[b-hebrew] Three again...
bruceprince at bigpond.com
Thu Dec 4 13:37:54 EST 2008
I once had a similar query and it involved 2 Chron 31.16.
I think the NASB (1999) translators are alone in rendering shalowsh =
thirty. I contacted the Lockman Foundation and they responded by saying that
they chose to use thirty because it seems likely that a transcribal error
had been made.
Their response went on to state that the NASB translators were well aware
that no alternate readings exist in the Hebrew for "three years". Some
commentators speculate that Levites' sons who were at least three y.o. may
have accompanied their fathers to work as observers or helpers, and as a
result may have been included in the distribution.
There is more detail in their response that I shan't quote here, and I'm not
all that sure if it is even relevant to your query, but yours reminded me of
mine, and I just thought I'd mention it.
Susannah Hesslein wrote:
> I'm familiar with looking at the issue from the biological angle
> (the finger in your eye theory), but my question was more of a
> literary/textual one, or maybe even a legal one. I'm wondering if
> the age of three has any significance, or if it is referred to
> elsewhere in the Talmud outside of the sex/marriage/dowry issue.
More information about the b-hebrew