Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Doctor X · 12-23-2003, 10:13 PM

Okay, this is beginning to make sense:

Quote:

Moi: Anyways, I am not sure I understand GD's "point." Are you arguing that there was a "10 Commandments" that got broken then refashioned? Are you arguing the story states that? Seriously.

GD: No, I think it is all myth. My point is that the Bible doesn't have two sets of stone tablets with different contents, and that this is an anachronistic feature suddenly discovered in the 19th century.

actually, the problem of two version of the story "stitched together" with a version having Moses smash the tablets--Friedman and others opine that the E writer does this to suggest that the Jerusalem temple run by a rival priestly group did not have the "original" tablets--all leading to what appears to be multiple versions was recognized early on. Whoever the Redactor was, he tried to clean up the contraditions. Now did he believe the story?

Did any believe the story? I do not know. For example, if Friedman is correct E is clearly changing the story--as is D when he alters the P version--so they would "know" that they were altering the story. It could be cold political manipulation of priests who believe nothing and use the religion for political power all the way to very sincere writers who want to support what they believe to be the true way of looking at the stories. Who knows? I do not know.

Much like the NT, the writers such as E and J did not expect to be in the same damn book! Redactor wanted to harmonize the versions. This why I answered "yes . . . and no!" The Redactor and those who used other writers would know they altered the story in order to present a coherent story.

Quote:

You'll find (and Doc X I'm sure will back me up!) that in versions of the Bible where "he (God)" is capitalised, it is ALWAYS capitalised. Where is isn't, it never is.

As soon as your check clears . . . as far as I know the "capital" He is a convention in English translation--though I would not be surprised if other translations did the same thing. It was a way to set off Big Daddy.

I am not a Hebrew scholar, so I cannot look at the Hebrew we have and make a coherent argument that "given the platial shift of the frictive of" we have to consider the Hebrew "he" refers to Big Daddy rather than Moses. Note that "he" refers in the passage to Moses.

Quote:

Note the "he said" in 34:9 and 34:10. Could that be Moses making the covenant in 34:10. After all, he also uses the word "LORD" there! A case could be mounted that Moses has suffered megalomania, and says he is going to do marvels!

Hrmmm . . . let me see . . . "Lord" is a convention for YHWH--which is why Darby uses "Jehovah." When you see "Lord" it is some version of "YHWH." Now, whom is speaking:

Ex 34:1-

Quote:

KJV: And the LORD said unto Moses, Hew thee two tables of stone like unto the first: and I will write upon [these] tables the words that were in the first tables, which thou brakest.
And be ready in the morning, and come up in the morning unto mount Sinai, and present thyself there to me in the top of the mount. And no man shall come up with thee, neither let any man be seen throughout all the mount; neither let the flocks nor herds feed before that mount.

Exodus 34:4
And he hewed two tables of stone like unto the first; and Moses rose up early in the morning, and went up unto mount Sinai, as the LORD had commanded him, and took in his hand the two tables of stone.

Exodus 34:5
And the LORD descended in the cloud, and stood with him there, and proclaimed the name of the LORD. And the LORD passed by before him, and proclaimed, The LORD, The LORD God, merciful and gracious, longsuffering, and abundant in goodness and truth, Keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, and that will by no means clear [the guilty]; visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children's children, unto the third and to the fourth [generation].

And Moses made haste, and bowed his head toward the earth, and worshipped. And he said, If now I have found grace in thy sight, O Lord, let my Lord, I pray thee, go among us; for it [is] a stiffnecked people; and pardon our iniquity and our sin, and take us for thine inheritance. And he said, Behold, I make a covenant: before all thy people I will do marvels, such as have not been done in all the earth, nor in any nation: and all the people among which thou [art] shall see the work of the LORD: for it [is] a terrible thing that I will do with thee.

Recall above that it is the Redactor who add the lines in the beginning to make this the second set. We do not have quotation marks like newer versions. It appears clear in 34:4 it is Moses who goes and hews the stone.

