[b-hebrew] daughters jacob never spoke of
hholmyard at ont.com
Thu Jun 22 07:35:43 EDT 2006
Shoshanna Walker wrote:
>I'm talking about the article you posted, reprinted below.
>If it's not in Torah, then it is just someone's theory, and if it is
>not in Torah, then I don't believe that it is the Truth.
>Especially the last sentence, which shows no understanding of Torah.
>Who wrote this article?
>Everything is sufficiently explained by Oral Torah, by all our Sages
>and Commentaries, there is no need for the theorizing you presented.
HH: Here is the last sentence to which you refer:
This double relationship suggested to Abraham the expedient that he
twice used when he lacked faith in God to protect his life and in
cowardice sought his own safety at the price of his wife's honor.
HH: The article was written in 1915 by J. Oscar Boyd. I don't know much
about him except that he wrote a number of articles for the
International Standard Bible Encyclopedia. I used it because it is
available online. I have the modern edition of this encyclopedia, and
the same idea is presented by P. J. Scalise. Scalise was one of the
authors of the commentary on Jeremiah 26-52 in the Word Bible Commentary
series. I don't know why you say this sentence above shows no
understanding of the Torah. And I don't what makes your "Sages and
Commentaries" more authoritative than this sentence above. God gave his
word for people to understand, and you don't necessarily have to be
Jewish to understand it. It seems very chauvinistic to talk the way you
do about not needing anything beyond the Oral Torah and the Sages and
Commentaries. It also stultifies the progress of thought to assume that
everything correct that can be said about Scripture has already been
said. I personally don't believe that at all, and Scripture itself
indicates that some things won't be known until the end times (though it
would not relate to this point):
Dan. 12:9 And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up
and sealed till the time of the end.
HH: At any rate, with the flood of new information about ancient culture
and languages provided by archeology, we know a lot about the words of
the Bible that the Oral Torah, the Sages, and Commentaries may not have
retained. It may possibly bear on stories in Genesis. I am not saying
that this is the issue here. Really, here the issue is simply whether
Abraham is to be believed, and I see no reason to doubt him.
HH: To me it is insulting to Abraham to say it shows no understanding of
Torah to believe Abraham when he admitted and explained what's he'd
done. The sentence above to which you object simply accepts Abraham at
his word. There is no way that it cannot show understanding of the Torah.
>HH: Do you mean you don't think the events happened? What are you
>The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia
> sa'-ra, sa'-ri:
>We are introduced to Sarai in Genesis 11:29. She is here mentioned as
>the wife that Abraham "took," while still in Ur of the Chaldees, that
>is, while among his kindred. It is immediately added that "Sarai was
>barren; she had no child." By this simple remark in the overture of his
>narrative, the writer sounds the motif that is to be developed in all
>the sequel. When the migration to Haran occurs, Sarai is named along
>with Abram and Lot as accompanying Terah. It has been held that the
>author (or authors) of Genesis 11 knew nothing of the relationship
>announced in 20:12. But there can be no proof of such ignorance, even on
>the assumption of diversity of authorship in the two passages.
> Sarai's career as described in Genesis 11 was not dependent on her
>being the daughter of Terah. Terah had other descendants who did not
>accompany him. Her movements were determined by her being Abram's wife.
>It appears, however, that she was a daughter of Terah by a different
>mother from the mother of Abram. The language of 20:12 would indeed
>admit of her being Abram's niece, but the fact that there was but 10
>years' difference between his age and hers (Genesis 17:17) renders this
>hypothesis less probable. Marriage with half-sisters seems to have been
>not uncommon in antiquity (even in the Old Testament compare 2 Samuel
> This double relationship suggested to Abraham the expedient that he
>twice used when he lacked faith in God to protect his life and in
>cowardice sought his own safety at the price of his wife's honor.
>b-hebrew mailing list
>b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org
More information about the b-hebrew