Madkins007

OK, I am probably spending too much time on this, but you've got me curious.

1. I have found a lot of words often used for young children, including 'taph' (little ones or children used 42 times), ben (the most common term it seems- used almost 5000 times but with a fairly wide definition), owlel (apparently used for babies most often, but only used 20 times), yeled (89 times).

2. The 'Biblical Hebrew Dictionary' lists r[n (naar) as 'young man' (http://www.ancient-hebrew.org/17_dict_14.html)

3. In use, 'qatar' means unimportant, least, and insignificant about as often as it does 'small' or 'young'. It is often used in the phrase 'great and small'.

4. In the places 'qatar naar' is used, the context is iffy as to whether it means young child or insignifant young man, etc. (And the Young's Literal Translation always renders it 'little youth')

Examples of #4 include (KJV unless noted):
1 Samuel 20:35 "And it came to pass in the morning, that Jonathan went out into the field at the time appointed with David, and a little lad with him." (Little lad is qatar naar- but in context, this seems to be 'young male servant'. The kid sounds like a teen, but no context seems to pinpoint his age much)

1 Kings 3:7 "And now, O LORD my God, thou hast made thy servant king instead of David my father: and I am but a little child: I know not how to go out or come in. " (Solomon is the speaker and is at least a young man at this point)

1 Kings 11:17 "That Hadad fled, he and certain Edomites of his father's servants with him, to go into Egypt; Hadad being yet a little child.". (No age hints in context, however the kid is married off a couple verses later after an unspecified time)

2 Kings 5:14 "Then went he down, and dipped himself seven times in Jordan, according to the saying of the man of God: and his flesh came again like unto the flesh of a little child, and he was clean" (Your example- and all it means is that his skin was cured of 'leperosy'. The context does not automatically require the term to mean 'little child'- even now we talk about a teen's skin as exceptionally smooth)

Isaiah 11:6 "The wolf also shall dwell with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the kid; and the calf and the young lion and the fatling together; and a little child shall lead them." (The most famous usage, and although the imagery is of a pre-teen, it does not have to be so.)


Not including the scene with the bears, this is ALL of the usages I can find*. As far as I can see, it does not HAVE to mean young child in any of them, and seems to mean teen or older in 3 of the 6 total verses.

(*= My method was to look up the word 'qatar' in the on-line Strong's Hebrew Lexicon, then search each instance to see if 'naar' was used in the same passage. Of 101 uses of 'qatar', this is all that involved 'naar'. Many others used 'ben'.)

MY conclusion: Let's call this aspect of this one a draw. Context is inconclusive unless you have another resource we can try. The 42 plus 'qatar naar' are old enough to hang out in a large group and travel outside of the town with some freedom. How's 10 to 20 years old grab you?

Madkins007

If a notched rope, what do you suppose its accuracy was in describing things like this? The rope would have been some 50' long to get around the sea. I'm trying to imagine the difficulty in measuring that distance 8' off the ground- sags in the rope, trying to pull it tight if there are decorations or protrusions to work around, etc.

If the rope is marked every yard or so (to use familar measurements), wouldn't you basically pull it until the end got near a mark, and call it good (unless you needed more accuracy for building, etc.)?

Steven Carr

Only because you declare it to be so.

Solomon is using it metaphorically to describe his total inexperience as king in comparison to David, not as a literal description of his age.

David was a boy in the passage.

Why call it it a draw? It is always translated 'little youth' which seems like a small child to me.

And do we talk about a teenager's skin as exceptionally smooth, especially in ancient days when childhood diseases like measles and chickenpox destroyed many people's complexion.....?

GakuseiDon

I'm not sure. The ancient Egyptians built some amazing things on this system.

One thing to note about measurements in the Bible is that half cubits were used only for lengths under 4 cubits (Goliath is the only exception, at 7.5 cubits). Over 4 cubits, all measurements were in whole cubits. This suggests a rounding strategy.

ceinwyn

A note on the "qatar naar" controversy here:

I've read the posts, and I've read the translations. I'm sorry Madkin, but you seem to really be reaching here. It's obvious to me what the meanings are: a young child, probably male.