Let us try a newer translation:

Quote:

Young's Literal: And Jehovah saith unto Moses, 'Hew for thyself two tables of stone like the first, and I have written on the tables the words which were on the first tables which thou hast broken; and be prepared at morning, and thou hast come up in the morning unto mount Sinai, and hast stood before Me there, on the top of the mount, and no man cometh up with thee, and also no man is seen in all the mount, also the flock and the herd do not feed over-against that mount.'

Exodus 34:4
And he heweth two tables of stone like the first, and Moses riseth early in the morning, and goeth up unto mount Sinai, as Jehovah commanded him, and he taketh in his hand two tables of stone.

Exodus 34:5
And Jehovah cometh down in a cloud, and stationeth Himself with him there, and calleth in the Name of Jehovah, and Jehovah passeth over before his face, and calleth: 'Jehovah, Jehovah God, merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and abundant in kindness and truth, keeping kindness for thousands, taking away iniquity, and transgression, and sin, and not entirely acquitting, charging iniquity of fathers on children, and on children's children, on a third [generation], and on a fourth.'

And Moses hasteth, and boweth to the earth, and doth obeisance, and saith, 'If, I pray Thee, I have found grace in Thine eyes, O my Lord, let my Lord, I pray Thee, go in our midst (for it [is] a stiff-necked people), and thou hast forgiven our iniquity and our sin, and hast inherited us.'

And He saith, 'Lo, I am making a covenant: before all thy people I do wonders, which have not been done in all the earth, or in any nation, and all the people in whose midst thou [art] have seen the work of Jehovah, for it [is] fearful that which I am doing with thee.

Note that Young's capitalizes "Me." Again, it is Moses doing the work. Here, it has YHWY making the last quote and capitalizes "He."

Now let us move to the RSV--I quoted most of it before, so I will start with 34:8

Quote:

RSV: 8 And Moses made haste to bow his head toward the earth, and worshiped. 9 And he said, "If now I have found favor in thy sight, O Lord, let the Lord, I pray thee, go in the midst of us, although it is a stiff-necked people; and pardon our iniquity and our sin, and take us for thy inheritance." 10 And he said, "Behold, I make a covenant. Before all your people I will do marvels, such as have not been wrought in all the earth or in any nation; and all the people among whom you are shall see the work of the LORD; for it is a terrible thing that I will do with you. 11 "Observe what I command you this day. Behold, I will drive out before you the Amorites, the Canaanites, the Hittites, the Per'izzites, the Hivites, and the Jeb'usites. 12 Take heed to yourself, lest you make a covenant with the inhabitants of the land whither you go, lest it become a snare in the midst of you. 13 You shall tear down their altars, and break their pillars, and cut down their Ashe'rim

Confusing. I understood it--and I believe Friedman does in his quotation--see above--that YHWH is speaking at 10. RSV on-line has no closure of the Moses quotation begun at nine unless one looks at it as an end of a thought at 10 with continuation of Moses speaking at 11. This does not make much sense, unless one wants to believe Moses is reciting the rule while YHWH just sort of stands there!! He is speaking through Moses?! Incidentally, why cannot YHWH make tablets? It seems RSV mixes something up--typo?--at 10.

It really cannot be Moses because it continues:

Quote:

14 (for you shall worship no other god, for the LORD, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God), 15 lest you make a covenant with the inhabitants of the land, and when they play the harlot after their gods and sacrifice to their gods and one invites you, you eat of his sacrifice, 16 and you take of their daughters for your sons, and their daughters play the harlot after their gods and make your sons play the harlot after their gods. 17 "You shall make for yourself no molten gods. 18 "The feast of unleavened bread you shall keep. Seven days you shall eat unleavened bread, as I commanded you, at the time appointed in the month Abib; for in the month Abib you came out from Egypt. 19 All that opens the womb is mine, all your male cattle, the firstlings of cow and sheep.

which would have Moses demanding sacrifice of the first-born to himself!

I think the RSV mixed up the convention of not having a closing quotation at the end of a paragraph and using a openning quotation at the start of the next paragraph when the same speaker is speaking.

