Interesting, but I believe you mean BNOT not benot. Isaac Fried, Boston University On Oct 31, 2011, at 5:21 PM, Nir cohen - Prof. Mat. wrote: > the few guarany villages along the brazilian coast do it too and the > grooms-to-be travel large distances (nowadays, by bus...) to marry > girls > from another village.
Nir, 1) I like the idea of explaining the delineating of boundaries through such stories. In fact it has precedents -- take the story of Abraham and Lot which served to demarcate the boundary -- essentially the Jordan River -- between the future Israelites on one hand and Moav/Amon on the other The dominance idea I believe was put out before, but I dont know by whom. As an aside, that none of the main characters in the torah are eldest sons is purposeful subversiveness. Uzi Silber On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 5:21 PM, Nir cohen - Prof. Mat. <nir@...> wrote: > > jim, firouz, > > that the ancients used in-clan marriage, this is no surprise. even salmon fish > return to their original breeding place, across the ocean and up the river. > the few guarany villages along the brazilian coast do it too and the > grooms-to-be travel large distances (nowadays, by bus...) to marry girls > from another village. > > this is a necessary strategy for a small group within bigger groups of the > same species, in order to maintain its ethnic identity. recall laban's > reply to jacob: i'd better give my daughter to you than to > another person (...since you are family). >(Continue reading)
Karl, Thank you for your answer.I would be interested to have your translation if אחד refers to God. Firouz Khandjani 2011/10/31 K Randolph <kwrandolph <at> gmail.com> > Firouz: > > We can mention theology, if and only if it is germane to the subject of > the discussion. What we may not do on this list is to push one’s own > theology in an effort to try to get others to believe that theology. The > way I figure it, the people on this list are all educated and have already > heard the differing theological positions before, therefore to proselytize > my theology would only offend and have no positive effect. > > (One of the things that offends me about another member on this list who > shall remain unnamed in this message is that in every message he pushes his > theology, a theology that I reject for linguistic, historical and other > reasons.) > > Having said that, the answer to your question has a theological component, > which can be mentioned without proselytism. This is one of the verses that > Christians point to when they teach their members about Trinity and yet how > that can be a monotheistic concept. I believe that this can be mentioned > without trying to convince you that this theology is the only way to > understand this verse. >(Continue reading)
Appears to to me that EXAD אחד is a variant of EXAZ אחז (also *EHAD אהד ), and eventually also of EGAD אגד and EQAD עקד Isaac Fried, Boston University On Nov 3, 2011, at 3:23 AM, Andronic Khandjani wrote: > אחד refers to God. _______________________________________________ b-hebrew mailing list b-hebrew <at> lists.ibiblio.org http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
Re: 'knowledge good and evil' I believe the phrase should be understood as 'knowledge of right and wrong' - something to do with the nature of Adam's sin - deciding what is right and wrong on their own, which should be in God's hand. The concept of 'good-and-evil' is much subordinate as 'evil' being 'absence of good', rather than a separate condition/power in dualistic thinking. The only translation I find this way is CEV, which is not suitable for serious study ;-< Oun Kwon. On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 10:13 PM, Andronic Khandjani <andronicusmy <at> gmail.com> wrote: > We usually renders Genesis 3:22 by "" Behold, the man is become as one of > us, to know good and evil", a targum translates mimenou by "by himself" and > the mim and the lam may suggest some motion. Mim may suggest subtraction and > lam adhesion. Eva is not even mentioned but only Adam. > > Is it possible that k'ehad refer to the unity of Genesis 2.24, if so Adam > refers here to the humanity and we may render the verse like this: > "The human became as one by their own initiative through the knowledge of > good and evil"? > . > Firouz Khandjani > > _______________________________________________(Continue reading)
Firouz: Yes, in this verse, אחד refers to God. Karl W. Randolph. On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 12:23 AM, Andronic Khandjani <andronicusmy <at> gmail.com>wrote: > Karl, > > Thank you for your answer.I would be interested to have your translation > if אחד refers to God. > > Firouz Khandjani > > > _______________________________________________ b-hebrew mailing list b-hebrew <at> lists.ibiblio.org http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
