DOCSLIB.ORG

A Note on Divine Names and Epithets in the Book of Jubilees

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Note on Divine Names and Epithets in the Book of Jubilees A NOTE ON DIVINE NAMES AND EPITHETS IN THE BOOK OF JUBILEES James Kugel In honor of our generation’s greatest scholar of Jubilees (as well as numerous other Second Temple writings), I wish in the following to raise a question that, to my knowledge, has been somewhat neglected in Jubilees scholarship. How does this book refer to God? It is a simple question, but the answer may prove enlightening for a variety of top- ics. (Indeed, in raising it in this brief note, I am afraid I will not be able to do much more than evoke one or two of its possible implications, but these are surely only one small part of what can be learned from studying divine epithets in Jubilees.) Use of “God” and “the Lord” Certainly the two most common ways of referring to the God of Israel in Jubilees are with the “generic” words for God (that is, ’elohim or ’el) and with the Tetragrammaton, YHWH. With regard to the latter, the surviving Qumran fragments leave no doubt that the original Hebrew text of Jubilees at least sometimes wrote out the Tetragrammaton itself, YHWH. It is likely that the Greek translator (or later Greek scribes) substituted the word kurios (“Lord”) for this divine name, as was done as well with the Old Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible and other ancient texts;1 this substitution then carried through into the second- ary translations of Jubilees. The usual Ethiopic rendering of “Lord” is ’egzi’abḥēr. However, a certain ambiguity surrounds this word in the Ethiopic manuscripts of Jubilees since, as James VanderKam observed some time ago, it “seems to be used indiscriminately” in Jubilees, often translating God as well as Lord.2 1 On the existence of an ancient Greek translation and its use for the Ethiopic and Latin translations, see James C. VanderKam, Textual and Historical Studies in the Book of Jubilees (HSM 14; Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1977), 6–18. 2 VanderKam, Textual and Historical Studies, 20. For example: Jub. 21:2 reads in VanderKam’s edition of the Ethiopic text: “I have continually remembered the Lord 758 james kugel In this respect, the surviving fragments of the Latin translation can be a more reliable guide to the original Hebrew text, since they regu- larly distinguish between dominus and deus. Perhaps surprisingly, the Latin fragments reveal a definite preference for “God” over “Lord”; the uses of deus outnumber those of dominus, with some eighty-four appearances of the former versus fifty-two of the latter.3 The evidence of the surviving Greek and Syriac fragments is somewhat less reliable, since these are, as VanderKam notes, often more in the nature of near- citations or allusions to the text of Jubilees.4 Divine Epithets If the distinction between “Lord” and “God” in the original Hebrew text must remain unresolved in numerous cases, there remains none- theless the matter of divine epithets in Jubilees. The author of Jubi- lees frequently supplemented or replaced his “default” divine names (YHWH, and ’elohim/’el) with other words or phrases, and it is these that I wish to mention briefly here. The most frequent among divine epithets in Jubilees is “the Most High,” no doubt corresponding to Greek hupsistos and, in turn, The phrase “the Most High God/Lord” or “the Most .[ה-]עליון Hebrew High” alone occurs some twenty-three times in Jubilees. Along with (אל )עולם ”these, one also finds two mentions of the “Eternal God (12:29, 13:8).5 I believe the author favored these epithets because they had a somewhat antique flavor for him, having been used by Israel’s ancestors or in reference to earliest times.6 In evoking them, he was, as it were, imaginatively projecting readers back into the era of the [’egzi’abḥēr]” whereas the Latin text has “I have continually remembered our God [deum nostrum].” The corresponding fragment in 4Q219 backs up the Latin text’s .תמי[ד את א]לוהינו :reading 3 According to A.-M. Denis and Y. Janssens, Concordance latine du liber Jubilaeo- rum sive Parva Genesis (Louvain: Publications de l’Université catholique de Louvain, 1973), 46–47; 51–52. 4 On this see James C. VanderKam, The Book of Jubilees: A Critical Text (2 vols.; CSCO 510–11, Scriptores Aethiopici 87–88; Louvain: Peeters, 1989), xi–xvi. 5 Both of these are in passages composed by Jubilees’ author and have no biblical (אל )שדי ”parallel. The author also used another antique name, “the God Shaddai (15:3 and 28:3), but in these he was following the biblical text of Gen 17:1 and 28:3 respectively. 6 For “the Most High” see Gen 14:18, 19, 20, 22, Deut 32:8 Ps. 82:4; for “Eternal God” Gen 21:33..
