One word of caution is that commentary can be mistaken at places. They are just men. I have noticed some errors in the commentary I have read on this very verse. For example, The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge wrongly states that the teil (tilia) tree is an "evergreen" (the TSK was not the originator nor alone in repeating this error) --
or, when it is returned, and hath been broused. teil-tree. The teil-tree is the linden or lime-tree, a species very common in Palestine; the leaf of which resembles that of the laurel, and its flower that of the olive. But the original ailah, which our translators render the oak, (but here distinguished from allon, the oak,) and Bp. Lowth the ilex, in ch. 1:29, 30, probably denotes, as Celsius contends, the terebinth. It is an evergreen of moderate size, but having the top and branches large in proportion to the trunk;...
When is an oak tree not an oak tree?
Discussion in 'Bible Versions & Translations' started by franklinmonroe, Jul 31, 2008.
Page 2 of 4
-
-
But we'd really like to see your Beza, Kimchi, Jarchi, and Josephus' evidence (or at least the precise references with volume title and pages). -
The objection that the KJB translators made a mistake is one of the silliest remarks ever. Not that they are infallable, but to discredit such men of degree is just plain simple mindedness.
Where has it ever been established that the wealthy of Isaiah's day could NOT have the teil trees imported to line there entranceways into the gates of their palaces???? ***Only in the convoluted minds of those who want to discredit the word of God.
By means of translation, the teil tree does not harm to the text, neither does the oak.:godisgood: -
Read my statements over again and try to leave definition and the Holy Ghost out and you would be justified. -
But notice that Jarchi, Ezra, and Kimichi also think that the "tenth" are ten kings (as translated in the Bishops' Bible, cited in my previous post). Do you agree with these commentators in their interpretation of this, too? Gill seems to disagree with them ("wherefore the words are to be understood of a few persons, a remnant"). As promised, I happily include below Gill's complete comments for Isaiah 6:13 (his bolds, my underline) --But yet in it [shall be] a tenth…So, the speculations of Jarchi, Ezra, and Kimichi are no more likely to be correct about the exact location and the kind of trees in this verse than they were about the meaning of "tenth". The absence of Aben Ezra at the point of "interpret the word as we do" may indicate that he had a yet different opinion than the Targum, Jarchi and Kimichi. Notice also the Targum (ancient Jewish commentary) has "elm" not "teil".
Which some understand of ten kings that should reign over Judah from this time, the death of Uzziah, unto the captivity, as Jarchi and Aben Ezra observe; and which are, as Kimchi reckons them, as follows, Jotham, Ahaz, Hezekiah, Manasseh, Amon, Josiah, Jehoahaz, Jehoiakim, Jehoiachin, Zedekiah; but the prophecy, as we have seen, respects not the captivity of the Jews in Babylon, but their present one; wherefore the words are to be understood of a few persons, a remnant, according to the election of grace, that should be called, and saved amidst all the blindness, darkness, and destruction that should come upon that people; and may be illustrated by the words of the apostle in (Romans 11:5) and these chosen, called, and saved ones, are the "tenth", that is, the Lord's tenth, as the words may be rendered. To this sense the Targum agrees,
and there shall be left in it righteous persons, one out of ten;though indeed the Christians were not left in Jerusalem when it was destroyed, but were called out of it just before, and were preserved from that ruin.
And [it] shall return, and shall be eaten;
or "be for burning". I should choose to render it, "it shall return, and be burnt"; that is, it shall be burnt again; it was burnt a first time by Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon, and his army, (Jeremiah 52:13) and a second time by Titus Vespasian, to which this prophecy refers:
as a teil tree, and as an oak, whose substance [is] in them, when they cast [their leaves];
the word "Beshallecheth", which we render, "when they cast their leaves", is by some, as Jarchi, Aben Ezra, and Kimchi observe, thought to be the name of a gate in Jerusalem, called "Shallecheth", from which a causeway went towards the king's palace, from whence it had its name, (1 Chronicles 26:16) and along which causeway, as is supposed, were planted teil trees and oaks, which are here referred to. But the Targum, Jarchi, and Kimchi, interpret the word as we do, of casting their leaves: and the sense seems to be this; that as the teil tree and oak, when they cast their leaves in autumn, and look as if they were dry, withered, and dead, yet have a substance in them, and in spring appear alive and green, and flourishing again; so the Jews, notwithstanding their miserable destruction by the Romans, when they were stripped of all their riches and glory, yet were not utterly consumed as a people, but remained an entire distinct people, and do so to this day, among the nations of the world; though, like a dry withered trunk of a tree, without verdure or beauty; the reason of this follows: so, or "because",
the holy seed [shall be] the substance thereof;
that is, they shall subsist, or continue a distinct people, though in this miserable condition; because there is a "holy seed", or a certain number, whom God has chosen to be holy, that is to arise from them, and will be called and converted in the latter day; hence they have a substance, a subsistence, and shall remain till that comes, and that chosen remnant is called and saved, (Romans 11:25,26). The Targum is,
as the elm and oak, when their leaves fall, and are like to dry "trees", and yet are moist to raise up seed from them; so the captivities of Israel shall be gathered, and shall return to their land; for the seed which is holy is their plantation.Some, interpreting the passage of the Babylonish captivity, by the "holy seed" understand the Messiah. See (Luke 1:35). -
-
The specific tree is not exactly mentioned either, rather two trees which carry the same behavioral patterns are made to compare what will happen in the future.
