------------------------------------------

Mihej 5:2 – Oduvijek ili od davnih dana? Ali ti, Betleheme [01035] Efrato [0672], [iako] si malen [06810] među tisućama [0505] Judinih [03063], [ipak] iz tebe će on izaći [03318] (8799) k meni [to jest] da budem vladar [04910] (8802) u Izraelu [ 03478]; čiji su odlasci [04163 - podrijetlo, podrijetlo] [bili] od davnina [06924], oduvijek [03117] [05769].– King James Verson s Strongovim # Ovaj se stih često navodi kao konačan dokaz da je Isus Jahve, Svemogući Bog, budući da se, prema načinu na koji stoji u većini prijevoda, čini da Isus postoji "oduvijek" ili "od vječnosti". Međutim, reproduciramo gore navedeni stih s Strongovim brojevima (koji predstavljaju uključene hebrejske riječi) kako bismo pokazali da stih ne govori da je Isus imao vječnu prošlost, već da je postojao od davnina. Obratite pažnju na Strongove #3117 i 5769. Ova kombinacija su dvije hebrejske riječi, jedna se odnosi na dane ili vrijeme [Yowm - Strongova #3117], a druga se odnosi na trajanje [olam - Strongova #5769] Upotreba i definicija ovih riječi data je na: http://www.biblestudytools.com/Lexicons/Hebrew/heb.cgi?number=03117 http://www.biblestudytools.com/Lexicons/Hebrew/heb.cgi?number=05769 Postoji slična izjava u Ponovljenom zakonu 32:7. Ponovljeni zakon 32:7 Sjeti se [02142] (8798) dana [03117] davnih [05769], razmisli o [0995] (8798) godinama [08141] mnogih [01755] generacija [01755]: pitaj [07592] (8798) svoga oca [01], i on će ti pokazati [05046] (8686) ti; tvoji starci [02205], i oni će ti reći [0559] (8799). — KJV w/ Strongovi #-ovi Ponovno primijetite Strongove #3117 i #5769. Mojsije sigurno nije govorio Izraelcima da se sjećaju vječnosti, jer oni za to nisu bili sposobni. Neki drugi stihovi koji sadrže "yowm olam" su Izaija 63:9,11; Amos 9:11 i Malahija 3:4. Trebalo bi biti jasno da se ni u jednom od ovih stihova ne misli na "dane vječnosti". Proučavajući drugo mjesto u Miheju gdje se koristi ovaj izraz, nalazimo: Pasi svoj narod svojim štapom, stado svoje baštine, koje živi zasebno u šumi, usred plodnih pašnjaka, neka pase; U Bašanu i Gileadu, kao u starim danima [Strongov #3117] [Strongov #5769]. — Mihej 7:14 Očito je da izraz ovdje ne znači dane vječnosti, osim ako netko ne želi vjerovati da je Božji narod, Izrael, postojao od davnina. Neki drugi stihovi su slični, iako su olam i yowm odvojeni: Psalam 77,5. “Olam” se ovdje u KJV prevodi kao “drevna vremena”. Izaija 51:9 “Olam” je preveden kao “stari” u KJV. Strongovi # 3117 i 5769 ponovno se koriste za označavanje, ne vječnosti, već davnih dana. Do sada nismo pronašli apsolutno nijedan tekst koji sadrži i "yowm" i "olam" u odnosu na prošlost koji ima bilo kakvo značenje "bez početka". Ako ne postoji nijedan drugi stih koji sadrži ovaj izraz koji bi nosio misao o vječnoj prošlosti, tada bi se činilo da Mihej 5:2 stoji sam ako bi netko pročitao vječnu prošlost u izrazu koji se tamo koristi. Jedini razlog koji možemo zamisliti zašto ovo čitamo kao "dane vječnosti" je pretpostavka da je Isus Svemogući Bog i da nije imao početak. Usprkos tome, nismo našli mjesta u svetim spisima da se ovaj izraz koristi za Boga, stoga bi argument da bi ovaj izraz trebao glasiti "dani vječnosti" u Miheju 5:2 bio izuzetak. S ovom mišlju na umu, argument da Mihej 5:2 "dokazuje" da Isus nije imao početak je kružni. Pretpostavilo bi se da je Isus Bog, a zatim na temelju ove pretpostavke nadalje pretpostaviti da ovaj izraz govori o "danima vječnosti". Iako u nekim kontekstima hebrejsko *olam* očito znači "vječnost" ili "vječno", to ne znači uvijek vječno. Upotreba dviju riječi zajedno u usporedbi gdje se te dvije riječi koriste drugdje u Bibliji daje nam razloga vjerovati da ovdje ne znači vječnost. Doista, riječ *olam*, kada se koristi za prošlost, vrlo rijetko zapravo znači vječan. To se može vidjeti po njegovoj upotrebi u sljedećim spisima: Postanak 6:4; Ponovljeni zakon 32:7; 1. Samuelova 27,28; Ezra 4:15,19; Job 22:15; Izreke 22:8;23:10; Izaija 51,9; 58:12; 61:4; 63:9,11; Jeremija 6:16; 18:15; 28:8; Jona 2:6; Mihej 7:14; Malahija 3,4, kao i mnogi drugi. Samo u odnosu na Jahvino postojanje u prošlosti, ono poprima značenje vječne prošlosti. (Psalam 90:2) “Čak i tada, još uvijek izražava ideju kontinuiranog, mjerljivog postojanja, a ne stanja neovisnosti o vremenu.” — “Leksička pomoć za Stari zavjet”, pod #5769, Hebrejsko-grčka ključna Biblija za proučavanje

