Bible Study Zechariah 12:10 - "Pierced him" or "Pierced me?" (The Hebrew Grammar)

[cyberjosh]

I was watching a few of the excellent videos on my friend Jeff Benner's YouTube channel (he is the author of the www.ancient-hebrew.org website) where he explores the Hebrew grammar of several different Bible verses. He makes explanatory videos unlike any I've ever seen before (very accessible and easy to understand his points). I saw this video last night and thought that it made a valid point from the perspective of the Hebrew grammar and the context of the verse, but I wanted to get others thoughts on it. Let me know what you think of the video:

[video=youtube;X4HezBaSlSs]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X4HezBaSlSs[/video]
Source: YouTube - Zechariah 12:10 - "Pierced him" or "Pierced me?"

 

[Elijah674]

I was watching a few of the excellent videos on my friend Jeff Benner's YouTube channel (he is the author of the www.ancient-hebrew.org website) where he explores the Hebrew grammar of several different Bible verses. He makes explanatory videos unlike any I've ever seen before (very accessible and easy to understand his points). I saw this video last night and thought that it made a valid point from the perspective of the Hebrew grammar and the context of the verse, but I wanted to get others thoughts on it. Let me know what you think of the video:

[video=youtube;X4HezBaSlSs]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X4HezBaSlSs[/video]
Source: YouTube - Zechariah 12:10 - "Pierced him" or "Pierced me?"

Hi, is this correct gramer?? 'excellent videos on my friend Jeff Benner's..'??

My rich sister is educated, and her education + wealth means nothing much to me;), she is a great loving Christian living 'her faith', yet, years ago when I accepted a call to W.Va. & on to S.C., it seems that 'calm' hyper(?) education grammer somewhat became an rear end back seat to the Gospel with a mostly waste of time for me. And my sister when we talked on the telephone often lovingly chuckled at my southern grammer & corrected it.

Anyhow friend, what does one do with other Bible Word's such as piss, + pisseth, + bastards?? Surely most know & agree that these are not the Holy Spirit's words, but the pennman's own words for how they saw the Inspiration & in describing it in their own words. So where does one draw the line of 'some' of these perhaps Jer. 17:5 ones??

It seems to me even more as I grow older, that this 'deep' study material becomes a drag into vainity & misses the whole of the Everlasting Gospelmof Rev. 14:6?? Here is a Psalms 69 Truth as 'i' see it about our Master, and I wonder how 'some' might gramerise (new word?;)) this up?

Because it is such an important Truth, let me kind of S.C. highlite it up, OK?

Psalms 69
[20] Reproach hath broken my heart; and I am full of heaviness: and I looked for some to take pity, but there was none; and for comforters, but I found none.

(they all forsook Christ at the crucifion! and Eccl. 3:15 + the Rev. 17:1-5 ones?)

[21] They gave me also gall for my meat; and in my thirst they gave me vinegar to drink.

(yet we constantly hear that the fermented stuff was what Christ turned water into, huh?)

[22] Let their table become a snare before them: and that which should have been for their welfare, let it become a trap.

(and the 'table' is where one was to be fed, (SANCTUARY) and it was not Jerusalen, but the [HOUSE] at Jerusalem that should have found [food] for their welfare, right? Matt. 4:4)

[23] Let their eyes be darkened, that they see not; and make their loins continually to shake.
[24] Pour out thine indignation upon them, and let thy wrathful anger take hold of them.
[25] Let their habitation be desolate; and let none dwell in their tents.

(their habitation was destroyed in 79 AD, their [HOUSE] was found DESOLATE (Matt. 23:38)
'in the midst of the week' at the 'Midnight Cry' of Matt. 25, right? Isa. 5:3 + house in verse 7!)

[26] For they persecute him whom thou hast smitten; and they talk to the grief of those whom thou hast wounded. (grammar? this sounds like some of us are 'talked' to grief also, huh?)

