In the movie Twilight Edward is a hundred-plus-year-old vampire with the emotional development of a seventeen-year-old boy.  Robert Pattinson plays Edward a little bipolar, sometimes the wise or world-weary centenarian at other times the soulful or petulant teen.  “You know, your mood swings are kind of giving me whiplash,” Bella (Kristen Stewart) says.  Mr. Pattinson’s acting choices remind me how I thought Jesus played y^ehôvâh.

	The Long Name of God
yehôvâh	The Lord (yehôvâh, יהוה), the Lord (yehôvâh, יהוה), the compassionate and gracious God, slow to anger, and abounding in loyal love and faithfulness, keeping loyal love for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin. Exodus 34:6, 7a (NET)	But he by no means leaves the guilty unpunished, responding to the transgression of fathers by dealing with children and children’s children, to the third and fourth generation. Exodus 34:7b (NET)
	First Advent	Second Advent
Jesus	Here is my servant whom I have chosen the one I love, in whom I take great delight.  I will put my Spirit on him, and he will proclaim justice to the nations.  He will not quarrel or cry out, nor will anyone hear his voice in the streets.  He will not break a bruised reed or extinguish a smoldering wick, until he brings justice to victory.  And in his name the Gentiles will hope. Matthew 12:18-21 (NET)	He is dressed in clothing dipped in blood, and he is called the Word of God.  The armies that are in heaven, dressed in white, clean, fine linen, were following him on white horses.  From his mouth extends a sharp sword, so that with it he can strike the nations.  He will rule them with an iron rod, and he stomps the winepress of the furious wrath of God, the All-Powerful. Revelation 19:13-15 (NET)

This understanding was part and parcel of the deal I made when I returned from atheism.  I became an atheist because I could no longer believe in an angry punishing god.  The idea that his wrath was deferred until the end offered me a window of opportunity to believe again.  Of course, the idea that Jesus was an actor (ὑποκριτής) playing y^ehôvâh doesn’t sit so well with me these days.

The Greek word translated rule in Revelation 19:15 above is ποιμανεῖ (a form of ποιμαίνω; shepherd).  After assembling all the chief priests and experts in the law, [King Herod] asked them where the Christ was to be born.  “In Bethlehem of Judea,” they said, “for it is written this way by the prophet: ‘And you, Bethlehem, in the land of Judah, are in no way least among the rulers (ἡγεμόσιν, a form of ἡγεμών) of Judah, for out of you will come a ruler (ἡγούμενος, a form of ἡγέομαι) who will shepherd (ποιμανεῖ, a form of ποιμαίνω) my people Israel.’”^[1]  But I didn’t make too much of it at first.

I found the following more troubling: And to the one who conquers and who continues in my deeds until the end, I will give him authority over the nations – he will rule (ποιμανεῖ, a form of ποιμαίνω) them with an iron rod and like clay jars he will break them to pieces, just as I have received the right to rule from my Father – and I will give him the morning star.^[2]  Who conquers the world (1 John 5:1-5 NET)?

Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ has been fathered by God, and everyone who loves the father loves the child fathered by him.  By this we know that we love the children of God: whenever we love God and obey (ποιῶμεν, a form of ποιέω) his commandments.  For this is the love of God: that we keep his commandments. And his commandments do not weigh us down, because everyone who has been fathered by God conquers (νικᾷ, a form of νικάω) the world.  This is the conquering power (νίκη, a form of νίκη) that has conquered (νικήσασα, another form of νικάω) the world: our faith.  Now who is the person who has conquered (νικῶν, another form of νικάω) the world except the one who believes that Jesus is the Son of God?

The words, to the one who conquers, are the translation of νικῶν (another form of νικάω) in Revelation 2:26 (NET).  I take continues in my deeds to mean the deeds which have been done in God, the deeds which flow from the love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control of the Holy Spirit.  I wondered how believing that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and living by the Spirit qualified someone to rule the nations and break them to pieces like clay jars.  Here again, rule is shepherd in Greek.

This time I pursued it.  A note in the NET (90) informs that, he will rule them with an iron rod and like clay jars he will break them to pieces, is a quotation of Psalm 2:9.  Note 26 on Psalm 2:9 after the words, You will break them, reads: “The LXX reads ‘you will shepherd them.’  This reading, quoted in the Greek text of the NT in Rev 2:27; 12:5; 19:15, assumes a different vocalization of the consonantal Hebrew text and understands the verb as רָעָה (ra’ah, ‘to shepherd’) rather than רָעָע (ra’a’, ‘to break’).  But the presence of נָפַץ (nafats, ‘to smash’) in the next line strongly favors the MT vocalization.”

The Hebrew words רָעָה (ra’ah H7462) and רָעָע (ra’a’ H7489) are apparently homographs in some forms, words that are spelled the same but have different meanings.  We determine their meanings primarily by context: The wind blows my hair as I wind my watch.  Here are some of the instances in the Psalms.

