[b-hebrew] tetragrammaton in Aramaic?

Jack Kilmon jkilmon at historian.net
Wed Apr 6 19:29:36 EDT 2011


Hi Doug;

I don't think this is off-topic since we are ultimately comparing Pauline 
thought with the Hebrew usage as in Ruth 2:4 relevent to the use of the Shem 
haMeforash.

In all things, context is king.  The LXX for Ruth 2:4, an obvious blessing, 
is:
καὶ ἰδοὺ Βοος ἦλθεν ἐκ Βαιθλεεμ καὶ εἶπεν τοῖς θερίζουσιν κύριος μεθ᾽ ὑμῶν 
καὶ εἶπον αὐτῷ εὐλογήσαι σε κύριος
for:
וְהִנֵּה־בֹ֗עַז בָּ֚א מִבֵּ֣ית לֶ֔חֶם וַיֹּ֥אמֶר לַקּוֹצְרִ֖ים יְהוָ֣ה 
עִמָּכֶ֑ם וַיֹּ֥אמְרוּ ל֖וֹ יְבָרֶכְךָ֥ יְהוָֽה׃

Philemon 2:11 states:
καὶ πᾶσα γλῶσσα ἐξομολογήσηται ὅτι κύριος Ἰησοῦς Χριστὸς εἰς δόξαν θεοῦ 
πατρός
And [that] every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ [is] Lord, to the 
glory of God the Father.

At Romans 10:9
ὅτι ἐὰν ὁμολογήσῃς ἐν τῷ στόματί σου κύριον Ἰησοῦν καὶ πιστεύσῃς ἐν τῇ 
καρδίᾳ σου ὅτι ὁ θεὸς αὐτὸν ἤγειρεν ἐκ νεκρῶν σωθήσῃ
That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe 
in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.

I think the key is that in both of these pericopes Paul clearly separates ὁ 
θεὸς  from  κύριος and we know that Paul was not a Trinitarian, in fact the 
concept did not exist in Paul's lifetime.  My own sense of this is that both 
Paul and Jesus would be horrified by the substitution of Jesus name 
(raised/revered) above all other names except God).

shlama

Jack Kilmon


-----Original Message----- 
From: Doug Belot
Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2011 4:25 PM
To: Jack Kilmon
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] tetragrammaton in Aramaic?

Hi Jack , can i add to this , you have mentioned that...............

> Dalman in “Words of Jesus” writes:
>      ׃”When  κύριος or Dominus is met in the Apocrypha or Pseudepigrapha, 
> that implies that the divine name יְהֹוָה
>
> was written in the original, which might be in Hebrew, and hence that 
> there was no scruple in writing of this kind against employing the sacred 
> name.
>
> The sense that I am getting is that the name of God could not be used in 
> any secular sense or narrative but perhaps in a blessing, as was the usage 
> in Ruth.
>
> Jack Kilmon


Would you think that Paul by making the statement , Phil 2:9 "you must
confess Jesus is Kupiou/Lord" , and a similar statement in Rom 10:9 , that
that is saying that Jesus must be how we now address the divine name.

It seems illogical that with all the statements of the importance of "this
name' in the Old Testament , that it would cease to be able to be used.

It was meant to be praised forever.

doug belot



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jack Kilmon" <jkilmon at historian.net>
To: "Mike Gockley" <mike.gockley at gmail.com>; <b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Thursday, April 07, 2011 3:42 AM
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] tetragrammaton in Aramaic?


>
>
> -----Original Message----- 
> From: Mike Gockley
> Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2011 10:27 AM
> To: b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org
> Subject: [b-hebrew] tetragrammaton in Aramaic?
>
> Hello All,
>
> I don't see the tetragrammaton in Biblical Aramaic. In Targum Onkelos I 
> see
> it as יוי, however I don't see that in Jastrow and I'm not sure whether 
> that
> is a translation or a circumlocution or other type of reference to the
> Hebrew form.
>
> I'm interested to know if it was possible to commit blasphemy by 
> pronouncing
> the name (m. Sanhedrin 7.5) in any other language than Hebrew.
>
> Can anyone clear this up for me?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Mike Gockley
>
> Clarks Summit, PA
>
> Hi Mike:
>
> In the “Aramaic Version of Ruth,” Etan Levine writes:
>
> "Once the principle of non-pronunciation was established, and אֲדֹנָי
> used for יְהוָֽה
> the Tetragrammaton was freely used in written texts. Thus the Targums 
> frequently use יְהֹוָה
> where the Hebrew Bible uses אלהים
>
> This does not say anything about how is was pronounced in Ruth such as 
> Ruth 2:4
> וְהִנֵּה־בֹ֗עַז בָּ֚א מִבֵּ֣ית לֶ֔חֶם וַיֹּ֥אמֶר לַקּוֹצְרִ֖ים יְהוָ֣ה 
> עִמָּכֶ֑ם וַיֹּ֥אמְרוּ ל֖וֹ יְבָרֶכְךָ֥ יְהוָֽה
>
> Dalman in “Words of Jesus” writes:
>      ׃”When  κύριος or Dominus is met in the Apocrypha or Pseudepigrapha, 
> that implies that the divine name יְהֹוָה
>
> was written in the original, which might be in Hebrew, and hence that 
> there was no scruple in writing of this kind against employing the sacred 
> name.
>
> The sense that I am getting is that the name of God could not be used in 
> any secular sense or narrative but perhaps in a blessing, as was the usage 
> in Ruth.
>
> Jack Kilmon
> San Antonio, TX
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
>


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 9.0.894 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3553 - Release Date: 04/06/11
04:34:00




More information about the b-hebrew mailing list