My 8 year old son is studying Breisheet (Genesis) 18 in school, the story of Abraham and the three visitors. In it Abraham addresses them as 'adonay' (plural of adonee -- 'gentlemen' essentially). but then he suddenly changes to singular, as if he's addressing a single person. He then reverts back to plural. Now Im suspect that the devout would say that this means he realized that the malakhim were angels and that they were essentially god's reps, and thats why he addresses them in singular. But how would nondevout biblical scholars explain this plural-singular-plural switch? scribal mistake? Uzi Silber On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 10:02 PM, K Randolph <kwrandolph <at> gmail.com> wrote: > Firouz: > > Yes, in this verse, אחד refers to God. > > Karl W. Randolph. > > On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 12:23 AM, Andronic Khandjani > <andronicusmy <at> gmail.com>wrote: > >> Karl, >> >> Thank you for your answer.I would be interested to have your translation >> if אחד refers to God. >>(Continue reading)
2011/10/28 Andronic Khandjani <andronicusmy@...> > There is some tendency use plural in the semitic and quite semitic world. > In the Quran, Allah is using the "we", in Iran we use both forms Izad and > Yezdan for the same God. Yezdan is basically a plural like Elohim. > > > 2011/10/28 Uzi Silber <uzisilber@...> > >> eloha singular - elohim plural. >> why can elohim be a very early semitic conception of god as a >> multifaceted entity or even a bundling of canaanite deities? referring >> to them in plural seems to me a clue to such an origin. otherwise it >> would have been be 'tzalmo' and 'kamoni', no? >> >> Uzi Silber >> >> On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 9:53 AM, Andronic Khandjani >> <andronicusmy@...> wrote: >> > Uzi, >> > Thanks. >> > How you will render Elohim? Why the governing verb is singular? >> > >> > I think that we must consider Elohim as singular even HE speaks to >> Angels. I >> > would maintain the monotheism of the author. >> > Firouz Khandjani >> > 2011/10/28 Uzi Silber <uzisilber@...> >> >> >> >> Andronic(Continue reading)
Hi Uzi, Look at Rashi. He give two ways of understanding verse 3. The first, is that he is indeed addressing the messengers as "My lords", and then continues to address the leader, asking him not to leave. He then continues to address all three in the plural. The second option, is that "Adonai is sacred" - in other words, in verse 3 Abraham is addressing God directly, asking him to make the "men" tarry. From a very quick look, at least some translations agree. The KLV, for example, translates "Adonai" as "Lord". Von Rad suggested that the original was "adoni" in the singular, since Abraham is not yet supposed to know that these were angels, and that the Masorets made it "Adonai". So: shiv'im panim latorah. Shabbat Shalom, Yigal Levin -----Original Message----- From: b-hebrew-bounces@... [mailto:b-hebrew-bounces@...] On Behalf Of Uzi Silber Sent: Friday, November 04, 2011 12:52 PM To: K Randolph Cc: b-hebrew Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] k'ehad mimenou My 8 year old son is studying Breisheet (Genesis) 18 in school, the story of Abraham and the three visitors. In it Abraham addresses them as 'adonay' (plural of adonee -- 'gentlemen' essentially). but then he suddenly changes to singular, as if he's addressing a single person. He then reverts back to plural.(Continue reading)
Abraham is speaking with the Memra and 2 Angels. After a while, the Memra remained with him as 2 other Angels left. The context is enough clear and there is not any sign of polytheism. 2011/11/4 Uzi Silber <uzisilber <at> gmail.com> > My 8 year old son is studying Breisheet (Genesis) 18 in school, the > story of Abraham and the three visitors. In it Abraham addresses them > as 'adonay' (plural of adonee -- 'gentlemen' essentially). but then he > suddenly changes to singular, as if he's addressing a single person. > He then reverts back to plural. > > Now Im suspect that the devout would say that this means he realized > that the malakhim were angels and that they were essentially god's > reps, and thats why he addresses them in singular. > > But how would nondevout biblical scholars explain this > plural-singular-plural switch? scribal mistake? > > Uzi Silber > > > > On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 10:02 PM, K Randolph <kwrandolph <at> gmail.com> wrote: > > Firouz: > > > > Yes, in this verse, אחד refers to God. > > > > Karl W. Randolph. > >(Continue reading)
RSS Feed300 | |
|---|---|
411 | |
297 | |
110 | |
89 | |
216 | |
284 | |
210 | |
139 | |
269 | |
210 | |
70 | |
58 | |
81 | |
79 | |
131 | |
60 | |
131 | |
142 | |
147 | |
153 | |
172 | |
176 | |
17 | |
111 | |
274 | |
268 | |
307 | |
347 | |
415 | |
494 | |
540 | |
318 | |
234 | |
276 | |
378 | |
293 | |
531 | |
144 |
