DOCSLIB.ORG

Debunking the Myths of Sacred Namers H²®Wh«Y«Y«Y«Y

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Debunking the Myths of Sacred Namers H²®Wh«Y«Y«Y«Y Debunking the Myths of Sacred Namers h²®wh«y«y«y«y Part II By © Carl D. Franklin December 24, 1997 Myth # 4 Jehovah is Pointed with the Vowel Markings of Adonai The divine name hwhi (jhvh) is used some six thousand eight hundred and twenty-three times in the Masoretic Text. Six thousand five hundred and eighteen times the name is marked to be pronounced h²®wh«y«y«y«y (Hebrew J'hõh-vãh' 3068). Three hundred and five times the name is marked to be pronounced h¬®²whµy (Hebrew Jehõh-vih' 3069). Not once is the divine name jhvh marked to be pronounced in any other way. Sacred namers view the markings that are found with jhvh in the Masoretic Text as illegitimate. They claim that these vowel points do not show the original pronunciation of hwhi (jhvh) but were transferred from the Hebrew name i®n¦d´a (adonai 136), which means "Lord." They point out that many scholarly works support this view of the vowel markings that are found with jhvh in the Masoretic Text. John R. Kohlenberger III is typical of those scholars who have adopted this view. He writes in the introduction to The NIV Interlinear Hebrew- English Old Testament, " hwhi , Yahweh, the proper name of God, is either pointed with the vowels of i®n¦d´a [adonai], 'Lord,' (h²®wh«y«y«y«y) or mi¡¡h²l¶a [elohim] 'God,' (h¬®²whµy) and is to be pronounced as the word whose vowels it borrows. This deliberate mispointing was an effort by the scribes to keep the name of God from being taken in vain (Exod. 20:7; Lev. 24:11) by making it unpronounceable. This device was misinterpreted in 1520 by one Galatinus who mixed the vowels of i®n¦d´a with the consonants of hwhi , thus producing the hybrid form Jehovah, which remained with us to this day." 2 Is it true that the name Jehovah borrowed its vowels from Adonai? Did Galatinus invent the name Jehovah by mixing the vowels of Adonai with the consonants of jhvh? Let us evaluate Kohlenberger's statements by reviewing what we learned under Myth #3. We know from the records of history that the name Jehovah was used hundreds of years before the time of Galatinus. Thus Kohlenberger's assertion that Galatinus invented this pronunciation of jhvh is a historical impossibility. Furthermore, there is no evidence that any Christian scholar at the time of Galatinus viewed the name Jehovah as a misinterpretation or mispronunciation. In fact, scholars of that era unanimously supported the pronunciation of jhvh as Jehovah. There is no question that Kohlenberger's assertion concerning Galatinus is false, but what about his assertion that the scribes deliberately mispointed the name jhvh? We must search the records of history before the time of Galatinus to determine whether or not the Masoretes deliberately mispointed the divine name jhvh. Let us go back to the time when the pointing of the Hebrew text was first undertaken. At that time, the text contained only consonants. Although a few consonants could also be used as vowels, most of the Hebrew words were unpronounceable as written. The pronunciation of the words had to be taught by word of mouth. This was the responsibility of the priests and Levites, who passed the pronunciation of the words down from generation to generation by oral tradition. Only those who were trained in oral tradition could accurately interpret the words in the Hebrew text by supplying the correct vowel sounds. Others who attempted to interpret the text could easily change the meaning of words simply by adding the wrong vowel sounds. That is why the task of pointing the text was undertaken. As Wurthwein attests, the effort to point the Hebrew text began about the fifth century A.D. He writes, "This task was engaged by the Masoretes from about the fifth century [the 400's]. It was found inadequate to establish merely the consonantal text and the matres lectionis [consonants used as vowels], the vowel letters which were used to a limited extent to indicate pronunciation, because even with due consideration for the stabilizing 3 influence of oral tradition the possibility still remained open for reading and interpreting many words in more than one way" (The Text of the Old Testament, p. 21). By this time in history, the Jerusalem Talmud had been completed and the Babylonian Talmud was in the process of being written. The Talmudic writings raised great concern among the Levitical Masoretes living in Babylon, who