# Halleluyah Scriptures



## StephenMartyr (Dec 24, 2019)

Here's a translation (seems to be new?) that's new to me. A friend of mine that attends a Bible study I go to introduced it to me last night over coffee. I've seen him use it at the study but never looked at it online. I might get it. Here are some links below:

https://www.halleluyahscriptures.com/

And a guy does a review on it here:






Anyone know more about it or is familiar with it?


----------



## B.L. (Dec 24, 2019)

I'd stay away from all Sacred Name Bibles. I know admittedly little about this one you are inquiring about, but that website you linked didn't exactly inspire confidence that this "new" translation was done by a team of competent orthodox scholars. I'll take a look at the video you linked later.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## StephenMartyr (Dec 24, 2019)

The guy from the Bible made a good case though for the names and words. Why are people's names used but not God or LORD or Lord? He said Baal actually means "Lord".

What's wrong with sacred name Bibles?


----------



## B.L. (Dec 24, 2019)

StephenMartyr said:


> What's wrong with sacred name Bibles?



Well, primarily that they are produced and promoted by those in the Sacred Name Movement. That's good enough of a reason for me.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## StephenMartyr (Dec 24, 2019)

This video is turning out to be interesting. His explanation of Philippians 3:10-11 is disturbing:

Php 3:10 That I may know him, and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, being made conformable unto his death; 
Php 3:11 If by any means I might attain unto the resurrection of the dead. 

He said that "resurrection" in verse 10 is different from verse 11, and indeed it is in the Greek:

10 = anastasis
11 = exanastasis

I'll leave it to you guys to watch his explanation.

Sorry everyone, it's bringing up a lot of questions for me.


----------



## Username3000 (Dec 24, 2019)

I bought some of these several years ago right before I became a Christian, and got sucked into it for a while.

I thought to myself, “Surely God would want to be called by His proper name.” I don’t feel that way any longer.

The gentleman in that video, if I remember correctly, believes the translation has a special anointing upon it. And they all make far too much of the Jewish-ness of the thing. I *think* he is also not connected to a local church. That’s a red flag.

Looking back, it did not savour of Christ, but merely of a special, mysterious language-based, culturally Jewish...thing.

I would recommend you stay away from it all. It won’t bring you closer to God, and it won’t make God happier with you.

I got rid of all my copies.


----------



## Username3000 (Dec 24, 2019)

StephenMartyr said:


> This video is turning out to be interesting. His explanation of Philippians 3:10-11 is disturbing:
> 
> Php 3:10 That I may know him, and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, being made conformable unto his death;
> Php 3:11 If by any means I might attain unto the resurrection of the dead.
> ...


Ah yes. I didn’t watch it, but doesn’t he say that Paul was working toward a different, special resurrection?


----------



## StephenMartyr (Dec 24, 2019)

Rutherglen1794 said:


> Ah yes. I didn’t watch it, but doesn’t he say that Paul was working toward a different, special resurrection?



Yeah. How the Greek actually goes, the English doesn't follow. The two "resurrection" words are different, they aren't the same. So that should now have a different meaning. What does Paul mean when he says:

Php 3:10 That I may know him, and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, being made conformable unto his death; 
Php 3:11 If by any means I might attain unto the [(out or out of?)] resurrection of the dead.


----------



## Username3000 (Dec 24, 2019)

StephenMartyr said:


> Yeah. How the Greek actually goes, the English doesn't follow. The two "resurrection" words are different, they aren't the same. So that should now have a different meaning. What does Paul mean when he says:
> 
> Php 3:10 That I may know him, and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, being made conformable unto his death;
> Php 3:11 If by any means I might attain unto the [(out or out of?)] resurrection of the dead.


I don’t know Greek. Guaranteed there are able men on this board that could answer that question. Perhaps make a new thread about it?

Does your interest in this Halleluyah translation stand or fall on the answer about this passage?


----------



## C. M. Sheffield (Dec 24, 2019)

These "translators" are superstitious nuts. Case in point, they argue...

