Zechariah 6:13 - and he shall be a priest upon his throne
schmuel at escape.com
Wed Nov 13 09:25:34 EST 2002
Even he shall build the temple of the LORD; and he shall bear the glory,
and shall sit and rule upon his throne; **and he shall be a priest upon
and the counsel of peace shall be between them both.
> >The lack of a preposition seems to match the KJB a little
> >closer than the Jewish versions, are they more literal?
> Youngs 6:13 And hath been a priest on His throne ..
> Emphaiszed And shall become a priest upon his throne,
> Jay Green Interlinear And shall be a priest upon his throne
>What do you mean by the lack of a preposition? In translation or in the text?
>I'm not sure I can identify what you have in mind.
Hi Trevor, always appreciate your assistance..
I was referring to the Hebrew text
.... does it have a clear, or only an implied proposition..
Some translations have "he",
others have "there shall be"
while, the three most literal I know have neither.
leaving the word "he" or "there" or whatever to simply to be implied..
Therefore I was wondering what is there in a strict literalist Hebrew text
Based on Emphasized, Green, and Young's, my conjecture was that the
phrases "he" or "there" are differing contextual emendations .
> >. but also grammatically more awkward, in the sense of harmonizing with
> >"and the counsel of peace shall be between them both. ?
>Perhaps the sense if it were read as one person would be accord between the
>priestly and royal offices (which would obviously result from one person
> But I agree that this part seems more straightforward if two persons are
> in view.
Yes, we seem to be covering two alternate views of the text, there are both
(e.g. Levey on the Targum) and Christian commentators who talk of the priestly
and royal offices...
Yet the idea of making the Hebrew into two persons is clearly contextually
So let's not worry much about the interpretation, consider that a wash, and
directly with the Hebrew in a more literal grammatical sense....
My question is does the Hebrew behind
*and he shall be a priest upon his throne**
equally allow for both possibilities, "he shall be" or "there shall be"
Or would/could the Hebrew more exactly be a little different if the idea
was "there shall be (another/different)" high priest....
In other words,
Ideally, if the Hebrew is switching subject, could it show that
Is either reading more called for from the grammar ?
ALSO.. what about the Hebrew difference between
These are very different in English.. how does the Hebrew wash out ?
Hope I was clearer this time, and thanks for the help..
schmuel at escape.com
Messianic_Apologetic-subscribe at yahoogroups.com
More information about the b-hebrew