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Veda Vs. Tetragrammaton: Decrypting the Greatest © 2017 IJSR Enigma in History Received: 08-11-2016 Accepted: 09-12-2016 Milorad Ivankovic
    International Journal of Sanskrit Research 2017; 3(1): 21-25 International Journal of Sanskrit Research2015; 1(3):07-12 ISSN: 2394-7519 IJSR 2017; 3(1): 21-25 Veda vs. Tetragrammaton: Decrypting the greatest © 2017 IJSR www.anantaajournal.com Enigma in History Received: 08-11-2016 Accepted: 09-12-2016 Milorad Ivankovic Milorad Ivankovic Omladinski trg 6/4, SRB-26300 Abstract Vrsac, Serbia Since times immemorial man`s experience and perception of the world have been encoded by and stored primarily in the words of human language. Thus, neither genetic DNA analysis nor archeological artifacts, but only the words of human language can decode the true history and evolution of man, his beliefs, religious ideas and philosophical concepts. The collection of Sanskrit texts called the Veda or the Vedas being the most comprehensive source of authentic ancient knowledge, it provides the missing clues for deciphering enigmas and mysteries of the bygone eras, of which the greatest is known as the Tetragrammaton. Key Words: YHWH, heaven, aśman, šamayim, Dyava, Yava, Iove Introduction In Hebrew tradition the proper name of god has been mystified by the four letters YHWH called the Tetragrammaton, due to the ancient Hamito-Semitic custom of recording only consonant sounds in writing, which presents the main difficulty in decoding its authentic spelling. The Revelation of Tetragrammaton According to the Book of Exodus 3: 14, God allegedly introduced himself to Moses by the phrase `ehyeh ’ašer ’ehyeh which means “I AM WHO I AM” and afterwards revealed his proper name “I appeared unto Abraham, Isaac and Jacob as God šadday but by my name YHWH I made me not known to them“ (Exodus 6:3).
    [Show full text]
  • Jesus and the Divine Name R
    47 Jesus and the Divine Name R. Kendall Soulen Whoever has the word of Jesus for a true possession can also hear his silence. —Ignatius of Antioch 15:2 In his estimable work Not Every Spirit: A Dogmatics of Christian Disbelief, Christopher Morse wisely observes that in the biblical context God’s name is understood to be communicated by God. God’s name “is revealed as a proper and not a generic name or an appellation chosen by human preference.”1 He goes on to elaborate: According to ancient tradition in Genesis the names of creatures are chosen by human selection: “whatever the man called every living creature, that was its name” (Gen. 2:19). Not so with the name of God. So sacred is this name in Hebraic tradition that it is not spoken. Another word, “LORD” (Adonai), is substituted in its place wherever the original appears.” In this essay, I want to explore the scriptural dynamics of God’s self-commu- nicated name with special attention to what is no doubt a simple but nevertheless important and often overlooked fact. The practice of honoring the divine name by avoiding its use is not only a Jewish tradition, as Morse rightly observes, but a Christian one as well. I offer these reflections in token of my great esteem for Christopher Morse as a theologian of the church and in gratitude for his unfailing friendship and generosity. By way of introduction, let me call to mind a bit of theological tradition and ask a question about it. The tradition is this.