[27] Add iniquity unto their iniquity: and let them not come into thy righteousness.

(and we hear some teach that Paul taught that Old Israel will be restored as a nation? Is that correct, or is this grammer wrong?)

[28] Let them be blotted out of the book of the living, and not be written with the righteous.

(and God's Word's seem clear on that BOOK??? Eccl. 3:14, Rev. 22:18-19 + Exod. 32:33 'And the Lord said... whosoever hath sinned against Me, him will I BLOT OUT OF MY BOOK' and even this verse has the final FIRISHED SIN against GOD MATURELY SEEN as in James 1:15 right?)

OK: Back to what 'i' call the boob tub.;) (hey, I do understand that there are 12 'different tribes' who make up the extended tribes of Israel!)

---Elijah

 

[cyberjosh]

Hi, is this correct gramer?? 'excellent videos on my friend Jeff Benner's..'??

Unless you thought my words were also supposed to be examined as inspired text, you shouldn't care. ;)

However I'm always up for a good English lesson. Where else in the sentence (aside from using parentheses like this) would I have interjected that phrase? I suppose I could made made more (and shorter) sentences.

Aside from all that, I hope you took the video for what it was. I have known Jeff Benner informally (never met in person but have talked like I talk with you online and via email) for many years and I admire his passion to teach Hebrew. I personally have been enabled to read many Hebrew words from the Old Testament because of his books and his website. I was merely noting that he was a friend that he had made some educational videos on YouTube.

That not withstanding, I saw no flaw in his examination of the Hebrew grammar. Aleph-tav ('et) is the "direct object identifier" and specifies that the object is definite (not indefinite). So I saw no flaw in the grammar or reasoning, plus it seems to fit in context as he indicated. Did someone have a gramatical or theological objection to the translation?

God Bless,

~Josh

 

[cyberjosh]

It seems to me even more as I grow older, that this 'deep' study material becomes a drag into vainity & misses the whole of the Everlasting Gospelmof Rev. 14:6?? Here is a Psalms 69 Truth as 'i' see it about our Master, and I wonder how 'some' might gramerise (new word?;)) this up?

I assume as far as this concern goes, that you are just asking me why I care? It's not like I'm trying to make a big deal out of this. I'm starting to teach myself Hebrew again (trying to learn nouns, adjectives, verbs, and sentance structure), I watched a few of Jeff's videos recently, and I was a little excited and interested again to discuss the translation of this Hebrew verse. This is a "Bible Study" section after all. ;)

But yes, I would never forget that we need to focus on the end issue or point of our studies, and that is Jesus Christ and the Gospel. However please let's not take this thread and use it as a launch pad for that very general tangential topic.

Please stay on topic is my plea at this point. You can always create another thread or PM me for anything else.

God Bless,

~Josh

 

[Theofilus]

Hi, is this correct gramer?? 'excellent videos on my friend Jeff Benner's..'??

However I'm always up for a good English lesson. Where else in the sentence (aside from using parentheses like this) would I have interjected that phrase? I suppose I could made made more (and shorter) sentences.

I can't speak for Elijah, of course, but I don't think the position in the sentence is what he was talking about. Unless I'm mistaken, it should have been "excellent videos on my friend's, Jeff Benner's, YouTube channel". At least, that's what I thought he was talking about.

With regard to the Hebrew grammar, I am no expert, but I did know about the word "et". It indicates the direct object of the verb (I hadn't heard about it indicating definite object before). Since it precedes "whom they pierced", wouldn't that be the direct object, i.e. "they looked to the one whom they pierced"?

Just a thought. I'm not at all sure about this.

 

[cyberjosh]

With regard to the Hebrew grammar, I am no expert, but I did know about the word "et". It indicates the direct object of the verb (I hadn't heard about it indicating definite object before). Since it precedes "whom they pierced", wouldn't that be the direct object, i.e. "they looked to the one whom they pierced"?

Just a thought. I'm not at all sure about this.

