that Mike posted Yada explains his reasoning rather extensivly.
Don't take my word for it, Look it up.

“The truth is not for all men but only for those who seek it.” ― Ayn Rand
Offline StevePaige  
#5 Posted : Tuesday, August 12, 2014 11:02:05 AM(UTC)
StevePaige
Joined: 10/11/2011(UTC)
Posts: 14
Man
Location: Summerville, South Carolina

A translation based on extrapolation is misleading. What he wrote is not nor has never been in any Hebrew, Greek, or other version.

The quote may explain his reasoning but inserting words because he thinks it should be there is not sound translation.

Steve
Offline James  
#6 Posted : Tuesday, August 12, 2014 12:40:30 PM(UTC)
James
Joined: 10/23/2007(UTC)
Posts: 2,616
Man
Location: Texas

Thanks: 5 times
Was thanked: 216 time(s) in 149 post(s)
The extrapolation is that the word Shachar is being used as a name, a perfectly valid extrapolation based on the evidence. All names have meanings and the context determins rather a word is being used as a proper noun, ie name, or not. Since Shachar is used as a name for the adversary there exists the posability that it is being used as a name. Yada explains why in the context he translated it that way, agree or disagee with the reason it remains a valid translation. The fact that no one else has translated it that way is irrelivant.

Your second stament is incorrect. He did not insert any words, he transliterated a word rather than translating it. The translation does not include Satan it does include Shcahar because Shcahar was included in the text. He then explained in his comentary why he transliterated it and didn't translate it at which point he equates Shachar with the adversary.
Don't take my word for it, Look it up.

“The truth is not for all men but only for those who seek it.” ― Ayn Rand
Offline StevePaige  
#7 Posted : Tuesday, August 12, 2014 7:17:03 PM(UTC)
StevePaige
Joined: 10/11/2011(UTC)
Posts: 14
Man
Location: Summerville, South Carolina

James,

What he wrote above is:

Quote:
Isaiah, in 14:12, tells us that “ben Shachar,” the “son of the Dawn or Morning
Star” is the fallen angel known as Satan.


In the Isaiah quote above, "son" is the object of the prepositional phrase "of the dawn". Here the "son" is the adversary. In the other rendering "Morning" is an adjective describing the "star". Here the "star" is the adversary.

In neither rendering is shachar/daybreak/dawn used as an noun to describe the adversary. The closest that we can get is saying that the phrase "HeYLeL BeN-ShaCHaR" is rendered HeYLeL/Bright Star (or Lucifer) and Ben-ShaCHaR/Son of the Morning"

This is why no lexicon or dictionary defines shachar as the adversary (as noted in the above BDB definition) describing the dawn. This is not a valid translation.

And to translate something is to have the meaning of a word or phrase conveyed from one language to another. To transliterate a word is to bring the sound of a word from one language to another. This is what is done with the word "antichrist" from "antichristos" in the Greek. Or "baptism" from "baptismo". The translated words would be "usurper of Messiah" or "opposer of Messiah" for the first and "immersion" for the second.

Shachar is the tranliteration while dawn is the translation.

Steve
Users browsing this topic
Guest
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.