Did Melchizedek pay tithes to Abraham? Logos 5 says, Yes!
According to Logos 5's new Referent Database, Melchizedek paid tithes to Abraham in Genesis 14:20, rather than the other way around (which is, of course, how it happened, Hebrews 7:2). Right click on the pronouns "he" and "him" in Gen. 14:20 to see the person mislabeled.
This is simply a mistake in the pronoun tagging, I trust (and not some new doctrine!). But it got me to thinking how this error may affect a study of Melchizedek to the uninformed. Look up Melchizedek with Bible Facts and notice the REFERRED TO AS section.
Melchizedek is listed as the implied subject of the verb 13x, and by pronoun reference 5x. Yet, if one counts the pronouns used in the three verses listed (Gen. 14:18; Heb. 7:2, 4), we find one usage in Gen. 14:18, NO USES in Heb. 7:2 (unless "To whom" and "which is" are untagged pronouns), and NO USES in Heb. 7:4. But back in Genesis 14:19 there is one "he" and another "he" in Gen. 14:20.
Under the "REFERRED TO AS" section, Melchizedek is not listed as "this man," though that is a referent in Heb. 7:4 (unless that is counted as the implied subject of the verb?). He is referred to as "King of Salem" (Gen. 14:18), but the "King of Salem references in Heb. 7:1 and 7:2 are not counted. "King (1x)" (Heb. 7:1) shows up. But He is not listed as "King of righteousness" or "King of peace" (as in Heb. 7:2).
This is only a small sampling of the concerns. But it is enough to show that we cannot do an accurate search for Melchizedek by referent, nor can we depend upon the counts shown. I was under the impression that the "REFERRED TO AS" was supposed to be exhaustive, not merely representative. Am I mistaken?
While a good effort has been put forth on the part of Logos, we must remember that inerrancy applies to the Scripture, not to Logos.
Core i7-2630QM CPU 2.00 GHz, 8 GB RAM, 64-Bit Windows 7 Professional SP1
Comments
-
Tommy Miller said:
While a good effort has been put forth on the part of Logos, we must remember that inerrancy applies to the Scripture, not to Logos.
Our data, and hence research, are as good as the level of accuracy of our tools. I always prefer quality data over quantity; however, with today's technology, I don't see why Logos can't provide exhaustive referents.
0 -
Tommy Miller said:
Right click on the pronouns "he" and "him" in Gen. 14:20 to see the person mislabeled.
This is simply a mistake in the pronoun tagging,
I don't see where the referents are indicating that Melchizedek paid a tithe to Abraham. The referents are correct for Gen 14:20b, but is not for 14:20c, where the NIV translates it as..."Then Abram gave him a tenth of everything." The "him" points to Abram, as if he gave himself a tenth. Good thing our modern English translations,such as NIV, ESV, NLT, and others, are clear about who gave to whom.
The NLT, my favorite translation when I read the Old Testament, says:
"Then Abram gave Melchizedek a tenth of all the goods he had recovered."
Cheers,
David
0 -
David Bailey said:
Good thing our modern English translations,such as NIV, ESV, NLT, and others, are clear about who gave to whom.
Who's on first? [;)]george
gfsomselיְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן
0 -
I struck out before I began to play & consequently never made it to first base. Maybe I should take a swing and cry foul.
0 -
The same issue was brought up a few months ago as well:
0 -
Bro.[Apostle} George,
Bootjack.
one of you can stand on the plate, get hit with the pitch, the one hit gets to go to first base, the other is the runner fr the batter....then the real question can become "Who's on first?" since matter cannot occupy the same space as other matter, one will have to get called out.....
DISCLAIMER: What you do on YOUR computer is your doing.
0 -
George Somsel said:
Who's on first?David Bailey said:Good thing our modern English translations,such as NIV, ESV, NLT, and others, are clear about who gave to whom.
I struck out with the curve balls thrown. [*-)]
0 -
Yes, this is an error in the referent annotation. We've fixed it internally: that fix should get shipped sometime in the next month or so.
0 -
Room4more said:
Bro.[Apostle} George,
Bootjack.
one of you can stand on the plate, get hit with the pitch, the one hit gets to go to first base, the other is the runner fr the batter....then the real question can become "Who's on first?" since matter cannot occupy the same space as other matter, one will have to get called out.....
For the benefit of those not familiar with the famous comedy skit
george
gfsomselיְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן
0 -
i have always loved this skit!George Somsel said:For the benefit of those not familiar with the famous comedy skit
0 -
Thanks so much, George! Unfortunately, now I feel my age! *smile* But! I'm still smiling! Great memories, eh??
Thanks for the memories!
Philippians 4: 4 Rejoice in the Lord always; again I will say, Rejoice. 5 Let your reasonableness be known to everyone. The Lord is at hand..........
0 -
Sean Boisen said:
Yes, this is an error in the referent annotation. We've fixed it internally: that fix should get shipped sometime in the next month or so.
It seems that this issue hasn't been completely fixed.
I still see Gen 14:20c in error. The verse states "And he gave him a tithe of all."
