[b-hebrew] Isaiah 53: In his death?
Lee Roy Martin
lmartin at vol.com
Mon May 17 17:56:18 EDT 2004
I see no problem in a wicked/rich parallel. Cf. the connection between
evil and riches in Proverbs 28:22; Jer. 5:26-27; and Psalm 37:16.
Micah, Amos and other prophets frequently ascribe great wickedness to
On May 17, 2004, at 5:05 PM, UUC wrote:
> Dear Lee,
> I doubt about the parallelism in this verse, since rich are not
> paralleled to wicked in ancient literature.
> Anyway, "altars" is just the closest approximation of bamah. "Shrine"
> another possibility, I agree with you. It's not only the burial
> places, but
> also sacrificial places, thus could be in plural, no problem.
> Best regards,
> Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Isaiah 53: In his death?
>> Given your concern for the literal, if you insist on rejecting bemotav
>> as "death" then you should translate it as "his high places," not "his
>> altars". The word bamah means "back", or "high place". If a high
>> place is used for worship it may include an altar or a shrine, but the
>> Isaiah 53 text does include the words altar or house, both of which
>> occur in other texts along with the word bamah.
>> If the high place is a cultic place of burial, as it seems to be in
>> Ezek. 4:7, then you still have the problem of the plural form= "his
>> burial places".
>> In light of the parallelism of the verse, I would either translate as
>> "his death" or "his burial", and accept the plural as intensive.
>> Lee R. Martin
>> On May 15, 2004, at 2:46 AM, unikom at paco.net wrote:
>>> Well, since the argument started to deviate into a messianic debate,
>>> may I
>>> suggest to concentrate, to begin with, on a single word:
>>> It is uniformly translated as
>>> in his death.
>>> How so? The word is in plural in every mss, even in Qumran.
>>> So, it is either,
>>> in his deathS,
>>> or, from boma,
>>> his altars
>>> I would love to read any arguments to the contrary.
>>> Vadim Cherny
>>> b-hebrew mailing list
>>> b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org
More information about the b-hebrew