Skip to main content

Ps 87:5 Strong man born

*Psalm 87:5: The Vav That Shouldn’t Be There* _How Ancient Texts Point to the Strong Man Born in Zion_ --- ### *The Problem in Your Hebrew Bible* *Psalm 87:5 MT*: *וּלְצִיּוֹן יֵאָמַר אִישׁ וְאִישׁ יֻלַּד־בָּהּ וְהוּא יְכוֹנְנֶהָ עֶלְיוֹן* _“And of Zion it shall be said, ‘man and man was born in her,’ and He, the Most High, will establish her.”_ *Grammatical problem*: _’ish ve-’ish_ “man and man” is plural, but _yullad_ “he was born” is singular. *“Man and man he-was-born in her”* makes no sense. The verb doesn’t match the subject. Something broke. And the break is one letter: *וְ* _vav_. --- ### *The Hebrew Idiom: Doubling = Strength* Biblical Hebrew uses repetition for superlatives: **Phrase** **Literal** **Actual Meaning** **קֹדֶשׁ קָדָשִׁים** holy of holies **most holy** **שִׁיר הַשִּׁירִים** song of songs **best song** **עֶבֶד עֲבָדִים** servant of servants **lowest servant** **אֱלֹהֵי הָאֱלֹהִים** God of gods **supreme God** *Remove the vav from Psalm 87:5*: *אִישׁ אִישׁ יֻלַּד־בָּהּ* _’ish ’ish yullad-bah_ *“A Man of men was born in her” = “A Champion, a Strong Man was born in her”* *The vav destroys the idiom.* With vav it means “man and man.” Without vav it means “Mighty Man.” --- ### *What the Ancient Versions Read* The oldest translations don’t have the vav problem. They read it as “Strong Man.” #### *1. Septuagint [LXX] — 3rd century BC Greek* *Μήτηρ Σιων, ἐρεῖ ἄνθρωπος, καὶ ἄνθρωπος ἐγενήθη ἐν αὐτῇ* _“‘Mother Zion,’ a man will say, ‘and a man was born in her’”_ *Two things matter:* 1. *Adds Μήτηρ “Mother”* — Zion is personified as the mother. 2. *Singular “a man was born”* — Not “men.” The LXX sees one birth, one man. #### *2. Peshitta — 2nd century AD Syriac* *ܘܠܨܗܝܘܢ ܢܐܡܪ ܓܒܪܐ ܓܒܪܐ ܐܬܝܠܕ ܒܗ* _“And of Zion it will be said: Mighty man, mighty man was born in her”_ *Syriac doubles for emphasis*: _gavra gavra_ = *“the mightiest man.”* The Peshitta translators ignored the vav. They translated the meaning: *Champion born in Zion.* #### *3. Targum Psalms — Aramaic paraphrase* *ולציון יתאמר מלכא משיחא וגברא יתיליד בה* _“And of Zion it shall be said: ‘King Messiah and a Mighty Man was born in her’”_ *Targum explains the idiom*: _’ish ’ish_ = *Malka Meshicha ve-gavra* — *“King Messiah who IS the Mighty Man.”* One person, two titles. Born from Zion. --- ### *The Pattern: Zion as Mother Birthing the Strong Man* This isn’t isolated. It’s a biblical theme the ancient versions preserve: 1. *Isaiah 66:7-8* — _“Before she was in labor she gave birth... for as soon as Zion travailed she bore her sons.”_ *Zion labors. Gives birth to a nation in one day.* 2. *Galatians 4:26* — _“The Jerusalem above is free, which is our mother.”_ Paul quotes the LXX tradition of Mother Zion. 3. *Revelation 12:5* — _“She bore a male son who is to rule all nations.”_ The woman = Zion. The male son = Messiah, quoting Psalm 2 and Psalm 110. *The Targum to Isaiah 9:6* seals it: *אִתְיְלִיד לַנָא בַּר... וְאִתְקְרֵי שְׁמֵהּ... גִּבָּר אֱלָהָא* _“A son is born to us... and his name is called... Mighty God”_ *גִּבָּר* _gibbar_ = *gavra* = *the Strong Man of Psalm 87:5.* --- ### *Why the Vav Was Inserted* *MT reading*: _’ish ve-’ish_ “man and man” — plural, generic, non-messianic. *LXX/Peshitta/Targum reading*: _’ish ’ish_ “Strong Man” — singular, messianic, specific. *This matches other scribal changes in Psalms:* *Psalm 110:5* — MT: _Adonai at your right hand_. Original: _YHWH at your right hand_. *Psalm 68:30* — MT changes letters to hide “tribute to Yah.” *After 70 AD*, texts that pointed too clearly to a Messiah born in Zion were smoothed. The vav turns “Champion” into “men.” It de-messianizes the verse. *But the verb _yullad_ “he was born” was left singular.* The grammar betrays the edit. --- ### *So Who Is the Mother?* *Zion.* In MT she’s the birthplace: _yullad-bah_ “born in her.” In LXX she’s Μήτηρ Σιων “Mother Zion.” In Targum she births _Malka Meshicha_. In Revelation 12 she births the male son who rules. *The female is Zion/Jerusalem — Israel personified.* *The Strong Man born from her is Messiah.* *Then she births more sons*: Acts 2:41 — 3,000 in one day, fulfilling Isaiah 66:8. --- ### *Putting It Together* *Original Psalm 87:5*: *וּלְצִיּוֹן יֵאָמַר אִישׁ אִישׁ יֻלַּד־בָּהּ וְהוּא יְכוֹנְנֶהָ עֶלְיוֹן* _“And of Zion it shall be said: ‘A Champion was born in her,’ and He, the Most High, will establish her.”_ *One letter — וְ — changed prophecy into platitude.* *Remove it, and the ancient versions agree: Mother Zion births the Mighty Man, King Messiah.* *The Most High then establishes her through Him.* *Psalm 68:35*: _nôrā’ ’ĕlōhîm mimmiqdāšêḵā_ — “God is awesome from your sanctuaries.” Two sanctuaries. Two Zions. Earthly and heavenly. Both mother. Both birth — first the Strong Man, then His sons. *The vav doesn’t belong. The Strong Man does.*

