Steven Avery

Can you document that the collation you are referencing involves thousands of manuscripts of Proverbs 22 ?

And ... for the purpose of this discussion do manuscripts past about the 17th century have much relevance ?

Shalom,
Steven Avery
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Messianic_Apologetic

JoeWallack

JW:
You ever heard of Geza Vermes? He's generally considered the leading Expert on the DSS and he does know English. I have evidence on my bookshelf. Abegg and Flint are faculty at Trinity. I can't help but notice that Geza Vermes didn't endorse their book (but Herschel Shanks did).

I don't think much of Abegg the question and Flint but I concede that many would consider them authorities. But direct examination of the Evidence is better evidence than just appealing to the authority of Fah! (Flint, Abegg and Hever), isn't it. That's what this Thread is for.

You may wonder why I consider the evidence which I Am putting together in this Thread during commercials superior to the Life Project of prestigous scholars at Trinity. Just think of the scene in the classic Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy where Zaphod Beeblebrox is placed in the anti-isolation chamber by "The Pyschiatrists" and what happens to him.

If Abegg and Flint are running around saying it's an issue of "like a lion" vs. "pierced" knowing that the Hebrew word they think they see at NH does not have a possible meaning of "pierced" than this Thread is needed even more than I thought.



Joseph

Chris Weimer

Joe, I'm still curious on where you've seen the elongated yod at the end of the word. A great piece of evidence would be in the scrolls, in a standard Psalms or other Biblical text.

Anat

So are there any instances in the Hebrew Bible where a verb of the root KRH refers to anything other than digging in the ground? There's also the figurative 'karah ozen' which means to listen, though I'm not sure if it's Biblical.

Phlox Pyros

Of course. I have several of his books on my shelf as well, including his translation of the DSS. I can't say that I'd class him above all others. In fact, I have rather enjoyed reading Martinez' translation of the DSS as well.

I'm not sure why you bring him up, however. Does his newest edition cover the Biblical texts from the DSS? Just curious, because the version I have does not.

I'm not sure what being faculty at Trinity has to do with anything. I'm also unsure why you seem to be resorting to Ad Hominem. I did not see Herschel Shanks on either my copy of their DSS Bible or their DSS translation.... I did, however, see endorsements by other well-known scholars such as Joseph Fitzmyer and J.H. Charlesworth. This is just a name dropping game, however. Let's get to the meat and leave off the Ad Hominem.

Ok. Well, then I asked you some very specific questions. Will you please answer them so that we can delve into the issue a little deeper? If you have something you can teach me (especially with respect to the elongated yod), I am more than willing to learn.

One of the things I mentioned was that the aleph in the K)RW of the NH MSS may be (if I am remembering things correctly) a mater lectionis. If that is possible, as I suspect, and I still need to glance through a few of my books, then the word is simply KRW, or "pierced".

So, I think we'd really get some interesting information flowing if you could answer the questions I've posed. Thanks.

spin

On Ps 22:17:

Simple facts:

1. )RY means "lion";
2. K- indicates "like" as in comparing one thing to be like another;
3. K)RY clearly means "like a lion"

How were these wicked people? -- K)RY YDY H:RGLY, ie "like a lion [at] my hand and foot" or in better English, "like lions at my hands and feet".

More simple facts:

1. The Nahal Hever copy of Ps 22 has a word K)RW (the last letter appears to be a WAW);
2. At around the time of Qumran YODs and WAWs were written in manners that confuse modern readers (see for example F.Moeller's intro to 1QIsaA on the net);
3. There is no biblical form of the verb KRH which has an ALEF (transcribed here as ")") as the second letter and no reason to insert one here based on Qumran orthography;
4. The letters at the end of the relevant line get smaller;
5. The YOD at the end of the next line in the NH Ps.22 (ie BY = "on me") is basically as big as the last letter of K)RW and is as big as the WAW at the end of the previous word of that line (YR)W).

This all means it is difficult to push the necessity of the NH fragment reading a WAW for there is no clear way to be sure that a WAW was either intended or even read by ancient readers, the upshot a reading of K)RW from KRH seems unlikely, so the "to dig" approach is hard to justify.

Even more facts:

1. The Greek verb wruxan ("they dug, dug up") has forms which are similar to the Greek word wrugh (w=omega, h=eta), which I gather is partially onomatopoeic, indicating the sound of some wild animals;
2. According to Liddell and Scott it is principally an attribute of wolves, but L & S also give an indication that it can apply to lions as well, citing Theocritus' Idylls 25:217.

The LXX translator would have had no trouble putting aside the Hebrew parallelism of dogs/lion assailing the servant and writing his version so that the wicked howl (like wolves or lions) at his hands and feet of the speaker. The inventiveness was perhaps lost on a later scribe who, it would seem not catching the sense, used the nearest word he knew based on the verb "to dig".