    [Show full text]
  • Pandeism - Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia
    Pandeism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pandeism Pandeism From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Pandeism or Pan-Deism (from Greek: πάν pan "all" and Part of a series on Latin: deus meaning "God" in the sense of deism), is a term describing religious beliefs incorporating or mixing logically God reconcilable elements of pantheism (that "God", or its metaphysical equivalent, is identical to the Universe) and General conceptions deism (that the creator-god who designed the Universe no Agnosticism · Apatheism · Atheism · Deism longer exists in a status where it can be reached, and can Henotheism · Monolatrism · Monotheism instead be confirmed only by reason). It is therefore most Panentheism · Pantheism · Transtheism particularly the belief that the Creator of the Universe actually became the Universe, and so ceased to exist as a [1][2] Specific conceptions separate and conscious entity. Creator · Architect · Demiurge · Devil Sustainer · Lord · Father · Monad It is through this incorporation pandeism claims to answer Oneness · Mother · Supreme Being · The All primary objections to deism (why would God create and Personal · Unitarianism · Ditheism · Trinity then not interact with the Universe?) and to pantheism (how in Abrahamic religions did the Universe originate and what is its purpose?). (Bahá'í Faith, Christianity, Islam, Judaism) in Ayyavazhi · in Buddhism · in Hinduism in Jainism · in Sikhism · in Zoroastrianism Contents Attributes Eternalness · Existence · Gender 1 A pantheistic form of deism Names (God)
    [Show full text]
  • Original Monotheism: a Signal of Transcendence Challenging
    Liberty University Original Monotheism: A Signal of Transcendence Challenging Naturalism and New Ageism A Thesis Project Report Submitted to the Faculty of the School of Divinity in Candidacy for the Degree of Doctor of Ministry Department of Christian Leadership and Church Ministries by Daniel R. Cote Lynchburg, Virginia April 5, 2020 Copyright © 2020 by Daniel R. Cote All Rights Reserved ii Liberty University School of Divinity Thesis Project Approval Sheet Dr. T. Michael Christ Adjunct Faculty School of Divinity Dr. Phil Gifford Adjunct Faculty School of Divinity iii THE DOCTOR OF MINISTRY THESIS PROJECT ABSTRACT Daniel R. Cote Liberty University School of Divinity, 2020 Mentor: Dr. T. Michael Christ Where once in America, belief in Christian theism was shared by a large majority of the population, over the last 70 years belief in Christian theism has significantly eroded. From 1948 to 2018, the percent of Americans identifying as Catholic or Christians dropped from 91 percent to 67 percent, with virtually all the drop coming from protestant denominations.1 Naturalism and new ageism increasingly provide alternative means for understanding existential reality without the moral imperatives and the belief in the divine associated with Christian theism. The ironic aspect of the shifting of worldviews underway in western culture is that it continues with little regard for strong evidence for the truth of Christian theism emerging from historical, cultural, and scientific research. One reality long overlooked in this regard is the research of Wilhelm Schmidt and others, which indicates that the earliest religion of humanity is monotheism. Original monotheism is a strong indicator of the existence of a transcendent God who revealed Himself as portrayed in Genesis 1-11, thus affirming the truth of essential elements of Christian theism and the falsity of naturalism and new ageism.