​

Stoga nalazimo da mnogi prijevodi ne prevode Mihej 5:2 s mišlju da je Mesija iz prošlosti vječnosti: Ali ti, o Betleheme iz Efrate, koji si jedan od malih rodova Judinih, iz tebe će mi izaći onaj koji će vladati u Izraelu, čije je porijeklo od davnina, od davnih dana. — Nova revidirana standardna verzija. Ali ti, o Betleheme Efrato, koji si malen među rodovima Judinim, iz tebe će izaći za mene onaj koji će biti vladar u Izraelu, čije je porijeklo od davnina, od davnih dana. — Revidirana standardna verzija Gospodin kaže: "Betlehem Efrata, ti si jedan od najmanjih gradova u Judeji, ali iz tebe ću dovesti vladara za Izrael, čija obiteljska loza seže do davnih vremena." — Današnja engleska verzija Ali ti, Betleheme Efrato, iako si premalen da budeš među vojskama iz Judeje, iz tebe će doći onaj koji će vladati Izraelom za mene. On dolazi iz vrlo starih vremena, iz davnih dana.” — Verzija novog stoljeća Ti si, Betleheme Efrato, premali da bi te uvrstili među Judine gradove. Ipak, od tebe će budući vladar Izraela doći po mene. Njegovo porijeklo seže u daleku prošlost, u davne dane. — Prijevod Božje riječi A ti, Bet-Leheme Efrato, Malo si među glavarima Judinim! Od tebe k Meni on dolazi - da bude vladar u Izraelu, A njegovi dolasci [su] od davnine, iz dana antike. — Youngov doslovni prijevod Ti, stoga, Betleheme Efrato, iako si mali među tisućama Judinih, iz tebe će moj izaći da budeš vladar u Izraelu, čiji su dolasci od davnina, od davnih vremena. — Rotherham Ali ti, Betleheme Efrato, koji si malen među tisućama Judinim, iz tebe će mi izaći onaj koji će biti vladar u Izraelu; čiji su izlasci od davnina, od davnih dana. — Židovsko izdavačko društvo Stoga ne postoji ništa u Miheju 5:2 što bi dalo dokaz da Isus ima vječnu prošlost; doista, kao i mnogi drugi stihovi u Bibliji, argument postaje cirkularan, zapravo govoreći: budući da vjerujemo da je Isus Jahve, vjerujemo da odlomak znači da je Isus iz prošlosti vječnosti, i stoga ovo značenje koje dajemo odlomku jer vjerujemo da je Isus Jahve dokazuje da je Isus Jahve. Međutim, čitajući dalje do Miheja 5:4, nalazimo o Mesiji: "Tada će on stajati i čuvati svoje stado u snazi Jahvinoj, U veličanstvu imena Jahve, Boga svoga, podnijeli su, Jer sada će on biti velik do nakraj zemlje;" (Rotherham) Tako se Jahve naziva unipersonalno "svojim Bogom". Svemogući Bog nema Boga, stoga iz ovih spisa nema razloga da se misli da je Isus Jahve, o kojem se govori kao o "svom Bogu". Prigovor 1 Jedan kritizira našu studiju govoreći: Unatoč mnoštvu modernih prijevoda, čiji rukopisi stoljećima nisu bili dostupni Božjem narodu, i koji ne čuvaju vjerno Božansko ime, Reslightovi pokušaji da utiša svjedočanstvo vječnosti Sina Božjeg u ovom stihu pozivajući se na njihov upitni autoritet kao ispravan način za prijevod "yowm olam" također se smatraju lošima. [Poziva se na nekoliko modernih prijevoda koji ne koriste izraz "od vječnosti"] Nismo sigurni što se misli pod “čiji rukopisi nisu bili dostupni ljudima stoljećima. Koliko je nama poznato, svi navedeni prijevodi koriste masoretski tekst kao osnovu svog prijevoda, isti tekst koji su koristili prevoditelji King James kao i gotovo svi prijevodi. Niti je istina da svi navedeni prijevodi "ne čuvaju vjerno Božje ime" (vidi Rotherham i Young), ali to je nevažno. Nadalje, mi se ne "apeliramo" na ove prijevode, ali oni podupiru zaključak do kojeg smo došli u vezi s upotrebom uključene fraze. Mogli bismo dodati sljedeće prijevode: New Living Translation; Prijevod poruke; Kompletna židovska Biblija; Holman Christian Standard Bible; Nova internacionalna verzija; New International Reader’s Version; Nova međunarodna verzija (UK); Proširena Biblija. Vjerojatno ih ima još. Prigovor 2

