Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - [b-hebrew] almighty?

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: <michaelabernat9001 AT sbcglobal.net>
  • To: "b-hebrew" <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: [b-hebrew] almighty?
  • Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 16:03:28 -0500

To make a long story short, I was reading a commentary on Psalm 91 that
argued that שַׁדַּי $DY should be translated in such a way that it
demonstrates God's bounty. I was curious to see how it was translated in the
Septuagint so I looked it up. I was surprised to find that it was rarely
translated at all. Usually, the authors substituted God or Lord. Is there
some reason for this? Was שַׁדַּי considered too holy to translate or
something?
Sincerely,
Michael Abernathy
>From bsr15 AT cantsl.it.canterbury.ac.nz Wed Jul 25 18:08:20 2007
Return-Path: <bsr15 AT cantsl.it.canterbury.ac.nz>
X-Original-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Delivered-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Received: from cantva.canterbury.ac.nz (cantva.canterbury.ac.nz
[132.181.2.27])
by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B57EE4C01B
for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Wed, 25 Jul 2007 18:08:19 -0400
(EDT)
Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON.it.canterbury.ac.nz by it.canterbury.ac.nz
(PMDF V6.3-x11 #31493) id <01MJELBBDSYO9GYY63 AT it.canterbury.ac.nz> for
b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org; Thu,
26 Jul 2007 10:08:08 +1200 (NEW ZEALAND STANDARD TIME)
Received: from cantsl.it.canterbury.ac.nz
(cantsl.it.canterbury.ac.nz [132.181.4.26])
by it.canterbury.ac.nz (PMDF V6.3-x11 #31493)
with ESMTP id <01MJELBBMA649FWRXW AT it.canterbury.ac.nz> for
b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org; Thu,
26 Jul 2007 10:08:08 +1200 (NEW ZEALAND STANDARD TIME)
Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 10:08:08 +1200 (NZST)
From: Bill Rea <bsr15 AT cantsl.it.canterbury.ac.nz>
In-reply-to: <mailman.391660.1185314486.26993.b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Message-id: <Pine.SOL.4.58.0707261001570.12469 AT cantsl.it.canterbury.ac.nz>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
References: <mailman.391660.1185314486.26993.b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] virginity
X-BeenThere: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: bill.rea AT canterbury.ac.nz
List-Id: Biblical Hebrew Forum <b-hebrew.lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew>,
<mailto:b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/b-hebrew>
List-Post: <mailto:b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sympa AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=HELP>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew>,
<mailto:b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 22:08:20 -0000

Yigal wrote:-

>BTW - all of the above, about rape being "no big deal", is based on a
>literal reading of the passage involved.

I once read that Philo regarded the seduction of a marriage woman
as a more serious crime than the rape of a virgin. Unfortunately
I can't give you any details of where I read it. But it is consistent
with what we understand from the Hebrew Bible.

Bill Rea, ICT Services, University of Canterbury \_
E-Mail bill.rea AT canterbury.ac.nz </ New
Phone 64-3-364-2331, Fax 64-3-364-2332 /) Zealand
Unix Systems Administrator (/'




  • [b-hebrew] almighty?, michaelabernat9001, 07/25/2007

Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page