    [Show full text]
  • Ontology of Monotheism Road Map to Reach the Ontom
    Ontology of Monotheism Road map to reach the OntoM Bobiquins Estêvão de Mello1, Francisco A. Pereira Fialho2, José Leomar Todesco2 1Programa de Pós-Graduação em Engenharia e Gestão do Conhecimento (PPGEGC) 2Departamento de Engenharia do Conhecimento (dEGC) Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC) – 88040-900, Florianópolis, SC, Brazil {estevaomello,fapfialho}@gmail.com, [email protected] Abstract. This paper reports my qualifying working stage PhD research project. Our target is to develop the Ontology of Monotheism, an ontology to join the fundamental texts of the major monotheistic religions. We will base our research on Philosophy and Linguistics theories to accomplish our aim with Knowledge Engineering tools. We expect to generate an ontology to enhance comprehension among people from these religious denominations. 1. Introduction In 1868, Allan Kardec (1804-1869), founder of Spiritism, published La Genèse, les miracles et les prédictions selon le spiritisme and pointed the Christian-Spiritist doctrine as the third grand revelation; Moses promulgated the first one, the law of Sinai registered on Torah, and the Gospel originated from the Christ as the second revelation [Kardec 2013a, chapter 1]. If this premise is true, there is a didactic-pedagogic connection between the Torah, the Holy Bible and the Spiritist Pentateuch, linking Judaism and Christianity, two of the most influent monotheistic religions nowadays. Following this further, I have deduced that if God is only One, Islam, the other influent monotheistic religion, can be connected in the same way: another revelation registered on the Quran. How can these foundational texts be studied and analyzed without religious biases? By means of Artificial Intelligence tools such as ontologies — this is our bet.
    [Show full text]
  • Bible Studies • Біблійні Студії
    Bible Studies • Біблійні студії PAVLOS D. VASILEIADIS The Pronunciation Aristotle University of Thessaloniki of the Sacred Tetragrammaton: Greece An Overview of a Nomen Revelatus [email protected] that Became a Nomen Absconditus Prologue The name of the God of the Bible is instrumental in understanding His identity. The Hebrew “quadriliteral” term , can be located in the core of almost every theological attempt to describe the biblical notion of God — either Jewish or Christian.2 For centuries, this sacred name was met with only in Semit- ic contexts. But during the Hellenistic period, a crucial meeting between Hebrew and Greek cultures happened. There came a fundamental shift in the understanding of the identity of the God who bears this name and, consequently, of the meaning attribut- ed to his name. Judaism moved from the biblically active “becoming,” as a covenan- tal God who seeks to get in close relation with faithful humans, to the philosophically static “being,” more akin to the Platonic view of God as immutable and utterly trans- cendent. A result of this development was that the divine name gradually became a ta- boo to the Jews. It may have started as reverence but it ended up as a long-lasting super- stition. Since the Tetragrammaton became ineffable, the exact ancient pronunciation was thought to be lost or restricted to a few initiates. Philo, a contemporary of Jesus and the apostle Paul, was the first to describe God as “unnameable,” “unutterable,” and completely incomprehensible.3 The Tetragrammaton — a name that appears more than 6, times in the Hebrew Bible — was replaced by various circumlocutions, like “the Name” or “the Holy One.” Copies of the Greek LXX Bible made early in the Chris- tian era had their text quickly overwhelmed by substitute titles like “Lord” and “God” in place of God’s name.
    [Show full text]
  • Soul and Soil
    Soul and Soil GEORGIA HALLIDAY samgrahah: he who holds everything together The Lord of the Universe and Professor Godbole stand at “opposite ends of the same strip of carpet” ( Passage 283). The room is full of “coloured rags, iridescent balls, chandeliers of opaque pink glass, and murky photo - graphs framed crookedly”; of effigies; of mild-featured Hindu men; school - boys; jasmine garlands; musics, multiple and indeterminate; an altar covered in rose leaves, golden tablets, silver dishes; a banana tree (283). God will be born at midnight—although he was born hundreds of years ago—although he will never be born. Sri Krishna, the Lord of the Universe, just like the music that fills the air with vibrations from choirs, cymbals, hand drums, a harmonium, the thumping of an electric generator, a Europeanized band playing a waltz in the courtyard, and elderly Brahmans singing a hymn, is multiple and indeterminate. The poets of the State have written inscriptions and hung them about the room “where they could not be read” (285). But evidently someone has read them, because we are shortly informed that one of them is in English “to indicate His universality,” and that a mistake on the part of the draughtsman has resulted in the inscription reading “God si love” (285). We are then treated to this sentence, set apart in its own paragraph: “God si love. Is this the first message of India?” And then the choir starts to sing again: “Tukaram, tukaram, thou art my father and mother and everybody” and mothers squabble over the children and the band in the courtyard plays “Nights of Gladness” and someone breaks cordon in an effort to get closer to the silver icon of Sri Krishna and Professor Godbole attempts to untangle his pince-nez from the jasmine gar - land around his neck (283).
