[b-hebrew] Was the MT for public consumption?
tensorpath at gmail.com
Fri Dec 24 12:40:05 EST 2010
the dead sea scrolls do testify that both language and story, (substance and
form), of the leningrad codex, preceded that document by at least 1,000
years. Beyond that fact, the migration to faith begins with the highly
incomplete dead sea scrolls.
i mentioned faith only as a point of contrast from fact, and not to begin
discussion of faith, here.
i also note that isaiah 9:4 refers to a number of different names for God.
On Fri, Dec 24, 2010 at 10:55 AM, David P Donnelly
<davedonnelly1 at juno.com>wrote:
> fred burlingame tensorpath at gmail.com
> Fri Dec 24 10:27:16 EST 2010
> Previous message: [b-hebrew] Was the MT for public consumption?
> Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
> fred burlingame wrote:
> in the message posted below
> "facts vs. faith ...
> we have complete:
> a. a 5th century greek manuscript;
> b. a 10th century hebrew manuscript; and
> c. a 15th century aramaic manuscript,
> of the same story.
> the rest is faith.
> fred burlingame
> Dave writes,
> I would add to the list:
> d. The dead Sea Scrolls, with the understanding [which I not sure is true
> or false,] that the Hebrew Consonants that occur in the Dead Sea Scrolls
> are almost 100% identical to the Hebrew Consonants that are found in the
> Extant Leningrad Codex of 1008-1010 A.D.
> Now fred burlingame raises the issue of "faith" to the list, and I
> assume he adds "faith" to the list as a Jewish believer in Old Testament
> Scripture, while I add "faith" to my list as a Christian believer in the
> Hebrew Leningrad Codex, who has been taught that "All Scripture is given
> by inspiration of God".
> It is at least possible that the faith issue is more difficult for me to
> deal with than it is for Fred to deal with it..
> I am deeply involved in the issue of what God's name is, while it is my
> impression that is not an issue that Jewish Believers are troubled with.
> Although I have discovered in my study of Codex L. that 6 different
> vocalizations of YHWH occur in Codex L., I think of those six variant
> vocalizations of YHWH that occur in Codex L. as a puzzle to be dealt
> with, rather than some insurmountable obstacle to deal with.
> I pause at this moment and ask the moderators of this Discussion Board if
> I should continue on my present line of dialogue, or should I just
> completely withdraw from this particular thread.
> Dave Donnelly
> On Fri, Dec 24, 2010 at 8:58 AM, David P Donnelly <davedonnelly1 at
> > K Randolph kwrandolph at gmail.com
> > Fri Dec 24 08:06:48 EST 2010 wrote:
> > "The Leningrad Codex is merely a preservation of a document that was
> > written
> > mostly during that period, with additional marks to aid the non-scholar
> > in
> > its reading."
> > _______________________________________________________________
> > Isn't the text of the Leningrad Codex believed to be an accurate
> > representation of the pronunciation of a
> > much earlier "Unpointed Hebrew Text" as it was preserved in a Jewish
> > Oral Tradition?
> > Or did an earlier version of a Masoretic Text accomplish the
> > of the pronunciation of the "Unpointed Hebrew Text"?
> > It was my impression that every variant of YHWH found in Codex L. that
> > now rendered as "Adonai", and that every variant of YHWH found in Codex
> > L. that is now rendered as "Elohim", was pointed as it is today,
> > of information found in a preserved oral tradition of how the Jewish
> > people pronounced the "Unpointed Hebrew Text of their day.
> > Don't the consonants that occur in the Leningrad Codex almost match
> > perfectly with those consonants found in the dead sea scrolls?
> > Dave Donnelly
> > ____________________________________________________________
> Mortgage Rates Hit 2.99%
> If you owe under $729k you probably qualify for Gov't Refi Programs
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org
More information about the b-hebrew