perceived that the rabbis were misinterpreting many words in the Hebrew text by adding the wrong vowel sounds to the consonants. In English, it would be like changing "bid" to "bed," or "date" to "duty." Changing the pronunciation gave the Hebrew words an entirely different meaning. To eliminate any possibility of misinterpreting the words in the Hebrew text, the Masoretes devised a written system to denote the exact pronunciation of the Hebrew words. Instead of inserting vowel letters between the consonants, as in modern languages, the Masoretes used a system of dots and dashes, each of which represented a specific vowel sound. These marks, or "vowel points," were then inserted into the Masoretic Text. In the early stages of vowel pointing, there were two different systems-- the Babylonian system of the Eastern Masoretes and the Palestinian system of the Western Masoretes. In both systems the vowel marks, or "points," were placed above the Hebrew consonants. In the final system, called the Tiberian system, most vowel points were placed below the consonants. Wurthwein explains how the later Tiberian system developed from the earlier work of the Palestinian or Western Masoretes. "Until the Age of Humanism and the Reformation, the Hebrew text and its transmission remained primarily a Jewish concern. In the first millennium A.D., during which the basic lines of transmission were set, we should distinguish between the Jews of Palestine, the Western Masoretes..., and the members of the great Jewish colony in Babylonia, the Eastern Masoretes....The Western school centered at Tiberias until the end of the third century, and again from the eighth to the tenth century; the Eastern centers were the schools at Sura, Nehardea (destroyed A.D. 259), and later at Pumbeditha, which were authoritative in matters of Jewish scholarship for centuries. Finally the Babylonian schools lost the significance, and in the 4 tenth and eleventh centuries they disappeared. Once again the West assumed the spiritual leadership of Judaism, and the Western Masoretes sought to eliminate all traces of textual traditions that differed from their own. The views of the school of Tiberias became determinative for the future, and the Eastern tradition was forgotten for a millennium" (Ibid., p. 14). Although the Babylonian system of the Eastern schools was replaced by the Tiberian system in the 900's, it survived in Yemen until the 1200's. Its early development can be traced through fragments of ancient manuscripts. Wurthwein writes, "The Babylonian system...developed in two stages, an older and simpler stage represented in the fragments of the seventh century (E), and a later, more complex stage appearing in fragments from the eighth and ninth centuries (K)....The Babylonian tradition was preserved in Yemen into the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. Under the influence of Tiberian pointing a characteristic Yemenite tradition was later developed reflecting a simplified Tiberian system with supralinear signs [vowel points above the words]" (Ibid., pp. 22-23). As Wurthwein goes on to relate, remnants of the Palestinian system can also be found in ancient manuscripts. He writes, "A system found in some Samaritan manuscripts from the twelfth to the fourteenth century is clearly derived from it. Kahle published the relatively few and textually varying Biblical fragments (seventh to ninth century) in Masoreten des Westens, 2 (1930); they are cited in BHK as V(ar)pal. Their significance lies in showing how the vocalized Hebrew manuscripts of the Bible first appeared when the Masoretes of Tiberias began their work. Basically they lack the strict consistency of the Tiberian Masoretes in indicating pronunciation" (Ibid., pp. 23-24). These remnants of the early Palestinian system bear witness to the superiority of the Tiberian system, which became the fixed standard for the Hebrew text. As Wurthwein testifies, the "Tiberian system...combined the accent system with a means of indicating finer nuances, and permitted control of pronunciation and intonation of the Biblical text in its minutest details" (Ibid., p. 24). 