    [Show full text]
  • The Concept of Non-Duality in Śaṅkara and Cusanus
    Comparative Philosophy Volume 12, No. 1 (2021): 98-110 Open Access / ISSN 2151-6014 / www.comparativephilosophy.org https://doi.org/10.31979/2151-6014(2021).120109 THE CONCEPT OF NON-DUALITY IN ŚAṄKARA AND CUSANUS JEROME KLOTZ ABSTRACT: When comparing diverse philosophical traditions, it becomes necessary to establish a common point of departure. This paper offers a comparative analysis of Advaita Vedānta Hinduism and esoteric Christianity, as represented by the two highly celebrated figures of Śaṅkara and Nicholas Cusanus, respectively. The common point of departure on which I base this comparison is the concept of “non-duality”—a concept that is fitting for at least two reasons. First, it is general enough to encompass both traditions, pervading the work of each figure, and thus allowing for a kind of “shared language.” Second, it is specific enough to identify a set of core and well-defined principles amenable to systematic study, chief among which are the notions of (1) the “Absolute” as an infinite unity that transcends all determinations (“no-thing”) and exceeds all oppositions (“not-other”), and (2) the world as an ontologically ambiguous “reflection” that simultaneously hides and manifests its meta- ontological Principle. In drawing these connections, I hope to show how the concept of non- duality provides the possibility for a mutual understanding among diverse traditions at the philosophical level. Keywords: Advaita Vedānta, metaphysics, mysticism, Nicholas Cusanus, non-duality, Śaṅkara 1. INTRODUCTION The concept of “non-duality” is not the exclusive possession of any one philosophical system. On the contrary, it can be found—mutatis mutandis—within religio- philosophical traditions the world over: from Philosophical Daoism, Mahāyāna Buddhism, and Advaita Vedānta Hinduism in the East, to Kabbalistic Judaism, esoteric Christianity, and mystical Islam in the West.
    [Show full text]
  • Lesson Six M O D E L S O F G O D Key Concepts and Considerations
    LESSON SIX M O D E L S O F G O D If there is a God, HOW does this God exist? KEY CONCEPTS AND CONSIDERATIONS 2 * Key Terms Transcendence; Immanence; Creation ex deus; Creation ex nihilo * Models of God Pantheism Panentheism Theism Deism OVERVIEW 3 This lesson is best understood as an extension of the previous lesson. In this lesson the attention shifts from debates about the fact of God's existence to debates regarding the manner of God's existence. The question pursued here initially is: How does God exist? The focus is upon the possible relationships that God may have in relationship to creation, both at its point of origin, and with regard to its continuance. Four precise models are presented. These are: Pantheism; Panentheism ; Theism; and Deism. These models will be treated in a systematic fashion. Our discussion will focus upon: (1) an explanation of the name for the model; (2) an identification of key thinkers associated with the model; (3) a listing of some of the tenets of the model; and (4) an assessment of the model which will identify both strengths and weaknesses. Before beginning our systematic survey of each model it will be necessary to define and discuss four key terms. These terms are: Transcendence; Immanence ; Creation ex deus; and Creation ex nihilo. DEFINITION & DISCUSSION OF KEY TERMS The four terms needing definition and discussion may be grouped into two pairs. Transcendence and immanence belong together, as do creation ex deus and creation ex nihilo. The first term in need of definition is transcendence.