Still more facts:

1. The English notion of piercing comes from Jn 19:35-37, when a soldier pierced Jesus' side;
2. This is based on a citation from Zech 12:10, "they shall look upon me who they have pierced";
3. The Hebrew word, DBR, is what was translated into English to mean "to pierce, to run through";
4. If that verb is not sufficient, there is also MXC (X = CHET, C = TSADE), which is often translated as ideas such as "to smite through, wound", or as in Jdg 5:26 "to pierce" -- and there are other similarly worthy verbs.

It's not that there was a lack of possibilities for a suitable verb in Ps 22:17 if the writer really wanted to say something like "pierce". It's clearly that that was not the concept that he wanted to convey. Without the usual contortions, the Hebrew text makes sense as it is: "Dogs surround me; an assembly of wicked ones close in on me, like lions at my hands and feet."

If a Greek "to dig" reflected a Hebrew "to dig", how on earth would one get "to pierce"? These are quite different in meaning -- one involving the formation of a hole by excavation and the other damage by insertion of a sharp object -- and one has to turn quite a blind eye to that meaning difference, considering the Hebrew writer had terms that were more accurate to indicate the desired significance of "to pierce". You wouldn't expect a metaphorical use in the Greek and L & S give none, so the LXX translator supposedly giving orussw must really have been confused as to the meaning of the original Hebrew. BDB have to conjure up a special entry just to deal with the phenomenon of K)RY in Ps 22 (see p.468, KWR II.), indicating that the meaning was dubious -- understandably.

If the Greek translator found KRH in the original and translated it as "to dig" rather than going for the hypothesized underlying intention of the original Hebrew, he would be showing as much confusion as a later scribe might over wrugh. The Greek here seems to be of little help in clarifying the fact that the Hebrew has "like a lion". But then, some people want the LXX when it suits them but would prefer it to disappear at other times.

As to a medaieval understanding of the Hebrew text from the Psalms Targum, an Aramaic interpretative translation, Edward Cook renders the relevant verse of the psalm: Because the wicked have surrounded me, who are like many dogs; a gathering of evildoers has hemmed me in, biting my hands and feet like a lion. (With the italics Cook indicates what was added by the targumist.)

It's interesting that when we look at these christianizing interpretations, the pregnant virgin, the servant Israel, the one like a son of man, the lion-like digging, they are seldom straightforward, as though they need to be eked out just to arrive at the christian view about them. Odd that. Some are just unjustiable.

:wave:

Over and out. Whizz... Crackle... Splutter.


spin

Chris Weimer

Thanks spin for setting me straight. :notworthy:

JoeWallack

JW:
Who was that Maskoretic Man?!

Nachal Hever:


For the last word the Masoretic text has "בִי", a known word, while Nachal Hever has "בִו", where there is a "vav" instead of a "yod", another unknown word.

Consider that:

1) A "vav" is a "yod" that extends farther down.

2) The difference between "kaari" and "kaaru" is a "yod" vs. a "vav" for the last letter. The word with the "vav" would be unknown.

3) The difference between the last word in the scrap is a "yod" vs. a "vav" for the last letter. The word with the "vav" would be unknown.

4) Moshe Schulman, whose word is Gospel, in my opinion, points out:

http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/b...er/016753.html

that "yods" in the DSS are often written in the direction (elongated) of "vavs".

Thus it is quite possible that "kaaru" from Nachal Hever was intended to be "kaari".

For those who claim they've Hever seen an elongated yod in the DSS I've got an idea. Why don't you just post a scrap or two here. I can find plenty of em freely available.


Joseph

TRANSLATOR, n.
One who enables two persons of different languages to understand each other by repeating to each what it would have been to the translator's advantage for the other to have said.

http://www.errancywiki.com/index.php/Main_Page

Chris Weimer

Questions for spin:

In your translation, you have "at [my] hand and foot" - my humble question is where did this come from? I don't see a preposition attached to the phrase - does that matter? Isn't usually the preposition ל attached to this sort of phrase? Or is because it is merely poetic that it can be inferred? If not, then how do you explain the assembly (plural) like a lion (singular) hand and foot (not "at")?

Could you also explain a bit more about Qumran orthography. I was under the assumption that it was pretty varied compared to standard Hebrew (Masoretic). Is there a good article you can recommend? Also, if perhaps you could recommend at least one other scroll where an obvious yod looks just like a waw, that would be awesome.

As for the ωρυγη/ωρυξαν mixup, I can find that plausible enough... I'm not sure about probable, but it at least seems plausible.

Questions for Phlox Pyros - Does KRW anyone else mean "to pierce" as in to pierce someone?

Phlox Pyros

This, of course, is the question. Spin wrote very well, but in my opinion it was smoothed over for the layman and the issues were made a little to simple and decisive in one direction. I have more to say on that, but it will probably have to wait.

Spin, you also use the plural "lions" to smooth out the translation. Why? What grounds?

I assume you mean anywhere else. The word is usually used as mentioned "to dig". The perception is that of teeth "digging"/"piercing" into the hands and feet. So, it lends credence to the LXX reading, in my view (and that of the scholars I mentioned).