#1:
Explain situating of Naphtali's placement in reference to Deuteronomy 33:23?
Yes, you are in error…this section was prophecy over each of the tribes not geographical distribution of land as per each tribe. However as we learn from the Targumim (ancient Jewish Rabbis) he will have possession to the west
of the sea of Genesareth (the sea of Galilee in the north), and to the south (of it). If you look at a map you will see this is literally the case (save that which went to Issachar on the southern-most tip
#2:
Where were the firstfruits offered? Only at the Temple or in towns too? (Deuteronomy 26:1-10, Leviticus 23:9-14.)
At the Tabernacle which in earliest times was in Shiloh but could be moved as the Lord commanded. Shiloh was sort of the capital at that time and was located in what later became known as Ephraim (the Kingdom of Israel in the north) just north of Jacob’s Beth-El south of Jordan in what we now call the West Bank.
#
3: Where are the (faithful) deceased Israelites now (spiritually)?
They were awaiting God’s promised redeemer (Messiah) and after the crucifixion, Christ entered Sheol and rescued them, setting them free, and they are with Him (along with all the saved among us) in heaven until the parousia.
#4: Thoughts on translations- Vulgate vs. Masoretic, & origins?
The Vulgate unlike the Byzantine-Greek majority texts is based not on the LXX but the best (and most accepted) Hebrew Manuscripts during Jerome’s time. The Vulgate being interpreted into Latin however takes liberties unknown to western thinkers that would not have been part of the mindset of the earlier Hebrews and so led to a limited number of errors made obvious when read today in light of the LXX, Targums, and Dead Sea Scroll versions (for example see Genesis 3:15 in the Vulgate). But aside from this it is a descent OT translation…
The Masoretic comes to us 9 centuries after the Christ events, and IMO changes and interpretational differences (I have not counted these inferences but there are over 20) occurred in light of that. In other words, IMO the Masoretes intentionally used alternative renderings (not indicated in the Targums or Dead Sea Scroll versions) to the meaning implied in the LXX because they indicated our Messiah too obviously. It was a good translation however (with the exception of this possible motive, as I do not know for sure but it is curious) taken mostly from a few earlier copies of texts still extant, the Talmud, early prayer books, etc. Now also note there are differences between the pre-JPS Masoretic and the JPS Masoretic were even more liberal selections of word choice or alternate meaning have been instilled (IMO to the detriment of the Text…but the excuse I have been given is “You do not read it in the original tongue, therefore you do not realize the possibility of these renderings…but I ask, why come to so different a conclusion to the Targumim of the 1st and 2nd century in these places…like in Isaiah 7:14 the LXX Rabbis from 300 years before Christ, and the Targumim understand the use of Almah, or maiden, to mean “virgin” because of the Prophet’s use of Bethulah in reference to principalities, cities, towns etc. They understood that a “maiden” in Israel was always assumed to be a virgin, to falsely accuse otherwise was false witness and subject to severe punishment or even death…so for the later Masoretes to render this “young woman” and not even at least young UNMARRIED or never married woman IMO is an insult to the text.
#5: Because the honey Samson ate from the lion's carcass considered an unclean food, what were the repercussions if his actions? Why did the Lord remain with him?
What makes you think it was an unclean food (…for the bees to have built a hive there we are talking about a well-aged dried up old skull)?
#6
: Ruth was a Moabite, who were not allowed to enter the congregation even till the tenth generation. Did this not include proselytes? Deuteronomy 23.
Well first off Ruth was of a generation beyond the 10th generation after the Exodus so this does not apply here at all, but also when a person entered the covenant of Israel they were fully accepted and t o be treated as family, the true Israel being the Israel of the Spirit not the flesh. A
ger tzedek or righteous gentile convert was fully accepted immediately after conversion and baptism (the tivellah service, or washing, in a sanctified mikvah or pool was a God ordained method of consecration of all people and things being “set apart” or made Holy by Him for His purpose or use…even down to the smallest instrument for the Tabernacle or Temple) if a male then they also had to be circumcised.
#7: Thoughts on Nephilim? (Gensis 6:1-4) Giant Caananite ancestors?
Read the former threads for much valuable information regarding the use of the term (literally in Genesis 6 and later figuratively by the lying spies)…nothing indicates these were the Canaanites ancestors…see the discussions of the three views (offspring of fallen ones or manifest angels with human females, the sons of Seth theory, and the Magistrate-Kings theory)
#
8: Is 1 Samuel 2:35 speaking of priests or Jesus?
I admit there are differing views on this one but for me the clue is that this faithful priest (or these faithful priests) will follow His anointed (not are His anointed one) and for me this prophecy speaks of David’s Zadok (see Ezekiel 44 but also go through Strong’s for a more complete picture)
#9: Is the 'boiling' spoken of in 1 Samuel 2 against or not in line with God's law? I thought He already told them what part they would receive.
The boiling spoken of in your translation is the word
baschal and can also mean baking, sizzling, and more but I see no sense in what you are asking here…I cannot see how you think this would be with or against the Torah (law as you put it).
#10: What of (Numbers 21:14) Book of Wars & (Joshua 10:13) the Book of Jasher?
We know obviously that other books or writings existed in the time of the Israelites (even from before the Exodus) which were books of history and much more. These two books either no longer exist or else have not been found but this does not necessitate that they did not exist at this time.
#11: (Joshua 10) Were there two kings if Hebron, then?
Hehom…name the other?
#12: (Genesis 49:10) Why do some translations say Shiloh?
Some? The word is Shiloh and it speaks to the one (a future person) who would come when Judah lost its scepter and the gentiles would flow unto Him and His “Shabbat” would be glorious…it is speaking of the Messiah (Y’shua/Jesus specifically)…if you PM me with your e-mail address I will send you a more complete essay which addresses this very topic…
#13: (1 Samuel 2:30) Was the Levite promise conditional?
Not really, faithful, spiritual, Israel walked before Him always. Physical often idolatrous grace abusing Israel were only His children is one sense but not the other actual sense of their being of His Spirit but that was always their choice. This same truth applies to each of the tribes not just the Levites (Deuteronomy 28 – read it) and in a sense applies to all who call themselves followers of Y’shua/Jesus today…mere profession or taking a bath does not make a child of God…believing God (not just “in God”) like father Abraham, is what God counts as righteous before Him and such a one will receive the One (the Holy One of Israel) that He has sent (and accept the work He came to do on their behalf and be saved)