L5 still shows "he" as Melchizedek and "him" as Abraham (when you right-click on the word). So, L5 still has Melchizedek giving Abraham a tithe.
0 -
GeoPappas said:
It seems that this issue hasn't been completely fixed.
Yes. The LHB phrase "gave him" is still showing that Melchizedek gave Abram. The interlinears take their cue from that
Dave
===Windows 11 & Android 13
0 -
This is an interesting problem. I'm referring to Logos' work, effectively becoming a commentary with nameless authorship (a team, as Bob calls it).
I was happily reading BAR Nov/Dec 1982 where it said Hiram was doing bronze on the Jordan plain (1 KI 7.45-46). That caught my eye due to the geology (sand/clay process), the question of where Hiram was getting the tin, and most importantly why he was doing it on the Jordan plain far from 'home'?
Turning to my trusty Logos5, Logos insisted, no, it was Solomon (through kingly delegation) doing the bronze work on the Jordan plain. Of course, the answer turned on 'king' ... which one? 2 CH 4.16 solved it by dumping it.
"If myth is ideology in narrative form, then scholarship is myth with footnotes." B. Lincolm 1999.
0 -
Dave Hooton said:GeoPappas said:
It seems that this issue hasn't been completely fixed.
Yes. The LHB phrase "gave him" is still showing that Melchizedek gave Abram. The interlinears take their cue from that
Yes, it appears the annotation here is still incorrect. I'll make sure it gets fixed.
0 -
Thanks, Sean
Dave
===Windows 11 & Android 13
0 -
Is there more information on this topic. When I read Genesis 14.....the way it’s worded, it appears Melchizedek paid tithes to Abraham.
That being said....how do we handle the wording in Hebrews 7.
Trying to find this view on the internet is nearly impossible.
Thanks.
0 -
Denise said:
I'm referring to Logos' work, effectively becoming a commentary with nameless authorship (a team, as Bob calls it).
Given the lack of reporting of obvious errors ... I find this troubling and very consciously fight against the tendency to believe the data presented.
Orthodox Bishop Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."; Orthodox proverb: "We know where the Church is, we do not know where it is not."
0 -
James Caldwell said:
Is there more information on this topic. When I read Genesis 14.....the way it’s worded, it appears Melchizedek paid tithes to Abraham.
That being said....how do we handle the wording in Hebrews 7.
Trying to find this view on the internet is nearly impossible.
Thanks.
Not sure your question. Gen 14 doesn't identify the referrents; ergo opinions. The major translations (LXX, Syriac, and then Latin) similarly avoid identification. Jewish tradition as in the Targums, and then later discussed by Jerome and Ephrem, solved the problem by identifying Shem as Melchi Sedek (Shem living until Isaac). The Babylonian Talmud makes it clear why Shem is significant (b. Ned. 3:11g).
Heb 7, interestingly, doesn't follow that tradition.
"If myth is ideology in narrative form, then scholarship is myth with footnotes." B. Lincolm 1999.
0 -
MJ. Smith said:
I find this troubling and very consciously fight against the tendency to believe the data presented.
I avoid the fray by having never used any of the pre-masticated datasets fabricated by FL. I suppose it helps that I mostly use L3...and that I generally prefer to chew my own food.
ASUS ProArt x570s Creator, AMD R9 5950x, HyperX 64gb 3600 RAM, ASUS Strix RTX 2080 ti
"The Unbelievable Work...believe it or not." Little children...Biblical prophecy is not Christianity's friend.
0 -
James Caldwell said:
Is there more information on this topic. When I read Genesis 14.....the way it’s worded, it appears Melchizedek paid tithes to Abraham.
That being said....how do we handle the wording in Hebrews 7.
Trying to find this view on the internet is nearly impossible.
Thanks.
Just to be clear, James, this thread started based on an earlier error in Logos annotation (now fixed). The Hebrew is ambiguous, with "___ gave him a tenth of everything", without an explicit subject and a pronoun as the object. Many modern translations interpret the subject as Abraham, consistent with Heb 7:2: you can see from the Text Comparison tool, and Logos' annotation represents the same perspective. I'd recommend a Passage Guide on Gen 14:20 to dig into commentaries and their views on this passage.
0 -
James Caldwell said:
When I read Genesis 14.....the way it’s worded, it appears Melchizedek paid tithes to Abraham.
As most translations correctly use "him" for the Hebrew pronoun, we have to deduce that "him" refers to Melchizedek in the context. But it is tagged as Melchizedek in reverse interlinear bibles. The ones that translate it as "Melchizedek" (for clarity) are NET, NLT, CEV, GNB, Living, and NCV - even The Message translates as "him".
The Greek pronoun in Hebrews 7:2 is treated similarly. Only NLT, God's Word, Living, and Passion translate as "Melchizedek".
The part of v.2 that explains the name (including v.3) is without pronouns in the Greek and an English pronoun is inserted several times. A few bibles insert "Melchizedek" at the start for clarity e.g. "Melchizedek means..."
Dave
===Windows 11 & Android 13
0
