The Linkage Between Isaiah 7:14 and 9:6

Eduardo M. Acuna eacuna at
Thu Mar 8 15:17:06 EST 2001

> On 08-03-2001 02:33 Eduardo M. Acuna <eacuna at> wrote:
> > The site: shows what you say.
> > However, Qumran in my opinion is an heretic jewish sect engaged in magic.
> > The scrolls show many re-writing attempts, almost like forgotten drafts in
> > the trash basket.
> Eduardo,
> In reaction to your answer, the following:
> I think you do not know where you're talking about, when you say this with
> regard to the 1QIsa^a-scroll. 
I was very clear:"The scrolls show many re-writing attempts, almost like
forgotten drafts in the trash basket".
> It is an important and very good preserved bible-manuscripts.
There are other good examples of very well preserved mss. and amulets
regarding magic.
> So, even if you are right with regard to Qumran (which I really doubt), you
> skip the problem with regard to this reading much to easy.
> <Hebr> (MNW )L <endHebr> is written as two words indeed in e.g. BHS or
> Snaith. However, the Codex Leningradensis itself does not show a clear space
> between the two elements.
And not only there but the whole text of CL. So, applying this fact only
to Isaiah 7:14 and 8:8 is misleading.
Also, we have the fact that BHS is based on CL, so it is your opinion that
all the specialists that worked on BHK and BHS are wrong and that they
should write
one word?
> In Isaiah 7:14 it only could be; in Isaiah 8:8
> there is certainly no space between the two elements and we read <Hebr>
> (MNW)L <endHebr>. You have thus the testimony of CL and 1QIsa^a against your
> statement. 
See above. Only 1QIsa^a stands against my statement. However, dont you
think that in 8:8 it is grammatically wrong to write it as a name?
> So, you're assumption was simply wrong.

More information about the b-hebrew mailing list