Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Hebrews 2:7 - "Angels"???
#1
If we look at the OT text of Psalms 8:5, we realize that this is where the writer of Hebrews got his quote from. In the KJV and others, elohim in the Hebrew is translated as angels, considering the LXX. Looking at the Hebrew, and looking at the Targums given here at the website, it both says "a little lower than God", whereas the LXX and the GNT and the Peshitta have "a little lower than the angels". This is unexpected to me, as i expected the Peshitta to have no LXX or GNT abnormalities.

Is there anything else to clearly suggest this meaning of the verse? Why would anyone make elohim to definately mean angels? i don't think we need a discussion on th term elohim and how it refers to Moses, i'd rather would like to know why Psalms 8:5 is interpreted in the way the LXX does whereas the Targums do not interpret in that manner.
Jesus is the one true God of the Bible.
Reply
#2
Hi,

According to Yigael Yadin "Scripta Hierosolymitana", the letter to the Hebrews is written to Essenes when compared to the actual faith and doctrine of the Essenes.
Many essenes might have been converted by John the Baptist and the Dead See Scrolls clearly show their doctrines.

The letter of Hebrews in chapter 1 and 2 is all about angels. Why? Because angels stood centrally in their doctrine.
They were converted to Yeshu', but still, angels played an important role, if not, too important.

So, vers 2:7 and the rendering: "lower than angels' is completely in line with the argument that the Hebrew-writer wanted to write to them.

The argument was: "Listen, angels do exist, but they are NOT as important as Yeshu'."

Now the Peshitta OT and the LXX have this rendering. It is well known that the Masoretic Text, is not always in accordance with both the LXX and the POT.

I bet that the Hebrew-writer, when he wrote Hebrews, had either the LXX or an Aramaic targum as a source, and that he would not use spurious arguments, where (especially essenes) would have thought: "What is he citating? This is not in our Tanach!"
Reply
#3
Interesting perspective.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)