That may be a problem for you as your reasonings seem to bear out. I'm sorry, but from what I gather, most scholars would agree with the posted translations.

Madkins007

I was going to go a different direction with this response, then I tried a couple more Jewish references (which are danged hard to use English in- I kept getting the word 'aborrhed', which I want to claim reinforces the 'teenager' aspect, but...

In Hebrew tradition, I found that this:
"Literally, na'ar means "a youth." It can also mean a servant or attendant.
The commentaries explain that na'ar generally indicates behavior rather than age. A na'ar is a person who shows youth in his actions. This is sometimes negative, as with Joseph, who was described as acting like an immature youth. Sometimes it is positive, as when describing Joshua who - at age 42 - is called a na'ar in reference to his serving and learning from Moses like a young student." (ohr.edu- a Jewish forum)

And in another Hebrew site:
"qatan "make smaller, diminish" The opposite of גדל cf. Am 8:5.
The adjective קָטֹן qaton "small" is a very common word, in Amos 6:11 it speaks of the "little" houses of ordinary folk (by contrast with the "great houses" of the elite) . While in 7:2 and 5 he speaks of Israel (Jacob) as so "small" that he will not survive the coming punishments." (http://www.bible.gen.nz/amos/hebrew/qoph/qatan.htm)



I KNOW I started this, but I am really feeling like I am straining at gnats overfocusing on the ager range of 'na'ar', especially if some Jewish scholars feel is a behavioral definition. I'll shut up on this now.

Madkins007

Certainly, you CAN get great accuracy- I just wondered how much you would work at it for something like this! Its already built and you are just basically bragging up the size. Why work for accuracy greater than that given in this sort of situation?

Mary.

Still, I don't see it this way. Yes, God is pissed that Israel is again worshipping foriegn gods. And yes, Jeremiah means for the overall message of his preaching to be that they should obeying their own god (which meant sacrificing only to God as prescribed by God himself). But the one particular statement at Jer 7:22 is a sweeping one in which God says flatly that he never spoke to those he brought out of Egypt about sacrifices, which he did.

Do I believe that God said anything at all to either Moses or Jeremiah? No, I don't. I think both Moses and Jeremiah preached there own message on 'the ways things should be'; whether they sincerely thought the message came from God - that's irrelavent, too. The point is that Jeremiah overstated his case by making such a sweeping statement while preaching (preachers do such all the time) and by putting those words in God's mouth, he made God say a mistruth.

Mary.

SwoleMan

How about this?

Matt 2:15 says:

Hos 11:1 says:

No way this line of Hosea is to be taken as a prophecy. He is writing about Exodus.

Madkins007

For my purposes, inaccurate or misguided though the guidelines might be, I am trying to avoid Jesus and narratives for different reasons.

OK, here is where I am at...

1. We all know there are problems with the Bible- inconsistancies in eyewitness reports, mistranslations, errors in transcription, entire sections probably based on myths from other cultures, stories and beliefs in stark contrast to what we would expect from a benevolent god, etc.

2. We also know that at least some of the entries in the typical 'errors and contradictions in the bible' lists are not really errors in any real sense- comparing comments made in two different situations (almost apples to oranges), glitches in the English language, forcing idioms and common phrases to exteme limits, etc.

The Bible does not seem to be especially 'inerrant' (except for some odd definition of the term), nor particularly 'inspired' in all ways. And I am not sure (yet) that it really HAS to be to remain in its primary role for most Christians.

On the other hand, it seems that claims that it is all dung and myth may just represent the other end of the pendulum swing.

Usually in cases like this, the answer seems to lie in the middle, I am just wondering where the middle might be. Is there possibly a core of 'inspired, inerrant' elements, such as the records of God's comparatively direct interactions?

So far, it does not seem as if there is- but heck, I am just a guy with a bump of curiosity and a computer- what the heck do **I** know?