Reference	Hebrew	NET	Strong’s Number
Psalm 2:9	תרעם	break	H7489
Psalm 22:16	מרעים	evil men	H7489
Psalm 27:2	מרעים	evil men	H7489
Psalm 28:9	ורעם	Care for them like a shepherd	H7462
Psalm 37:9	מרעים	Wicked	H7489
Psalm 49:14	ירעם	as their shepherd	H7462
Psalm 64:2	מרעים	evil men	H7489
Psalm 78:72	וירעם	David cared for	H7462
Psalm 92:11	מרעים	the defeated cries of the evil foes	H7489

This is where accountability comes into play for me.  I can’t stand before Jesus and tell Him (Revelation 1:12-20 NET) He quoted an erroneous translation of Psalm 2:9 in Revelation 2:27 but the Masoretes corrected his mistake.  Don’t get me wrong.  I thoroughly appreciate the notes in the NET.  I long for more.  But I can’t follow the translators on this point.

Jesus said shepherd (ποιμανεῖ, a form of ποιμαίνω).  The Septuagint implies that the original Hebrew word was shepherd (ποιμανεῖς, another form of ποιμαίνω) before Israel rejected Jesus as Messiah.

NET	Parallel Greek	Septuagint
he will rule them with an iron rod Revelation 2:27a	καὶ ποιμανεῖ αὐτοὺς ἐν ράβδῳ σιδηρᾷ Revelation 2:27a	ποιμανεῖς αὐτοὺς ἐν ῥάβδῳ σιδηρᾷ Psalm 2:9a

I think the Masoretes changed the word with vowel points.  Their motive^[3] seems fairly obvious, to invalidate Jesus as Messiah: Jesus did not break the Gentile nations with an iron scepter nor smash them like a potter’s jar, therefore Jesus was not the Messiah.  But I’m not convinced that believing He will return to do that is the best retort.  Perhaps it is the human religious mind’s last desperate hope for vindication.  Granted, accepting shepherd as the correct homograph in Psalm 2:9 won’t establish that.  Shepherd was used nearly as ironically in Psalm 49:14 (NET):

[Fools] will travel to Sheol like sheep, with death as their shepherd.  The godly will rule over them when the day of vindication dawns; Sheol will consume their bodies and they will no longer live in impressive houses.

But it opens the door to consider other homographs for nâphats (תנפצם) since it caused the NET translators to favor the Masoretes over Jesus.

I’ll turn my attention to a more thorough consideration of ὡς τὰ σκεύη τὰ κεραμικὰ συντρίβεται (like clay jars he will break them to pieces) in Revelation.  My contention is that the translation of the Greek has been shaded significantly to conform to the image of Jesus using his shepherd’s rod^[4] to shatter the nations like fired pottery in Psalm 2:9 of the Masoretic text.  This shading didn’t begin with the NET translators.

The King James translators rendered it, as the vessels of a potter shall they be broken to shivers.  There is a word for potter in Greek: Has the potter (κεραμεὺς) no right to make from the same lump of clay one vessel for special use and another for ordinary use?^[5]  The translators of the NET were right to change the translation of κεραμικὰ (a form of κεραμικός) from of a potter to clay.  My electronic edition of Strong’s Concordance numbers broken and to shivers as if two forms of συντρίβω followed one after the other in the Greek text.  But even in the textus receptus συντρίβεται is the only instance of a form of συντρίβω in Revelation 2:27.

The Greek word σκεύη (a form of σκεῦος) with no modifier was translated property in Matthew 12:29 and Mark 3:27 (NET) and goods in Luke 17:31 (NET).  All are finished products, no doubt.  The other occurrences are modified in some way.

Reference	NET	Parallel Greek
Romans 9:22	objects of wrath	σκεύη ὀργῆς
Romans 9:23	objects of mercy	σκεύη ἐλέους
2 Timothy 2:20	gold and silver vessels	σκεύη χρυσᾶ καὶ ἀργυρᾶ
Hebrews 9:21	utensils of worship	σκεύη τῆς λειτουργίας

It occurs to me to ask what the Holy Spirit would need to say beyond σκεύη τὰ κεραμικὰ (objects, vessels, utensils or jars of clay) to make us understand that these objects, vessels, utensils or jars are still malleable, made of clay?  [6/11/16: In the NET it may be ἐν ὀστρακίνοις σκεύεσιν or ὀστράκινα (a form of ὀστράκινος).]  In fact, isn’t it the translation—broken to shivers—which forces us to think otherwise?  Why was συντρίβεται (a form of συντρίβω) translated broken to shivers (KJV) or break them to pieces (NET)?  Another form was translated crush (bruise, KJV) in Paul’s letter to the Romans (16:20a NET):

The God of peace will quickly crush (συντρίψει, another form of συντρίβω) Satan under your feet.

To crush is an apt description of what a potter does as he begins to refashion a ruined vessel of clay.