“Although the English language is replete with words derived from pagan deities, this translation has attempted to remove most, if not all of these words when attributed to the Almighty, His Son or His people. In a number of cases this requires the restoration of a number of Hebrew terms that have no comparison in English: e.g. qodesh (holy), mishkan (tabernacle), kohen (priest). An explanation of terms is found at the back. All those involved in this project are in agreement that our Creator is so qodesh that it would be blasphemous to use words derived from pagan deities in an attempt to honor Him.”​
So calling God "holy" is blasphemous? Give me a break. You should have nothing to do with such utter nonsense.
​

Reactions: Amen 2


----------



## py3ak (Dec 25, 2019)

This link goes into their reasoning for how they have done things:
https://www.halleluyahscriptures.com/halelluyah-scriptures-the-superior-bible/

One curious feature of the translation is that they apparently feel constrained *not* to follow the example of the NT. Where Paul is comfortable writing "Holy Spirit" in Greek, they prefer to transliterate the Hebrew equivalent (e.g., 1 Cor. 2:13). Likewise, they admit to introducing YHWH into the New Testament in light of the OT.

What that means, in effect, is that their commitment to a very mechanical and superficial interpretation of certain commandments, leads to them changing the word of God (which they claim to be committed not to do) in service of a theory which is refuted by the NT treatment of the OT text. From some of their expressions, I would guess that, like some others, they think of Hebrew as being something of a magical language; but we have not so learned Christ.

Reactions: Like 3


----------



## kodos (Dec 25, 2019)

StephenMartyr said:


> This video is turning out to be interesting. His explanation of Philippians 3:10-11 is disturbing:
> 
> Php 3:10 That I may know him, and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, being made conformable unto his death;
> Php 3:11 If by any means I might attain unto the resurrection of the dead.
> ...



I haven't watched the video, and from the sound of things - I doubt I will.

But as you can can see, the word in verse 11 is a compound word. There are different reasons it might have been chosen by the Holy Spirit. One could be _emphasis_. Another could be _style_. But the infallible rule of interpretation is that Scripture interprets itself. If whatever this man teaches does not resonate with the rest of the Scripture, then it should be discarded. _Especially, _if it is based on a deep dive into the significance of a single word choice. Moisés Silva gives good commentary on this text:

The fact that this is the only attested occurrence of the compound ἐξανάστασις [exanastasis] has created more discussion than it probably deserves. The strong tendency in Hellenistic times to “strengthen” verbs in this way, plus the possibility that Paul may have, consciously or unconsciously, looked for stylistic variety (after using the simple form in v. 10), adequately account for its use. Meyer, who believes the two forms should not be distinguished, suggests that the compound “is to be explained solely from the more vividly imaginative view of the event which the apostle has before him” (i.e., ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς).​
Moisés Silva, Philippians, 2nd ed., Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2005), 169.


----------



## RamistThomist (Dec 25, 2019)

StephenMartyr said:


> He said Baal actually means "Lord".



That's not 100% accurate. Ba'al does sometimes mean lord, but not in the sense that Adonai means lord.

Reactions: Amen 1


----------



## RamistThomist (Dec 25, 2019)

Learn Greek. Learn Hebrew. No way around it. That way you can call people on their B.S. The Hebrew Roots cult is strong in my area and only a knowledge of the languages can really stop them.

Reactions: Like 2 | Amen 2


----------



## kodos (Dec 25, 2019)

BayouHuguenot said:


> Learn Greek. Learn Hebrew. No way around it. That way you can call people on their B.S. The Hebrew Roots cult is strong in my area and only a knowledge of the languages can really stop them.



Excellent. This reminds me of that recent thread regarding educational requirements for ministers.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## PointyHaired Calvinist (Dec 27, 2019)

BayouHuguenot said:


> Learn Greek. Learn Hebrew. No way around it. That way you can call people on their B.S. The Hebrew Roots cult is strong in my area and only a knowledge of the languages can really stop them.


In my Sacred Name influenced days they really pushed the “Baal means Lord so we can’t call Yahweh the Lord” narrative.

My understanding is
Adonai = Lord/Master
Baal = Lord/owner

When you brought up Adonai SNs just say “Adonai is Adonis and used by a pagan deputy so we can’t use it either” then they translate it as Sovereign our Master. How is that different from Lord again? (By the way they usually don’t have a problem with “el” or “Elohim” which were also coopted by pagan deputies, but hate “Adonai” which must be their paranoia about Lord.)

Sacred Name followers prove that “a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.” They’re like Jehovah’s Witnesses in misquoting and cherry picking their scholarship, but none of the really know the original languages.

Reactions: Informative 1


----------



## RamistThomist (Dec 27, 2019)

The problem is that Hebrew uses Adonai. In any case, its an example of the word=concept fallacy.

Reactions: Amen 1


----------