​

Tvrdi se da se koristi oko 38 puta sa značenjem "uvijek, neprestano, uvijek i uvijek". Pisac očito govori samo o riječi "yowm", a ne o kombinaciji s riječi "olam", o čemu smo raspravljali. Ovo nije u suprotnosti s onim što govorimo, niti postoji nešto u ovome što bi yowm dalo značenje vječnosti. Međutim, Crosswalkov leksikon daje sljedeće podatke o tome kako je riječ prevedena u verziji kralja Jamesa: dan 2008, vrijeme 64, kronike + (01697) 37, dnevno 44, uvijek 18, godina 14, kontinuirano 10, kada 10, kao 10, dok 8, puni 8 uvijek 4, cijeli 4, uvijek 4, razno 44 18 mjesta gdje je yowm prevedeno u KJV kao "uvijek": Postanak 43:9*,32*; Ponovljeni zakon 4:40*; 18:5*; 19:9*; Jošua 4:24*; 1. Samuelova 2:32*,35*; 28:2*; 1. Kraljevima 5:1*; 11:39*; 2. Ljetopisa 10:17*; 2. Ljetopisa 21:7**; Psalam 23,6*; 37:26*; Jeremija 31:36*; 32:39*; 35:19*. Dodali smo zvjezdice kako bismo istaknuli više o čemu će biti riječi u nastavku. Ni u jednom od ovih slučajeva *yown* se samo po sebi ne prevodi kao "uvijek", ali postoje dvije riječi spojene, a obje riječi su prevedene jednom riječju "uvijek". Oni slučajevi označeni jednom zvjezdicom, dvije riječi prevode se kao "uvijek". Te dvije riječi su: kol ("sve, kao u cjelini onoga o čemu se govori) yowm (dan ili dani), doslovno, svi dani, ili kako bismo vjerojatnije rekli: "svakodnevno", ili kontinuirano. Isti izraz je tako preveden kao "svaki dan" u Psalmu 42:10; 56:2; 72:15; Hošea 12:1. Pažljivo proučavanje ovih 17 slučajeva ovih dviju riječi pokazuje da se one nikada ne koriste u vezi s vječnošću u trojstvenom smislu, to jest, "bez početka ili kraja", već se koriste samo s početnom točkom, iako ne uvijek sa završnom točkom. U Psalmu 23:6 [dvostruka zvjezdica iznad] yowm se koristi s drugom hebrejskom riječi *’orek*, što jednostavno znači duljina vremena. Young to ovako prevodi: Samo me dobrota i dobrota prate sve dane života moga, i stan moj [je] u Domu Jahvinu, dugo vremena! Iako bi se iz ovog stiha moglo dobiti vječnu budućnost, on sigurno ne podupire trojstveni koncept vječnosti što znači bez početka i kraja. Primjećujemo da KVJ deset puta prevodi Yowm kao "stalno": Postanak 6:5; 1. Samuelova 18,29; 2. Samuelova 19,13; 2. Ljetopisa 12:15; Psalam 42,3; 52:1; 140:2; Jeremija 33:18. Opet, u