5 The Tiberian system replaced both the Babylonian and the Palestinian systems because they were inadequate for the task of preserving the oral tradition of pronunciation, punctuation and accentuation that had been faithfully passed down from the time of Ezra. These earlier systems did not meet the requirements for strict and consistent pronunciation of the Hebrew words. The Tiberian Masoretes strove earnestly to preserve in written form the pronunciations that they had inherited by oral tradition. The Masoretes were not descended from the tribe of Judah but from the tribe of Levi. While all Masoretes were Levites, not all Levites were Masoretes. The Masoretes were a special class of Levite, entrusted with the responsibility of safeguarding the Hebrew text and preserving it from being corrupted in any way. To allow any word to be mispronounced through a deliberate mispointing would have been totally against the ethic of these Levitical Masoretes! Had such tampering with the Hebrew text been attempted, the cries of protest from these Masoretic scholars would be recorded in historical writings for all the world to see. But there is no such historical record! On the other hand, there is ample evidence in the records of history to support the accuracy and consistency of the system of vowel pointing that was developed by the Tiberian Masoretes.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Popular Handbook of Archaeology and the Bible Represented by Codex Leningradensis B19A (L)
    1 THE MASORETES AND THE SAMARITANS he Hebrew text of the Old Testament was transmitted by a number of different groups within its history. The Sopherim (from Hebrew, meaning “scribes”) were Jew- Tish scholars who preserved and copied the text from the fifth to the third centuries BC. The Zugoth (meaning “pairs” of scribes) were entrusted with this responsibility in the second and first centuries BC. By AD 200, the Tannaim (“repeaters” or “teachers”) took over this task until about AD 500.* The Masoretes From this point, the group of medieval scribes primarily responsible for transmitting (and introducing vowels into) the Hebrew text upon which all editions of the Hebrew Bible were based for centuries were known as the Masoretes, or Masoretic scribes (from masora, meaning “traditions”). Thus we call the text they produced the Masoretic Text. There were two somewhat independent schools of Masoretes: the Babylonian and the Palestinian. The most famous Masoretes were the Jewish scholars living in Tiberias in Galilee in the late ninth and tenth centuries AD: Moses ben Asher (with his son Aaron), and Moses ben Naphtali. Though these two families are often considered to have formed separate traditions of textual preservation, they represent only a single textual tradition. The devotion and care with which the scribes copied the text is seen in the consonantal text—the pre-Masoretic text containing only consonants with no vowels. The versions preserved by the two families respectively contained a mere nine linguistic differences between them. The Ben Naphtali tradition eventually died out, while the Ben Asher tra- dition continued to flourish, representing the superior text.
    [Show full text]
  • How Was the Dageš in Biblical Hebrew Pronounced and Why Is It There? Geoffrey Khan
    1 pronounced and why is it בָּתִּ ים How was the dageš in Biblical Hebrew there? Geoffrey Khan houses’ is generally presented as an enigma in‘ בָּתִּ ים The dageš in the Biblical Hebrew plural form descriptions of the language. A wide variety of opinions about it have been expressed in Biblical Hebrew textbooks, reference grammars and the scholarly literature, but many of these are speculative without any direct or comparative evidence. One of the aims of this article is to examine the evidence for the way the dageš was pronounced in this word in sources that give us direct access to the Tiberian Masoretic reading tradition. A second aim is to propose a reason why the word has a dageš on the basis of comparative evidence within Biblical Hebrew reading traditions and other Semitic languages. בָּתִּיםבָּתִּ ים The Pronunciation of the Dageš in .1.0 The Tiberian vocalization signs and accents were created by the Masoretes of Tiberias in the early Islamic period to record an oral tradition of reading. There is evidence that this reading tradition had its roots in the Second Temple period, although some features of it appear to have developed at later periods. 1 The Tiberian reading was regarded in the Middle Ages as the most prestigious and authoritative tradition. On account of the authoritative status of the reading, great efforts were made by the Tiberian Masoretes to fix the tradition in a standardized form. There remained, nevertheless, some degree of variation in reading and sign notation in the Tiberian Masoretic school. By the end of the Masoretic period in the 10 th century C.E.