    [Show full text]
  • The Divine Name of Yahweh
    THE DIVINE NAME OF YAHWEH The divine name of Yahweh is recorded as having been revealed to Moses in Ex. III.I4-IS: "And God said to Moses, I am the God who IS; thou shalt tell the Israelites, THE GOD WHO IS has sent me to you. And he charged Moses again, That is what thou shalt tell the sons of Israel, that the God of their fathers, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob has sent thee to them, and this is the name he will be known by for ever; it shall stand recorded, age after age".1 In the East a man acquired power over a being if he knew its name. That the name expressed in some way the nature of a being is clear from the names given to children in the Pentateuch. 2 The name by which God chose to answer Moses' question could not have been a merely arbitrary onc for the sake of distinguishing Him from other gods; it had to give expression to the hopes of Israel, and so the prophet Micheas says: "Let other nations go their own way, each with the name of its own God to rally it; ours to march under the banner of Yahweh, our God for ever and for evermore" (IV.S, IZnox's translation, except the spelling of the divine name). Since only the Divinity Itself could make Its name known, ,Moses sought the name of God as a credential for the people of Israel. Yahweh, the name that God selects, seems already to have been in use.
    [Show full text]
  • Song El Shaddai – El Shaddai Is Most Often Translated As "God Almighty
    Song El Shaddai – El Shaddai is most often translated as "God Almighty". El-Elyon na Adonai is a combination of two names for God, meaning "God Most High, please my Lord". (The 'ai' in 'Adonai' is a possessive.) Na is a particle of entreaty, translated "please" or "I/we beseech thee", or left untranslated. Erkamka na Adonai is based on Psalm 18:"I love you, my Lord." Psalm 18:1 Possibly - most likely - "kan-naw" is from Exodus 34:14 meaning "jealous" - for you shall not worship any other god, for the LORD, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God. Immanuel / Emmanuel Did you know that our God, the God of the Bible has many different names? Each one of these is a significant revelation of a particular attribute of His character. As believers we know all these names are fulfilled in one powerful name, the name above all names, the name of Jesus or Yeshua. “Therefore God also has highly exalted Him and given Him the name which is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those in Heaven, and of those on earth, and of those under the earth, and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.” (Philippians 2-9-11) Hallowed be Your name? To hallow a thing is to make it holy or to set it apart to be exalted as being worthy of absolute devotion. To hallow the name of God is to regard Him with complete devotion and loving admiration.
    [Show full text]
  • Allah in Translations of the Bible by Kenneth J
    Allah in Translations of the Bible by Kenneth J. Thomas he question is asked by certain groups whether Allah can validly be used to translate words for God in the Bible. It is inconceivable T to many that a word that is commonly associated with the Islamic religion would be found in a Christian Bible. There are some English speak- ers, for example, who say that the words Allah and God refer to different deities and therefore that Allah should never be used in any translation of the Bible. One person who has written a book arguing against the use of Allah by Christians is a Nigerian, G. J. O. Moshay. In his book, Who Is This Allah?, he writes, “For long we had assumed that Christians and Muslims serve the same God, and that it is only in the language of expression and mode of worship that they differ.”1 But he concludes that they are not the same. Significantly, this objection does not come from traditional Arab Christians, most of whom live in the Islamic heartland. The basic question is whether the word “Allah” can be considered a generic term for the supreme being that can be used to translate elohim or theos, which are themselves generic terms in Hebrew and Greek. The Arab philologists dis- cussed the etymology of the word at great length. Some held that it was a loan word from Syriac or Hebrew, but most regarded it as a contraction of al ilāh (“the god”).2 Western scholars are fairly unanimous that the source of the word Allah probably is through Aramaic from the Syriac alāhā (“the god”).3 In either case, the Arabs used the word Allah for the supreme being before the time of Muhammad.4 Inscriptions with Allah have been discovered in Northern and Southern Arabia from as early as the fifth centuryB .C.5 Christians have used the word Allah from pre-Islamic times, and Allah has been used continuously in Arabic translations of the Bible from the earliest known versions in the This article originally appeared in the eighth century to this day.
    [Show full text]