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

153 in Gematria

 Here's a rewritten and tightened version of the blog post draft I gave you earlier. I've kept all the key layers intact but woven in גדי (the young goat/kid = 17) prominently—pairing it beautifully with עגלים (calves/circles = 153) as the two bracketing springs in Ezekiel's vision. This makes the symmetry even clearer and stronger.The Hidden Geometry of 153: Fish, Sons of God, and Two Young AnimalsJohn 21 tells of a night of empty nets turned into an overwhelming catch: exactly 153 large fish, hauled in on the right side, the net miraculously unbroken.Why 153? For centuries this number has intrigued readers. It is no random detail. Layer by layer, Scripture reveals a stunning web of mathematics, gematria, and wordplay—all pointing to resurrection, cleansing, and the great end-time harvest of souls.1. 153 = The 17th Triangular Number153 is the sum of every integer from 1 to 17:1 + 2 + … + 17 = 153This makes it a perfect triangular number—one that forms an equilateral triang...

Replenish the earth

  Here's an integrated discussion that brings together all the insights we've covered: Genesis Chapter 1: A Narrative of Creation and Restoration Martin Luther's Interpretation: Martin Luther, in his theological expositions on Genesis, particularly in his lectures from 1535 to 1545, offered an interpretation that has resonated with some believers regarding the nature of the creation narrative. Luther suggested that the world described in Genesis 1:1 as being created by God was initially perfect. However, he interpreted Genesis 1:2, where it states the earth was "without form and void," as evidence of a subsequent destruction or change from this perfect state. This view implies that what follows in Genesis 1:3-31 is not merely creation but a divine act of restoration or refurbishment. Luther's focus was theological, emphasizing God's omnipotence and love in bringing order from chaos, rather than engaging with modern scientific debates. Hebrew Text and the N...

Old earth v young earth? Wrong question!

Old earth Verses  Young earth ### *Genesis 1: Restoration, Not Stopwatch*   *Young Earth vs Old Earth — What Scripture Actually Says* I’ve been told Genesis 1 settles the age of the earth. I’ve been told it proves “young earth” or proves “old earth.” After looking hard at the Hebrew, I’m convinced we’re asking the wrong question. *Genesis 1 isn’t a stopwatch. It’s a restoration record.* And if we miss that, we miss the point. #### *1. What we _can’t_ prove from Scripture* *Scripture doesn’t date dirt.* _Job 38:4_ *“Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth?”* I wasn’t there. Neither were you. No verse says “the earth is 6,000 years old.” No verse says “the earth is 4.6 billion years old.”   *What Scripture _does_ date is man.* Genealogies from Adam put him ∼4,000 BC. _Luke 3:38_ *“Adam, which was the son of God.”* But Adam is not dirt. _Genesis 2:7_ *“the LORD God formed man of the dust.”* The dust was there first. *So “young earth vs old earth” i...