Also, it seems the KJV does not use the "He"--see the opening:

Quote:

KJV 1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. 2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. 3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. 4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. 5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night.

Note the "he" rather than "He" when it is clearly Elohim [Stop that!--Ed.] doing the work! I do not know when capitalization of divine pronouns started. It appears to be after the KJV and someone mixed this one up.

What was the point?

Oh yeah:

Quote:

As I've said, if "he wrote on the tablets" in Ex 34:28 refers to God, then it is consistant with EVERYTHING else. If it refers to Moses, then there are lots of problems elsewhere.

Well, as you see, the KJV does not bother with the "He"--at least on-line . . . I do not have one handy. The context, however, seems to be Moses. Again:

Quote:

KJV And the LORD said unto Moses, Write thou these words: for after the tenor of these words I have made a covenant with thee and with Israel. 28 And he was there with the LORD forty days and forty nights; he did neither eat bread, nor drink water. And he wrote upon the tables the words of the covenant, the ten commandments.

Seems rather clear that YHWH tells Moses to write the words. Verse 28 uses "he" for Moses . . . unless YHWH is with YHWH and YHWH does not eat any bread or water.

Of course . . . the "forty days" is a metaphor in all likelihood--a "long time" since Moses would be dead without water for forty days!

--J.D.

Gawen · 12-24-2003, 02:39 PM

This has been a most fascinating thread. I was rather disappointed when I got to the end and can't wait for the rest. Also, I'm quite happy that this thread has not seen any 'mud-flinging'....like a few others I've read.

GakuseiDon · 12-27-2003, 09:53 AM

Doc, IMHO you slightly misunderstand one point, but your post is very close to what I am saying, so I think it is easy to explain.

About 34:9&10, you said:

Quote:

Confusing. I understood it--and I believe Friedman does in his quotation--see above--that YHWH is speaking at 10... It really cannot be Moses because it continues:

which would have Moses demanding sacrifice of the first-born to himself!

I agree. Someone could try to make the case that it is Moses speaking at 34:10, but by checking the context the case is stronger that it is God speaking.

Note that 34:9 & 10 has "Then he said" in 34:9, followed by a "And he said" in 34:10. In English, the rule of thumb is that the subject is inherited from the previous clause (unless otherwise indicated), so the first assumption would be that "he" refers to the same person in both verses - but even in English this is a convention, not a grammatical rule, so we need to also look at the context. In this case, the context strongly suggests that 34:9 it is Moses speaking, and in 34:10 it is God speaking.

Now to 34:28. You said:

Quote:

Well, as you see, the KJV does not bother with the "He"--at least on-line . . . I do not have one handy. The context, however, seems to be Moses. Again:

Seems rather clear that YHWH tells Moses to write the words. Verse 28 uses "he" for Moses . . . unless YHWH is with YHWH and YHWH does not eat any bread or water.

Of course . . . the "forty days" is a metaphor in all likelihood--a "long time" since Moses would be dead without water for forty days!

As in 34:9 & 10, I'm saying that the first "he" refers to Moses, and the second "He" refers to God, which is how the NKJV shows it. (The KJV uses lower case "he" for both Moses and God).

Like in 34:10, this comes from context, in that it is consistent with the passages before or after it. As you say, we don't think it is Moses speaking in 34:10, as it would mean Moses demanding sacrifice of the first-born to himself.

If someone said that it was Moses speaking in Ex 34:10, how could be show that it wasn't except via context?

If the context fits better that it is God writing on the tablets in 34:28, do you not agree that the NKJV is correct to use "He" instead of "he"?

To show how it fits the context better, I can show the many parallels with the other passages:

(1) In Ex 34:1, God promises to personally write on the second set of stones. (Given the ambiguity of Ex 34:28, I would say that this by itself would be enough to establish context).

(2) The commands that God gives Moses are repeats from earlier in the Bible, suggesting that the commands are symbolic of a restoration of the covenant.