svim ovim slučajevima riječ "kontinuirano" prevodi se iz dvije riječi: kol yowm Opet, pažljivo proučavanje ovih tekstova ne ukazuje na vječnost kako je izražena u trojstvenoj misli bez početka i kraja, već na kontinuirano trajanje u ograničenom vremenu. Yowm je 4 puta preveden kao "uvijek" (Pnz 5:29; 6:24; 14:23; 2. Ljetopisa 18:7) i 4 puta "uvijek" (Pnz 11:1; 28:33; 1. Kraljevima 11:36; 2. Kraljevima 8:19). Opet, u svim ovim slučajevima dvije riječi (kol yowm), a ne jedna, prevode se kao "uvijek" ili "uvijek". Ovi tekstovi ne koriste nužno riječ u trojstvenom smislu “bez početka i kraja”, već s mišlju o neprekidnom trajanju u ograničenom vremenu. Stoga pažljivo ispitivanje upotrebe riječi *yowm* u ovim slučajevima ne podupire navodnu ideju da ta riječ znači vječnost. Prigovor 3: Tvrdi se da postoji i “qedem,” termin za koji se tvrdi da smo ga koristili da se pokušamo usredotočiti na njega u zaobilaženju značenja ajeta. Iako se priznaje da se qedem koristi u vremenskom smislu, tvrdi se da se u Ponovljenom zakonu 33:27 definitivno koristi jednom u Svetom pismu s idejom vječnosti. Tvrdi se da inzistiramo na tome da ne donosimo prosudbe samo na temelju značenja pojma "olam" i da zahtijevamo da se izraz definira korištenjem "yowm olam,". Ali, pitaju nas, zašto se ograničiti na to? Zašto to ne shvatiti kao "mowtsaah yowm olam?" Nadalje se tvrdi da ako nađemo dokaze da se "yowm olam" pojavljuje samo u vremenskim kontekstima, koliko se od tih "yowm olam" odnosi na "mowtsaah" ili izlaske bića za koje se kaže da je (doslovno) "stalno od dana vječnosti?" Ne postoji ništa u našoj prezentaciji što se fokusira na ovu riječ, qedem. Qedem je Strongov #6924, i preveden je u KJV Miheja 5:2 riječju "stari". Qedem ne znači vječan; jedino mjesto gdje se prevodi kao "vječan" u KJV je Ponovljeni zakon 33:27, a čak i tamo se prevodi tako samo zato što govori o Bogu, a ne zbog same riječi. Ovo se također moglo prevesti jednako dobro kao "Drevni bog" ili stari bog. Rotherham prevodi ovaj stih: "Gore je Bog prošlosti, A dolje su Oružje vjekova, – Tako on tjera ispred tebe neprijatelja, I kaže – Uništi!" Douay-Rheims to prenosi: "Njegov je stan gore, a dolje su vječne ruke: on će odbaciti neprijatelja ispred tebe i reći će: Uništi se." ———