    [Show full text]
  • Chaos Theory and the Text of the Old Testament1 Peter J
    Chaos Theory and the Text of the Old Testament1 Peter J. Gentry Peter J. Gentry is Donald L. Williams Professor of Old Testament Interpretation and Director of the Hexapla Institute at The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. He has served on the faculty of Toronto Baptist Seminary and Bible College and also taught at the University of Toronto, Heritage Theological Seminary, and Tyndale Seminary. Dr. Gentry is the author of many articles and book reviews, the co-author of Kingdom through Covenant, 2nd ed. (Crossway, 2018) and God’s Kingdom through God’s Covenants (Crossway, 2015), and the author of How to Read and Understand the Biblical Prophets (Crossway, 2017), and he recently published a critical edition of Ecclesiastes for the Göttingen Septuagint (2019). Introduction Canon and Text are closely related. For those who believe in divine revelation mediated by authorized agents, the central questions are (1) which writings come from these agents authorized to speak for God and (2) have their writings been reliably transmitted to us? Although my inquiry is focused on the latter question, the former is logically prior. How one answers the first question will determine evaluation of evidence relating to the second. What defines a canonical text according to Nahum Sarna, is “a fixed arrangement of content” and “the tendency to produce a standardized text.”2 Since the very first biblical text constituted a covenant, this automatically implies a fixed arrangement of content and a standard text. I am referring to the Covenant at Sinai, a marriage between Yahweh and Israel. A marriage contract does not have a long oral pre-history.
    [Show full text]
  • 4 1917 Jewish Publication Society Edition
    ADDENDUM Baer, Seligman (Sekel) From the Jewish Encyclopedia (1906): Writer on the Masorah, and editor of the Hebrew Bible; born at Mosbach (Baden)1, Sept. 18, 1825; died at Biebrich-on-the-Rhine, March, 1897. As early as 1844, Baer commenced his Masoretic studies. He belonged to the school of Wolf Heidenheim2, some of whose original manuscripts were in his possession. Few scholars in the nineteenth century had so intimate an acquaintance with all the details of the Masorah as had Baer; and it was largely due to him that the study of this branch of Hebrew philology was brought to the notice of Biblical critics. His friendship with Franz Delitzsch, who stood sponsor for much of his work, aided him in making known to the world the results of his studies. He never occupied an academic position, but was contented with the office of Hebrew teacher to the Jewish community of Biebrich. In recognition of his services to the Commission for the History of the Jews in Germany, the honorary degree of doctor of philosophy was conferred upon him by the University of Leipsic. In conjunction with Delitzsch he published in 1861 an edition of the Psalms (Leipsic, Doerfling und Franke). A second edition was published a few years later (Leipsic, Brockhaus). Seligman Baer.Collaborates with Franz Delitzsch3. In the mean time, in connection with Delitzsch, Baer had conceived the plan of editing anew the books of the Old Testament in Hebrew, following strictly the Masoretic tradition. The volumes, with a Latin preface by Delitzsch, appeared (Leipsic, Tauchnitz) in the following order: Genesis, 1869; Isaiah, 1872; Job, 1875; Minor Prophets, 1878; Psalms (together with a treatise "Elementa Accentuationis Metricæ"), 1880; Proverbs (together with "De Primorum Vocabulorum Dagessatione"), 1880; Daniel, Ezra, and Nehemiah (together with "Chaldaismi Biblici Adumbratio" and a treatise by Friedrich Delitzsch on the Babylonian proper names in these books), were published 1 This is incorrect.
    [Show full text]
  • The Vocalization of Verbs Containing Gutturals in Tiberian and Babylonian Traditions. an Attempt of Systematic Description
    Uniwersytet Warszawski Wydział Orientalistyczny Wiktor Gębski Nr albumu: 305018 The Vocalization of Verbs Containing Gutturals in Tiberian and Babylonian Traditions. An Attempt of Systematic Description Praca magisterska na kierunku orientalistyka w zakresie hebraistyki Praca wykonana pod kierunkiem Dr Angeliki Adamczyk Dr Lidii Napiórkowskiej Zakład Hebraistyki Warszawa, maj 2018 Oświadczenie kierującego pracą Oświadczam, że niniejsza praca została przygotowana pod moim kierunkiem i stwierdzam, że spełnia ona warunki do przedstawienia jej w postępowaniu o nadanie tytułu zawodowego. Data Podpis kierującego pracą Oświadczenie autora (autorów) pracy Świadom odpowiedzialności prawnej oświadczam, że niniejsza praca dyplomowa została napisana przez mnie samodzielnie i nie zawiera treści uzyskanych w sposób niezgodny z obowiązującymi przepisami. Oświadczam również, że przedstawiona praca nie była wcześniej przedmiotem procedur związanych z uzyskaniem tytułu zawodowego w wyższej uczelni. Oświadczam ponadto, że niniejsza wersja pracy jest identyczna z załączoną wersją elektroniczną. Data Podpis autora (autorów) pracy Streszczenie The subject of the present research is the inconsistencies within the vocalization of the Tiberian and Babylonian tradition. The thesis consists of three chapters. While in the first one the general overview of the pronunciation traditions of Biblical Hebrew was given, the second one constitutes a description of the vowel systems of the selected traditions. The third chapter contains the analytical part of the thesis. The collected material included 127 verbal forms from various stems which subsequently were analysed in order to spot fluctuations demonstrated by their vowel systems and prosodic structure. As will be seen, in the Tiberian tradition most of the inconsistencies are a matter of shewa placement and vowel length. Contrary to this, in the Babylonian one the fluctuations occur mostly in the vowel quality.