(3) Moses writing the words in the Book of the Covenant and NOT on the tablets is consistent with what occurs the first time (Ex 24:4 - 8), where Moses writes all the commands in the Book of the Covenant.

(4) In both cases, Moses spends 40 days and nights on the mountain (Ex 24:18) before receiving the tablets which God Himself had written on (Ex 31:18).

(5) Finally, Deut 10 says that that the "10 Commandments" from Ex 20 are written on both sets of tablets.

Now, if we assume that "he wrote on the tablets" refers to Moses, it suddenly contradicts directly with Ex 34:1, and goes against the precedents of the other passages.

Not that there would be anything wrong with that, IF there were a clear cut statement that it is Moses writing on the tablets.

Given that there is no such clear-cut statement, and given that the only way to establish this is through context (as per the example in Ex 34:9 & 10), I suggest that the case is very strong that the NKJV is correct to use "He" in Ex 34:28, and that would imply Ex 34:1 is also correct: that the same things are written on both sets of tablets.

Kosh · 12-27-2003, 12:14 PM

But GD....

What is the historical/linguistic/scholarly support (or whatever) for changing that second "he" to "He", other than the fact that it has to be done to make the apologetic work?

Doctor X · 12-27-2003, 02:00 PM

Indeed.

--J.D.

GakuseiDon · 12-27-2003, 05:07 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Kosh
But GD....

What is the historical/linguistic/scholarly support (or whatever) for changing that second "he" to "He", other than the fact that it has to be done to make the apologetic work?

It is for the very same reason that the "he" is changed to "He" in Ex 34:10 - the context. I don't think that Doc was being an apologist on that occasion(!)

As for support: This is what the NKJV says:

Quote:

27 Then the Lord said to Moses, "Write these words, for according to the tenor of these words I have made a covenant with you and with Israel."

28 So he was there with the Lord forty days and forty nights; he neither ate bread nor drank water. And He wrote on the tablets the words of the covenant, the *Ten Commandments.

Who made the NKJV?

Quote:

The NKJV is an attempt at updating the language while preserving the literary structure of the KJV. It is not a new translation, but a new and improved version of the old...

In 1975 an international group of 130 scholars began work on the NKJV, which was to be a revision, using the KJV as a base, and not a new translation of the Bible. The NT was completed in 1979, the OT in 1982.

The task of updating the English of the KJV involved significant changes in word order, grammar, vocabulary, and spelling. One of the most significant features of the NKJV was its abandonment of the second personal pronouns �thou,� �ye,� �thy,� and �thine.� Verbal endings and verb forms were also modernized in the NKJV...

The NKJV is a reasonable attempt by a large group of competent scholars to produce an English language Bible that retains as much of the classic KJV as possible, while updating the language to accomodate the modern reader.

I suppose that you may say that the NKJV scholars were also indulging in apologetics. If so, what are your reasons for deciding that they are wrong in this case?

Remember, you need to account for Ex 34:1, where God clearly states that He will write on the tablets, and that He will write the same things as on the first.

Reread what Doc wrote above, about Ex 34:9 and 10.

What is the reason for having 34:10 be "And He (God) said", instead of "And he (Moses) said"? We have two "he"s following on from one another just like in Ex 34:28, so why even question whether 34:10 is God speaking. Why not assume 34:10 is yet another contradiction, and leave it at that? It is because it doesn't match the context.

Does anyone disagree with the above point?

Ex 34:28 is ambiguous, in exactly the same way that 34:9 and 34:10 are. I have given my reasons for why the NKJV uses "He" there. So what are your reasons for why the NKJV scholars are wrong?

spin · 12-27-2003, 05:33 PM

Given this quote:

Quote:

27 Then the Lord said to Moses, "Write these words, for according to the tenor of these words I have made a covenant with you and with Israel."

28 So he was there with the Lord forty days and forty nights; he neither ate bread nor drank water. And He wrote on the tablets the words of the covenant, the *Ten Commandments.

in which the Lord tells Moses to "write these words", the context plainly says, when it comes to "and he wrote..." that the "he" is the one told to write, ie Moses. This seems the plainest reading of the passage.

