[b-hebrew] Prophetic Perfect? Jer. 50.

UUC unikom at paco.net
Thu May 20 00:31:27 EDT 2004


Dear Liz and Rolf,

Perhaps a post-Jeremiah author was careless enough to sometimes slip in the
past tense? This is no blunder compared to what is routinely forgiven to the
NT authors.

Another option is too reconsider the historical dating of certain events and
kings. As you know, current datings are more or less a wild conjecture.


Best regards,

Vadim Cherny


> I have not stated the assumptions that you ascribe to me, and whether
> or not I believe that a person whose name was Jeremiah, who lived in
> the times of Zedekiah, wrote the book,  is irrelevant from a
> linguistic and translational point of view. This is so, because even
> if a person a long time after Zedekiah wrote the book and pretended
> to be a Jeremiah of the 6th century B.C.E., he would naturally give
> the verbs a future reference. If he did not write "prophecies",
> people would quickly see through his scheme.
>
> Therefore, when I say that except when a prophet (read:a book
> claiming to be written by a certain prophet) utters words of judgment
> against a present population, the default interpretation of a
> prophet's words is future, that is a descriptive statement and not a
> theological one. It does not require any particular view regarding
> the writing of the book.
>
> To use the verb forms to find the time that is referred to by a
> certain writer is impossible. And to argue that by the use of this
> verb in the book of Isaiah, which is past tense,  we unmask the
> writer. He pretends to be a prophet speaking about the future, but
> without realizing it, by the use of this and that verb, he shows that
> he writes after the events have happened. Such arguments are
> fallacious in my mind.
> A very good example showing that I do not switch the meanings of the
> verbs around to conform to my hypothesis, is  Psalm 107. If you in
> this Psalm manage to find a pattern on the basis of the YIQTOLs,
> WEYIQTOLs, WAYYIQTOLs, and QATALs  I will admit that I am guilty of
> this switching.  I also suggest that you take a look at the long
> lists of different Hebrew forms used with the same meaning in the
> works of Alexander Sperber, from 1938 to 1959. After studying these
> lists, I think that second thoughts regarding the use of verb forms
> to fix time would emerge in the mind of manu students.
>
>
> Best regards
>
> Rolf
>
>
> Rolf Furuli
> University of Oslo
>
>
>
> >  Dear Rolf,
> >I don't agree that Jeremiah 50 speaks about a future event.
> >That katav is used in fact demonstrates that Jer. 50 is about
> >a past event not about a future event.
> >Now you assume that it is about a future event because you
> >say that Jeremiah lived in the time of Zedekiah and that
> >the fall of Babylon didn't occur until the time of Cyrus.
> >I don't assume this however. I assume that a later
> >writer added to the book of Jeremiah and wrote about a past
> >event.
> >You switch the meanings of the verbs around to conform to
> >your hypothesis that these are all the exact words of the
> >prophet who gives his name to the book.
> >Liz Fried
> >Ann Arbor
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
>




More information about the b-hebrew mailing list