    [Show full text]
  • Introductory Matters
    א א 1 Introductory Matters 1.1. Overview In this lesson we will place Biblical Hebrew, which is the focus of this grammar, in summary fashion within its linguistic, historical, and written (scribal) settings. Much has been written on each of these subjects, for which see the suggestions for further reading. 1.2. Linguistic setting Biblical Hebrew (BH) is a member of the Canaanite branch of the Semitic lan- guage family, along with Phoenician, Moabite, Ammonite, and Edomite. It is also closely related to Aramaic, Ugaritic, and even Arabic. The literature of the Hebrew Bible extends from ca. 1100 b.c.e. to ca. 150 b.c.e. In the Bible itself, the word ‘Hebrew’ is not used B.C.E. and C.E. stand for by Israelites or Judahites to describe their own lan- “Before the Common Era” guage. Instead, we have ‘the language of Canaan’ (Isa and “Common Era.” B.C.E. 19:18) and ‘Judahite’ (e.g., 2 Kgs 18:26 = Isa 36:11). and C.E. are modern schol- The prologue to the Wisdom of Ben Sira (writ- arly conventions for B.C. ten in Greek) contains our first extant attestation and A.D., respectively, an attempt to represent time of ‘Hebrew’ being used of the language: Ben Sira’s in something other than a grandson claims to have translated his grandfather’s purely Christian way. words from the original Hebrew. 1.3. Historical development Biblical Hebrew is usually divided into three large chronological periods: early poetry, Standard Biblical Hebrew (SBH), and Late Biblical Hebrew (LBH).
    [Show full text]
  • Felix Pratensis and Jacob Ben Chaim Ibn Adonijah
    ISSUE #33 FELIX PRATENSIS 2018 AND JACOB BEN CHAIM IBN ADONIJAH BY JIM R. SIBLEY, PHD AN OLIVE PRESS ISRAEL COLLEGE OF THE BIBLE RESEARCH PAPER Welcome to the Olive Press Research Paper – an occasional paper featuring articles that cover a wide spectrum of issues which relate to the ministry of CMJ. Articles are contributed by CMJ staf (past and present), also by Trustees, Representatives, CMJ Supporters or by interested parties. Articles do not necessarily portray CMJ’s standpoint on a particular issue but may be published on the premise that they allow a pertinent understanding to be added to any particular debate. Telephone: 01623 883960 E-mail: [email protected] Eagle Lodge, Hexgreave Hall Business Park, Farnsfeld, Notts NG22 8LS Lausanne Consultation on Jewish Evangelism 10th International Conference, 16-21 August 2015 Jerusalem, Israel FELIX PRATENSIS AND JACOB BEN CHAIM IBN ADONIJAH Jim R. Sibley, PhD Israel College of the Bible Five hundred years ago, in the early 16th century, an interesting chapter in the history of the transmission of the Bible intersects with a remarkable story of the triumph of God’s grace. Te work that was done at this time in establishing the text of the Hebrew Scriptures would last for centuries, but the transformation that took place in the lives of those who were involved in this work would last for all eternity. Not only that, but the work primarily of one individual would afect the Reformation, contribute to the translation of the Bible into common language, and eventually lead to the founding of the State of Israel.