I'm not entering into whatever it is the debate is, but using the text provided and a reading of "he" = the Lord seems way off when the Lord is telling Moses to write.

spin

GakuseiDon · 12-27-2003, 05:50 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by spin
I'm not entering into whatever it is the debate is, but using the text provided and a reading of "he" = the Lord seems way off when the Lord is telling Moses to write.

Welcome spin, I think you have just entered the debate!

The problem is one of context. The NKJV uses "He", clearly indicating "God". (The KJV uses "he" there, but it uses lower-case for "God" every other place as well). So the question is: why is the NKJV wrong?

In Ex 34:9 and 10, we have a similar situation with trying to decide who the"he" in 10 refers to. Why do we think it is God? Because of the context.

In Ex 34:27, God asks Moses to write the commands, but not on the tablets. In Ex 24:4 Moses is said "to write all the commandments" from God in the Book of the Covenant.

In Ex 34:1, God clearly promises to do the writing on the tablets.

I don't want to rehash the argument anew. I suggest you read my last few posts. If you have any questions after that, I'll be happy to go into them.

Amaleq13 · 12-27-2003, 07:04 PM

Maybe I've been reading Paul too much but, when I read Ex 34, I assume that God is writing the commandments through Moses rather than magically making the words appear or invisibly guiding a chisel.

spin · 12-27-2003, 07:20 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by GakuseiDon
Welcome spin, I think you have just entered the debate!

The problem is one of context. The NKJV uses "He", clearly indicating "God". (The KJV uses "he" there, but it uses lower-case for "God" every other place as well). So the question is: why is the NKJV wrong?

In Ex 34:9 and 10, we have a similar situation with trying to decide who the"he" in 10 refers to. Why do we think it is God? Because of the context.

In Ex 34:27, God asks Moses to write the commands, but not on the tablets. In Ex 24:4 Moses is said "to write all the commandments" from God in the Book of the Covenant.

In Ex 34:1, God clearly promises to do the writing on the tablets.

I don't want to rehash the argument anew. I suggest you read my last few posts. If you have any questions after that, I'll be happy to go into them.

Sorry, GakuseiDon, but you haven't addressed the immediate problem of cohesion in the text, to whit:

God tells Moses to write the words in 34:27 and (?) writes them in 34:28.

Any reader of the text would conclude that from that immediate context the (?) is Moses. Note that: "any reader of the text".

Until you get that clear it doesn't matter what the wider text says, especially if different parts of the text were written by different people as seems to be the case in numerous parts of the Hebrew bible. Don't be so hung up on contradictions. The ancient authors weren't. They included a lot of contradictions, obviously feeling at thimes that the text is more worthy to be recorded as is (and not intervene) and let other people worry about the implications. Texts are often written straight after differing versions, sometimes incorporated (as in the flood story). Traditions tend to have varying versions.

It doesn't change the stylistic impact of the two verses I commented on. The "he" who did the writing is indicated by the text as he who the Lord told to write.

spin

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

12-24-2003, 02:39 PM	#52
Gawen Contributor Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Cylon Occupied Texas, but a Michigander @ heart Posts: 10,326	This has been a most fascinating thread. I was rather disappointed when I got to the end and can't wait for the rest. Also, I'm quite happy that this thread has not seen any 'mud-flinging'....like a few others I've read.

12-27-2003, 12:14 PM	#54
Kosh Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: Orions Belt Posts: 3,911	But GD.... What is the historical/linguistic/scholarly support (or whatever) for changing that second "he" to "He", other than the fact that it has to be done to make the apologetic work?

12-27-2003, 02:00 PM	#55
Doctor X Banned Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: USA Posts: 3,794	Indeed. --J.D.

12-27-2003, 07:04 PM	#59
Amaleq13 Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Eagle River, Alaska Posts: 7,816	Maybe I've been reading Paul too much but, when I read Ex 34, I assume that God is writing the commandments through Moses rather than magically making the words appear or invisibly guiding a chisel.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.