Well, the "to me" is all one word "ali" followed by the et, which according to Benner's translation would have to suggest the implied words "the one" (non-gender specific, since et only implies something) who they pierced. If this were provided in translation it would need to be shown in italics (like the NASB does when it supplies words). Sometimes this is legitimate, sometimes not. I was going to leave a comment on his video to ask him to provide any other verses that also use the same Hebrew terms (specifically "et asher") and see how they were translated as well (for sake of comparison). I may do that soon.

God Bless,

~Josh

 

[Nathan]

I work with a guy who studies Hebrew. He used to be a Messianic Christian pastor for a while.

He clued me in on something very, very, very interesting a while back.

The "et" you speak of is a very intriguing word in the Hebrew language. It is composed of the 'Alef' and 'Tav'. These two letters happen to be the first and the last letters of the Hebrew alphabet.

In other words, all Hebrew words are composed of these two letters along with the letters between them.

Now think about Revelation 22:13;

I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end.​

Is Christ being redundant here? Or is He stating something? This guy I work with says that there is a WEALTH of treasure when you contemplate the word "et" in the Old Testament. For in all reality it speaks of Christ each and every time it is written; from beginning - to end.

He says that Jewish scholars still have a hard time with this. They do not see this in the light it is shown only through the recognition of Christ as Messiah. What they do is acknowledge its presence, but not that it is specifically significant to anything in particular. Primarily because it is used one way in one passage, and then another way in another passage. But when you look at it, study it, with Christ in mind - then it takes on a whole meaning of its own and resounds with intense depth.

I would suggest to you the simple fact that it is included in this verse is simply as a statement of reflecting to who this is speaking of. Nothing more, and nothing less. But of course, I am not a scholar and certainly not stating this to be the absolute truth. But it would be an interesting place to begin looking into the validity of what this guy I work with says about this "word". (In the beginning was the Word...)

...Whats interesting is the fact that this "et" is in the very first verse in the Bible.

 

[cyberjosh]

I work with a guy who studies Hebrew. He used to be a Messianic Christian pastor for a while.

He clued me in on something very, very, very interesting a while back.

The "et" you speak of is a very intriguing word in the Hebrew language. It is composed of the 'Alef' and 'Tav'. These two letters happen to be the first and the last letters of the Hebrew alphabet.

In other words, all Hebrew words are composed of these two letters along with the letters between them.

Now think about Revelation 22:13;

I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end.​

Is Christ being redundant here? Or is He stating something? This guy I work with says that there is a WEALTH of treasure when you contemplate the word "et" in the Old Testament. For in all reality it speaks of Christ each and every time it is written; from beginning - to end.

He says that Jewish scholars still have a hard time with this. They do not see this in the light it is shown only through the recognition of Christ as Messiah. What they do is acknowledge its presence, but not that it is specifically significant to anything in particular. Primarily because it is used one way in one passage, and then another way in another passage. But when you look at it, study it, with Christ in mind - then it takes on a whole meaning of its own and resounds with intense depth.

I would suggest to you the simple fact that it is included in this verse is simply as a statement of reflecting to who this is speaking of. Nothing more, and nothing less. But of course, I am not a scholar and certainly not stating this to be the absolute truth. But it would be an interesting place to begin looking into the validity of what this guy I work with says about this "word". (In the beginning was the Word...)

...Whats interesting is the fact that this "et" is in the very first verse in the Bible.

Indeed, I have heard of that before. Infact, Jeff Benner's official site logo is 'et, just written with the ancient proto-Hebrew characters for aleph (the ox head) and tav (the cross mark). See Jeff Benner's site www.ancient-hebrew.org in the top right where it says "Plowing through History from Aleph to Tav". If you click on that logo it will take you to this page where he explains the meaning of 'et and mentions its equivalence to the Greek alpha and omega. His explanation is that 'et picked up its original use & meaning from oxen pulling a plow.

God Bless,

~Josh