​

http://www.biblestudytools.com/Lexicons/Hebrew/heb.cgi?number=06924 Pitaju nas, zašto ograničiti naše ispitivanje na dvije riječi kao što smo to učinili, i zašto to ne bismo učinili: "mowtsaah yowm olam?" Točne riječi korištene u Miheju 5:2 koje su predstavljene u Interlinearu Jaya Greena su ovim redoslijedom: 4162 6924 3117 5769. Strong je ove riječi predstavio kao: 4162: muwtsag (mowtsaah) = prevedeno "čiji izlazi" u KJV 6924: qedem = prevedeno "od davnina" u KJV 3117: yowm = sa 5769 prevedeno "oduvijek" u KJV 5769: olawm = sa 3117 prevedeno "oduvijek" u KJV Dakle, da se ovo proširi izvan dvije razmatrane riječi, jedna bi uključila: “muwtsag qedem yowm olawm”; međutim, ovo stvarno skreće pažnju s dotične fraze, koja se sastoji od samo dvije riječi. Ipak, "mowtsaah" se odnosi na porijeklo, koje samo po sebi ukazuje na početak. ========== http://www.biblestudytools.com/Lexicons/Hebrew/heb.cgi?number=04163 Naravno, ne postoji ništa u Miheju 5:2 što doslovno govori o nekome za čije se “mowtsaah” ili izlaske kaže da su (bukvalno) “stalno od dana vječnosti”. Korištenjem ovog izraza pretpostavili bismo da pisac tvrdi da "qedem" znači "neprestano", kako bi Mihej 5:2 pročitao: "čiji su izlasci neprestano od dana vječnosti", ili nešto slično. Naravno, u stvarnosti ne postoji ništa u riječi “qedem” što ima ovo značenje. Čini se da je ovo pokušaj da se problem skrene s puta i da se skrene pažnja s činjenice da smo pokazali da yowm olam ne znači od dana vječnosti, kao što smo pokazali. ========== http://www.biblestudytools.com/Lexicons/Hebrew/heb.cgi?number=06924 Prigovor #4 Sugerira se da Mihej 5:2 snažno sugerira da biće o kojem se ovdje govori ne prebiva samo u području konačnosti. Nije upitno da biće o kojem se govori nije obitavalo u konačnom carstvu zemlje prije rođenja na zemlji. U stvarnosti, ideja da je boravio u nekom carstvu gdje vrijeme ne postoji mora se iščitati u tekstu. Pretpostaviti da je to ono što to znači dodatno bi iznijelo pitanje: Prebivaju li anđeli koji uvijek [u vječnosti?] lice Božje na nebu žive u ovom istom carstvu, i stoga su također vječna bića? (Matej 18:10) Postoje neki trinitarci koji vjeruju da anđeli postoje u vječnosti gdje navodno ne postoji vrijeme, iako se čini da im nije jasno kako je to moguće. Kao odgovor na ovu nedoumicu, jedna je osoba otišla toliko daleko da je rekla da svi koji će živjeti vječno u navodnom području gdje vrijeme ne postoji zapravo postaju jedno s Bogom tako što postaju Bog! Pa kamo vode sva ovakva rezoniranja? Sve dalje od istine!

​

​

​

​

             -----------------------

Micah 5:2 – From everlasting or from ancient days?

But thou, Bethlehem [01035] Ephratah [0672], [though] thou be little [06810] among the thousands [0505] of Judah [03063], [yet] out of thee shall he come forth [03318] (8799) unto me [that is] to be ruler [04910] (8802) in Israel [03478]; whose goings forth [04163 - descent, ancestry] [have been] from of old [06924], from everlasting [03117] [05769].– King James Verson w/Strong’s #’s

This scripture is often cited as conclusive proof that Jesus is Yahweh God Almighty, since, according to the way it reads in most translations, it appears that Jesus has existed “from everlasting”, or “from eternity.” However, we reproduce the scripture above with Strong’s numbers (representing the Hebrew words involved) in order to demonstrate that the scripture is not saying that Jesus has had an eternal past, but rather that he existed from days of old.

Notice Strong’s #3117 & 5769. This combination is two Hebrew words, one referring to days or time [Yowm - Strong's # 3117] and the other referring to duration [olam - Strong's #5769]

The usage and definition of these words are given at:
http://www.biblestudytools.com/Lexicons/Hebrew/heb.cgi?number=03117
http://www.biblestudytools.com/Lexicons/Hebrew/heb.cgi?number=05769

There is a similar statement in Deuteronomy 32:7.

Deuteronomy 32:7
Remember [02142] (8798) the days [03117] of old [05769], consider [0995] (8798) the years [08141] of many [01755] generations [01755]: ask [07592] (8798) thy father [01], and he will shew [05046] (8686) thee; thy elders [02205], and they will tell [0559] (8799) thee. — KJV w/ Strong’s #’s

Again notice Strong’s #3117 and #5769. Certainly Moses was not telling the Israelites to remember eternity, for they were not capable of such.