Rememeber, many, many times the Bible makes reference to actual people, places, and things, all the while exacting out prophetic occurences. This passage is no exception.:godisgood: -
-
-
Also of note, since turpentine came from the teil and was used as fuel for fire and cleansing, along with the oak known for it's strength, there is much can be applied through the mention of these two trees.
Using references show how these trees could never have been a teil tree and I'll show you where they are mentioned as the other trees as well.:laugh:
I think you're looking for hairs to split( or should I have said logs?) rather than finding the word of God to be beautiful. -
"Types" are not specific trees, but types of trees.:laugh:
-
Notice Hosea 4:13 (KJV) --
They sacrifice upon the tops of the mountains, and burn incense upon the hills, under oaks and poplars and elms, because the shadow thereof [is] good: therefore your daughters shall commit whoredom, and your spouses shall commit adultery.When is an oak tree not an oak tree? When it's an elm tree, of course. The underlying Hebrew word again is 'elah (Strong's #424) which when it is the only tree named in an AV verse it is translated as "oak", but the two times it is in a verse along with 'allown (Strong's #437 "oak" here and always in the KJV) it has become the "teil" (Isaiah 6:13) and now the "elm" tree.
But most 'modern' versions render 'elah as "terebinth", and so did some very early versions for example --
On the heedis of mounteyns thei maden sacrifice, and on the litil hillis thei brenten encense vndur an ook, and a popeler, and terebynte, for the schadewe therof was good. Therfor youre douytris schulen do fornicacioun, and youre wyues schulen be auoutressis. (Wycliffe 1380)They seemed to have again followed the Bishops' Bible. So, in Hosea 4:13 'elah does not get to be an "oak tree" but instead becomes the "elm".
On the tops of the mountains they sacrifice, And on the hills they burn incense, Under the oak, and the poplar, and the terebinth, Because their shade is pleasant. Therefore your daughters commit fornication, And your daughters–in–law commit adultery; (Noyes 1869)
On tops of the mountains they do sacrifice, And on the hills they make perfume, Under oak, and poplar, and terebinth, For good `is' its shade. (Young 1898)
They sacrifice on the mountaintops and burn offerings on the hills, under oak, poplar and terebinth, where the shade is pleasant. Therefore your daughters turn to prostitution and your daughters-in-law to adultery. (NIV 1978) -
-
I've read the posts in this thread. And, I may I ask, "Why is this important?" Although I really want to say, "Who cares?" This KJV verses other translations debate brings out such quibbling over issues that, in the end, will not matter. I can't see wasting a time debating over a tree. I don't get it.
-
But yet in it [shall be] a tenth, and [it] shall return, and shall be eaten: as a teil tree, and as an oak, whose substance [is] in them, when they cast [their leaves: so] the holy seed [shall be] the substance thereof. (Isaiah 6:13, KJV)Basically, the simile in Isaiah 6:13 seems to be the "substance" of the prophetic seed is "as" the "substance" of a natural tree. It is a comparison of these two substances. The "substance" of the spiritual seed is NOT stated to be the actual "substance" of a physical woody plant, but only similar to it in character. The inserted English words of the KJV "so" and "shall be" makes it even more clear that the seed's "substance" will be like the tree's "substance" in the future (but it is not at the present). -
I was curious as what a teil tree was, so I did some searching and reading. That research led me to some interesting facts about the tilia species; one piece of data about the tilia (teil) was that it isn't indigenous to the Middle East, which made me wonder why would this tree mentioned by Isaiah. I uncovered the Hebrew behind the English words; this led to learning about the terebinth tree and that this word held connections to other passages. Sometimes the points that another poster makes causes me to learn about related or even unrelated things; cross-referencing other verses that perhaps I was not intimately familiar with before. I saw several interpretations in commentaries.
So, what are the KJV translators telling us with their rendering that is different than other versions? Can you explain the unique justification for "teil" in Isaiah 6:13, its' sole occurrence? Are the very words of Scripture important? -
Personally, I haven't learned anything that is edifying from reading these posts. But, y'all have fun.
-
Appreciate what you thought, only you thought wrong.:thumbsup: -
Nope, the metaphor is the return of the remnant from being considered dead and found alive which is treferenced by the fallen leaves and the return of spring whcih causes the bud to spring forth.. Although there is a simile of the subtance in the trees regarding the substance being the holy seed.
When the light of His word warms the heart of a sinner to a place of repentence, that whcih was dead in tresspasses and sins becomes alive in the newness of life.
The metaphor being that salvation is a type of "Spring" in the heart of the new born child of God.
The words of Isaiah are very deep in spiritual truths!:godisgood: -
I appreciate the discussion. It has helped me to recognize the truths hidden in the O.T. about New Testament truths!:godisgood: :thumbsup: :godisgood:
Page 2 of 4