    [Show full text]
  • Joaquim Azevedo Neto2 in Order That the Word of God Could Reach the Last
    THE M ASORETIC G UILD AND THEIR G IFT TO P OSTERITY : THE T EXT OF THE O LD T ESTAMENT 1 A Aliança Massorética e sua transmissão à Posteridade: O Texto do Antigo Testamento Joaquim Azevedo Neto 2 RESUMO A Palavra escrita de Deus é um presente para todas as gerações. É o caso do Antigo Testamento, em que Deus revelou Sua vontade para Israel e para nós. Esta Palavra foi conservada através de gerações por homens que passaram suas vidas no processo de copiar e manter tão puro quanto podiam o texto bíblico. Eles eram os escribas e os massoretas. Assim, nós herdamos a Palavra Sagrada de Deus, e é nosso dever manter a cadeia de transmissão às gerações futuras, de modo que todas as gerações possam ter a oportunidade que tivemos de conhecer a vontade de Deus escrita. PALAVRAS -CHAVE : Crítica Textual. Masorah. Bíblia Hebraica. ABSTRACT The written Word of God is a gift to all generations. It is the case of the Old Testament in which God revealed His will to Israel and to us. This Word was kept through generations by men who spent their lives in the process of copying and keeping as pure as they could the biblical text. They were the scribes and the Masoretes. Thus we have inherited the Sacred Word of God, and it is our duty to keep the chain of transmission to future generations; so that all generations might have the opportunity we had of knowing the written will of God. KEYWORDS : Textual Criticism. Masorah. Biblia Hebraica. INTRODUCTION In order that the word of God could reach the last generation, before the coming of the Lord, the text of the Old Testament in Hebrew had to be preserved and transmitted through centuries, in its purity.
    [Show full text]
  • Preview of the Textual History of the Bible 2020 Volume 3
    Textual History of the Bible VOL. 3: A Companion to Textual Criticism PREVIEW General Editor Armin Lange Volume Editors Russell E. Fuller, Armin Lange Subvolume Editors Russell E. Fuller, Armin Lange, Marilyn J. Lundberg, Mika S. Pajunen, Richard D. Weis Textual History of the Bible Edited by: Armin Lange (General Editor), Frank Feder, Russell E. Fuller, Marilyn J. Lundberg, Mika S. Pajunen, Emanuel Tov, and Richard D. Weis Vol. 1A-C: The Hebrew Bible Vol. 2A-C: The Deuterocanonical Scriptures Vol. 3A-D: A Companion to Textual Criticism • For available volumes and prices see brill.com/thb Volume 3, A Companion to Textual Criticism, Volume Editors Russel E. Fuller and Armin Lange, consists of the following subvolumes: Volume 3A History of Research edited by Armin Lange and Russell E. Fuller surveys the history of research on the textual criticism and textual history of the Hebrew Bible and its versions in both Judaism and Christianity from its ancient beginnings until today for all of its important versions. Volume 3B Modern Editions of the Text of the Bible in Hebrew and the Ancient Versions (Fifteenth Century to the Present) edited by Richard D. Weis provides a comprehensive discussion of the printed editions of the Jewish Scriptures in all of the languages covered in THB 1 and 2 starting from the advent of the printing press in the West. Volume 3C Theory and Practice of Textual Criticism edited by Mika S. Pajunen will address in one place technical terminology, genres and media transmitting biblical texts, the practice of textual criticism, translation theory and translation technique, and theories of textual transmission.