Some other scriptures that contain “yowm olam” are Isaiah 63:9,11; Amos 9:11and Malachi 3:4. It should be apparent that “days of eternity” is not meant in any of these scriptures. Examining the other place in Micah where this expression is used, we find:

Shepherd your people with your staff, The flock of your heritage, Who dwell by themselves in a forest, In the midst of fertile pasture land, let them feed; In Bashan and Gilead, as in the days [Strong's #3117] of old [Strong's #5769]. —Micah 7:14

It is apparent the expression here does not mean days of eternity, not unless one wants to believe that God’s people, Israel, has existed from eternity past.

Some other scriptures are similar, although olam and yowm are separated:

Psalm 77:5. “Olam” is rendered “ancient times” here in the KJV

Isaiah 51:9 “Olam” is rendered “old” in the KJV.

Strong’s # 3117 & 5769 are again used to denote, not eternity, but the days of old.

So far we have found absolutely no text that contain both “yowm” and “olam” with reference to the past that has any meaning of “without a beginning”. If there is no other verse containing this expression that would carry the thought of eternal past, then Micah 5:2 would appear to stand alone if one were to read eternal past into the expression used there. The only reason we can think of for reading this as “days of eternity” is on the assumption that Jesus is God Almighty and had no beginning. Nevertheless, we have found no place in the scriptures that this expression is used of God, thus the argument that this expression should read “days of eternity” in Micah 5:2, would be an exception. With this thought in mind, the argument that Micah 5:2 “proves” that Jesus had no beginning is circular. It would assume that Jesus is God, and then based on this assumption, further assume that this expression is speaking of “days of eternity”.

Although in some contexts the Hebrew *olam* evidently means “eternity” or “everlasting”, it does not always mean eternal. The usage of the two words together in comparison where the two words are used elsewhere in Bible gives us reason to believe that here it does not mean eternity.

Indeed, the word *olam*, when used of the past, very seldom actually means eternal. This can be seen by its usage in the following scriptures: Genesis 6:4;Deuteronomy 32:7; 1 Samuel 27:28; Ezra 4:15,19; Job 22:15; Proverbs 22:8;23:10; Isaiah 51:9; 58:12; 61:4; 63:9,11; Jeremiah 6:16; 18:15; 28:8; Jonah 2:6; Micah 7:14; Malachi 3:4, as well as many others.

Only in reference to Yahweh’s existence in the past, does it take on the meaning of eternal past. (Psalm 90:2) “Even then, it still expresses the idea of continued, measurable existence, rather than a state of being independent of time considerations.” — “Lexical Aids to the Old Testament”, under #5769, Hebrew-Greek Key Study Bible

Thus we find that many translations do not render Micah 5:2 with the thought that the Messiah is from eternity past:

But you, O Bethlehem of Ephrathah, who are one of the little clans of Judah, from you shall come forth for me one who is to rule in Israel, whose origin is from of old, from ancient days. — New Revised Standard Version.

But you, O Bethlehem Eph’rathah, who are little to be among the clans of Judah, from you shall come forth for me one who is to be ruler in Israel, whose origin is from of old, from ancient days. — Revised Standard Version

The Lord says, “Bethlehem Ephrathah, you are one of the smallest towns in Judah, but out of you I will bring a ruler for Israel, whose family line goes back to ancient times.” — Today’s English Version

But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though you are too small to be among the army groups from Judah, from you will come one who will rule Israel for me. He comes from very old times, from days long ago.” — New Century Version

You, Bethlehem Ephrathah, are too small to be included among Judah’s cities. Yet, from you Israel’s future ruler will come for me. His origins go back to the distant past, to days long ago. — God’s Word Translation

And thou, Beth-Lehem Ephratah, Little to be among the chiefs of Judah! From thee to Me he cometh forth — to be ruler in Israel, And his comings forth [are] of old, From the days of antiquity. — Young’s Literal Translation

Thou, therefore, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though little to be among the thousands of Judah, out of thee shall Mine come forth to be ruler in Israel, whose comings forth, have been from of old, from the days of age-past time. — Rotherham

But thou, Beth-lehem Ephrathah, which art little to be among the thousands of Judah, out of thee shall one come forth unto Me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth are from of old, from ancient days. — Jewish Publication Society

Thus there is nothing in Micah 5:2 that gives evidence that Jesus has an eternal past; indeed, like many other verses in the Bible, the argument becomes circular, in effect saying: because we believe that Jesus is Yahweh, we believe the passage means that Jesus is from eternity past, and therefore this meaning we give the passage because we believe that Jesus is Yahweh proves that Jesus is Yahweh.