Now while Jesus was in Bethany at the house of Simon the leper, reclining at the table, a woman came with an alabaster jar (ἀλάβαστρον) of costly aromatic oil from pure nard.  After breaking open (συντρίψασα, another form of συντρίβω) the jar (ἀλάβαστρον), she poured it on his head.^[6]  Did she break the ἀλάβαστρον to pieces?  Or did she take its body in one hand, its lid in the other and rub (τρίβος) them together (σύν), or twist them to break the wax seal?

The Greek word translated “alabaster box” in the KJV, as well as “flask,” “jar” and “vial” in other translations, is alabastron, which can also mean “perfume vase”….The boxes were often sealed or made fast with wax, to prevent the perfume from escaping.^[7]

A man described his son to Jesus: A spirit seizes him, and he suddenly screams; it throws him into convulsions and causes him to foam at the mouth.  It hardly ever leaves him alone, torturing (συντρῖβον, another form of συντρίβω) him severely.^[8]  How the spirit crushed him isn’t readily apparent in the text, but it didn’t break him to pieces.  Another form of συντρίβω (συντετριμμενους) was in the prophecy Jesus read from Isaiah in the textus receptus: The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal (ιασασθαι, a form of ἰάομαι) the brokenhearted (συντετριμμενους^[9] την καρδιαν)…^[10]  Jesus rebuked the unclean spirit, healed (ἰάσατο, another form of ἰάομαι) the boy who was tortured, crushed, bruised or broken, and gave him back to his father.^[11]

But I can’t make this a slam dunk, not without the correct homograph for the Hebrew word nâphats (תנפצם).  I can’t tell, for instance, if the man with the unclean spirit had broken (συντετρῖφθαι, another form of συντρίβω) the shackles in pieces (Mark 5:4 NET) or rubbed them together until he wriggled free.  A form of συντρίβω was contrasted to a form of κατάγνυμι in Matthew 12:20 (NET): He will not break (κατεάξει, a form of κατάγνυμι) a bruised (συντετριμμένον, another form of συντρίβω) reed or extinguish a smoldering wick, until he brings justice to victory.  But in the Septuagint συντρίψει (another form of συντρίβω) was used in place of κατεάξει and τεθλασμένον was used in place of συντετριμμένον.

That wouldn’t be particularly problematic.  I’m perfectly willing to prefer the New Testament to the Septuagint.  My primary interest in the Septuagint is as corroboration of the instances where the Masoretes altered the Hebrew of the Old Testament.  In John 19, however, forms of κατάγνυμι were used interchangeably with a form of συντρίβω (John 19:31-33, 36 NET):

Then, because it was the day of preparation, so that the bodies should not stay on the crosses on the Sabbath (for that Sabbath was an especially important one), the Jewish leaders asked Pilate to have the victims’ legs broken (κατεαγῶσιν, another form of κατάγνυμι) and the bodies taken down.  So the soldiers came and broke (κατέαξαν, another form of κατάγνυμι) the legs of the two men who had been crucified with Jesus, first the one and then the other.  But when they came to Jesus and saw that he was already dead, they did not break (κατέαξαν, another form of κατάγνυμι) his legs.

For these things happened so that the scripture would be fulfilled, “Not a bone of his will be broken (συντριβήσεται, another form of συντρίβω).”

Each of the Old Testament prophecies used a form of συντρίβω for broken in the Septuagint:

NET	Parallel Greek	Septuagint	Septuagint	Septuagint
Not a bone of his will be broken John 19:36b	ὀστοῦν οὐ συντριβήσεται αὐτοῦ John 19:36b	καὶ ὀστοῦν οὐ συντρίψετε ἀπ᾽ αὐτοῦ Exodus 12:46b	καὶ ὀστοῦν οὐ συντρίψουσιν ἀπ᾽ αὐτοῦ Numbers 9:12	ἓν ἐξ αὐτῶν οὐ συντριβήσεται Psalm 34:20

I haven’t found a way to search Hebrew homographs online.^[12]  I definitely need help from someone who knows Hebrew extremely well.

I’ve often quipped to friends, if there is anything left of me when I see Him face to face, my first question will be: a written language without vowels?  Dr. Thomas M. Strouse, arguing for the necessity and inspiration of vowel points in an essay titled “A Review of and Observations about Peter Whitfield’s: A Dissertation on the Hebrew Vowel-Points,” gave me a glimpse into the beauty and economy of biblical Hebrew.  After eliminating the options that could be disregarded by context, Dr. Strouse proposed three options for Genesis 1:26: “Did Jehovah say ‘let us make’ man, or man ‘he was made,’ or ‘we will be made’ man?”

Whether God said, let us make man or man he was made, is inconsequential to me as it pertains to meaning, though I suspect that the latter may be eliminated by context in the very next verse.  But the realization that the Hebrew, without vowel points, means that God said let us make man and we will be made man in one and the same verb, is too beautiful a prophetic truth for mere words.