    [Show full text]
  • Remarks on Vowels Represented by $Ewa and Hatep Signs in the Tiberian Vocalization System
    Journal of Semitic Studies XLI/1 Spring 1996 REMARKS ON VOWELS REPRESENTED BY $EWA AND HATEP SIGNS IN THE TIBERIAN VOCALIZATION SYSTEM GEOFFREY KHAN UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE In the Tiberian Masoretic text a hatep qames sign (representing the quality [a]) sometimes occurs on a non-guttural letter in a syllable that originally had short [o], e.g. *K>1r, ns, V3j7, D*Jj?, Vtb"Tj?-ri*n (2 Kings 12:19), D^DS, riiTO (Ex. 28:40)" ninin (Joel 2:24).'Trie syllable with originally short [o] sometimes takes secondary stress, which is often marked by a ga'ya sign, and the hatep sign is replaced by an ordinary qames. This occurs when the syllable in question is separated from the main stress by another syllable: D^ttnj?, VViO"7j?, T T T The occurrence of secondary stress is sometimes marked on vocalic sewa or a hatep vowel on a guttural letter by a ga'ya sign, e.g. DSVlin (Ezra 9:12), ^aan (Jer. 32:27). The ga'ya sign also marks secondary stress in at least two other contexts. It may occur on a long vowel in an open syllable or on a long vowel before sewa, e.g. "ION"1 (Gen. 22:14), roVl (Gen. 22:5). This is known as major ga'ya. It may also occur on a short vowel in a closed syllable, e.g. ^yrn (Is. 57:8), 1*7550 (Ezek. 4:8). This is known as minor ga'ya. The major and minor ga'yas were treated as different entities by the Masoretes.
    [Show full text]
  • The Believer and the Modern Study of the Bible
    The Believer and the Modern Study of the Bible In memory of Belda and Marcel Lindenbaum ְרֵאַה ִחּי ִיםעִםאָּׁשֲה אֶׁשָר אַהְבָּתָ ּכְל יֵמַיחֵּיֶי הְבֶלֲָך אֶׁשָר נַתְןלַָך ּתַחַת הֶּׁשֶמֹׁש ּכְל יֵמֶיהְבֶלָך ּכִי הּוא חֶלְקְָך ִּבַחַּיים ּובַעֲמָלְָך אֲׁשֶר אַּתָ ה עָמֵלּתַחַת הַּׁשָמֶ ׁש קהלת ט, ט Enjoy happiness with a woman you love all the fleeting days of life that have been granted to you under the sun all your fleeting days. For that alone is what you can get out of life and out of the means you acquire under the sun. Ecclesiastes 9:9 The editors are grateful to Targum Shlishi, a Raquel and Aryeh Rubin Foundation for making the open-access publication of this book possible. The Believer and the Modern Study of the Bible This book is subject to a CC-BY-NC license. To view a copy of this license, visit Edited By Tova Ganzel,Yehudah Brandes, and https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/. Other than as provided by these licenses, no part of this book may be reproduced, transmitted, or displayed by any Chayuta Deutsch electronic or mechanical means without permission from the publisher or as permitted by law. The open access publication of this volume is made possible by: The Believer and the Modern Study of the Bible Edited By Tova Ganzel, Yehudah Brandes, and Chayuta Deutsch Boston 2019 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Ganzel, Tova, editor. | Brandes, Yehudah, editor. | Deutsch, Chayuta, editor. Title: The Believer and the modern study of the Bible / edited by Tova Ganzel, Yehudah Brandes, and Chayuta Deutsch.
    [Show full text]
  • Origins of the Torah
    Origins of the Torah Scrolls from the Torah that Predated Moses Our teacher Moses wrote this book of Genesis together with the entire Torah as dictated by the holy One, blessed is He. It would have been appropriate for him to write at the beginning of the book of Genesis, “The Lord spoke to Moses all these words, saying.” The reason it was written anonymously [i.e., with no such introductory phrase] is that our teacher Moses did not write the Torah in the first person . whereas our teacher Moses wrote the history of all previous generations and his own genealogy, history, and experiences in the third person. Moses therefore is not mentioned in the Torah until his birth, and even then he is mentioned as if someone else were speaking of him. Thus Moses was like a scribe transcribing an ancient book. —Nachmanides, Introduction to Genesis Nachmanides’s words typify the mainstream rabbinical opinion regarding the composition of the Torah in general, and of Genesis in particular. Yet throughout the generations there were some who argued that the Torah had been given “in scrolls,” each at the time most appropriate for its content to be revealed. The stories of Genesis, according to this opinion, were also given at their appropriate time, namely, that of the Patriarchs.1 Moses then was not merely “like a scribe transcribing an ancient book,” but literally used a preexisting text when writing the Torah.2 1 Rabbi Yoḥanan said in the name of Rabbi Banna’ah: The Torah was given in scrolls, as it says, “Then I said, ‘Behold I have come, I am written about in the scroll of the book’” (Ps.
    [Show full text]