However, reading onward to Micah 5:4, we find of Messiah: “Then shall he stand and tend his flock in the strength of Yahweh, In the excellency of the name of Yahweh his God have they endured, For now shall he be great unto the ends of the earth;” (Rotherham)

Thus Yahweh is called unipersonally “his God”. God Almighty does not have a God, thus there no reason from these scriptures to think Jesus is Yahweh, who is spoken of as “his God”.

Objection 1

One criticizes our study saying:

Despite the plethora of modern translations, whose manuscripts were not available to the people of God for centuries, and that do not faithfully preserve the Divine Name, Reslight’s attempts to mute the witness of the eternity of the Son of God in this verse by appealing to their questionable authority as the right way to translate “yowm olam” are also found wanting. [He appeals to several modern translations that don't use the phrase "from everlasting"]

We are not sure what is meant by “whose manuscripts were not available to the people of for centuries. As far as we know, all of the translations given use the Masoretic text as a basis of their translation, the same text used by the King James Translators as almost all translations. Nor is it true that all of the translations given “do not faithully preserve the Divine Name” (See Rotherham and Young), but this is irrelevant. Further, we do not “appeal” to these translations, but they do support the conclusion we have reached concerning the usage of the phrase involved.

We might add the following translations: New Living Translation; The Message translation; The Complete Jewish Bible; Holman Christian Standard Bible; New Internatinal Version; New International Reader’s Version; New International Version (UK); Amplified Bible. There are probably more.

Objection 2

The claim is made that there are about 38 > times that it is used with the sense “ever, continually, always, and alway.”

The writer is evidently speaking of the word “yowm” alone, not the combination with the word “olam,” as we have been discussing. This does not contradict what we am saying, nor is there anything in this that would give yowm the meaning of eternity.

However, Crosswalk’s Lexicon gives the following counts for how the word is translated in the King James Version:

day 2008, time 64, chronicles + (01697) 37, daily 44, ever 18, year 14, continually 10, when 10, as 10, while 8, full 8 always 4, whole 4, alway 4, miscellaneous 44

The 18 places where yowm is translated in the KJV as “ever”: Genesis 43:9*,32*;Deuteronomy 4:40*; 18:5*; 19:9*; Joshua 4:24*; 1 Samuel 2:32*,35*; 28:2*;1 Kings 5:1*; 11:39*; 2 Chronicles 10:17*; 2 Chronicles 21:7**; Psalm 23:6*; 37:26*; Jeremiah 31:36*; 32:39*; 35:19*.

We have added asterisks to point out more as will be discussed below. In none of these instances is *yown* by itself translated as “ever”, but there are two words put together, and both words are translated by the one word “ever.”

Those instances marked with a single asterisk, two words are translated as “ever.” These two words are: kol (“all, as in the whole of what is being spoken of) yowm (day or days), literally, all the days, or as we would be more likely to say: “daily”, or continously. This same expression is so translated as “daily” in Psalm 42:10; 56:2; 72:15; Hosea 12:1. A careful study of these 17 instances of these two words show that they are never used with reference to eternity in the trinitarian sense, that is, “without beginning or end”, but they are used only with a starting point although not always with an ending point.

In Psalm 23:6 [double asterick above] yowm is used with another Hebrew word *’orek*, which simply means a length of time.

Young translates it this way:

Only — goodness and kindness pursue me, All the days of my life, And my dwelling [is] in the house of Jehovah, For a length of days!

While one could possible get an eternal future out of this verse, it certainly does not support the trinitarian concept of eternity meaning without beginning or end.

We note the the KVJ translates Yowm as “continually” ten times: Genesis 6:5; 1 Samuel 18:29; 2 Samuel 19:13; 2 Chronicles 12:15; Psalm 42:3; 52:1; 140:2;Jeremiah 33:18.

Again, in all of these instance the word “continually” is translated from two words: kol yowm

Again, a carefully study of these texts do not indicate eternity as expressed in the trinitarian thought of without beginning or ending, but rather a continuous duration for a limited time.

Yowm is 4 times translated “always” (Deuteronomy 5:29; 6:24; 14:23; 2 Chronicles 18:7) and 4 times “alway” (Deuteronomy 11:1; 28:33; 1 Kings 11:36;2 Kings 8:19). Again, in all of these instances it is two words (kol yowm), not one, that are translated as “always” or “alway”. These texts do not necessarily use the word in the trinitarian sense of “without beginning or end”, but with the thought of continuous duration for a limited time.

Thus a careful examination of the usage of the word *yowm* in these instances do not support the alleged idea that this word means eternity.

Objection 3:

It is claimed there is also “qedem,” the term that one has claimed that we have used to try to focus on in siderailing the meaning of the verse. While it is acknowledged the qedem is used in a temporal sense, it is claimed that inDeuteronomy 33:27 it is definitely used once in Scripture with the idea of eternity. It is claimed we insist on not making a judgment on the basis of the meaning of the term “olam” alone, and that we require that one define the phrase by using “yowm olam,”. But, we are asked, why limit it to that? Why not understand it as “mowtsaah yowm olam?” Further it is claimed that if we find evidence that “yowm olam” only occurs in temporal contexts, then how many of those “yowm olams” are referring to the “mowtsaah” or goings forth of a being who is said to be (lit.) “continually from the days of eternity?”

There is nothing in our presentation that focuses on this word, qedem. Qedem is Strong’s #6924, and it translated in the KJV of Micah 5:2 by the word “old.”

Qedem does not mean eternal; the only place it is rendered “eternal” in the KJV isDeuteronomy 33:27, and even there it is rendered so only because it is speaking of God, not because of the word itself. This could have been also rendered just as well as “Ancient God” or God of old. Rotherham translates this verse: “Above, is the God of aforetime, And, beneath, are the Arms of the ages, – So he driveth before thee the foe, And doth say – Destroy!” The Douay-Rheims renders it: “His dwelling is above, and underneath are the everlasting arms: he shall cast out the enemy from before thee, and shall say: Be thou brought to nought.”
———
http://www.biblestudytools.com/Lexicons/Hebrew/heb.cgi?number=06924

We are asked, why limit our examination to the two words as we did, and why not make it: “mowtsaah yowm olam?” The exact words used in Micah 5:2 as represented in Jay Green’s Interlinear are in this order: 4162 6924 3117 5769. These words are represented by Strong as:

4162: muwtsag (mowtsaah) = rendered “whose goings forth” in the KJV 6924: qedem = rendered “have been from of old” in the KJV
3117: yowm = with 5769 rendered “from everlasting” in the KJV
5769: olawm = with 3117 rendered “from everlasting” in the KJV

Thus to extend this beyond the two words considered, one would include: “muwtsag qedem yowm olawm”; however, this really sidetracks attention from the phrase in question, which is only two words. Nevertheless, “mowtsaah” refers to origin, which itself indicates a beginning.
==========
http://www.biblestudytools.com/Lexicons/Hebrew/heb.cgi?number=04163

Of course, there is nothing in Micah 5:2 that literally speaks of one whose “mowtsaah” or goings forth are said to be (lit.) “continually from days of eternity.” By using this expression we would assume that the writer is claiming that “qedem” means “continually”, so as to make Micah 5:2 read: “whose goings forth are continually from days of eternity”, or something of this nature. Of course, in reality there is nothing in the word “qedem” that has this meaning. This appears to be an attempt to sidetrack the issue, and turn one’s attention away from the fact that we have shown that yowm olam does not mean from the days of eternity, as we have demonstrated.
==========
http://www.biblestudytools.com/Lexicons/Hebrew/heb.cgi?number=06924

Objection #4

It is suggested that Micah 5:2 strongly suggests that the being spoken of here does not dwell solely in the realm of finiteness.

That the being spoken of does was not dwelling in the finite realm of the earth before being born on earth is not in question. In reality, the idea that he was dwelling in some realm where time does not exist has to be read into the text. To assume that this is what it means would further bring forth the question: Do the angels who always [in eternity?] behold the face of God in heaven dwell in this same realm, and are thus also eternal beings? (Matthew 18:10) There are some trinitarians who do believe that the angels exist in eternity where supposedly time does not exist, although they seem to be vague about how this is possible. In response to this quandry, one person went so far as to say that all who will live eternally in the supposed realm where time does not exist actually become one with God in that they become God! So where does all this kind of reasoning lead to? Farther and farther away from the truth!

​

​

​