[b-hebrew] Someone knows?

K Randolph kwrandolph at gmail.com
Mon Apr 18 13:42:42 EDT 2011


Pere:

On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 10:47 PM, Pere Porta <pporta7 at gmail.com> wrote:

> Karl,
>
> In a first approach I think you may be right.
>
> 1. Concerning the form -------> we have parallels of your proposed (hamtem)
> form in
>
> a. Nm 32:14: qamtem
> b. Dt 9:16: sartem
> c. Zc 14:5: v'nastem
>
> 2. Concerning the meaning:
>
> Maybe we have here a construction similar (not identical!) to that in Dt
> 7:23 (v'hamam).
>
> But I find here a problem; Karl.
>
> In a context of death and destruction (see 16:35 and the preceding
> verses)....  isn't it more logical the meaning "you killed"   -namely,
> related to verb "MWT"-   than any meaning related to verb HWM?
>

I agree, that was my first reaction, and for the reasons you list.

However, to maintain that reading, I would have to assume that here we are
dealing with a copyist error, as the form of the word does not fit that
meaning.

On the other hand, the people were stirred up, upset, and they were blaming
Moses and Aaron. The actions of Korach were but a symptom of that unrest.
The following chapter finally puts to rest the question of Moses’ and
Aaron’s authority. That is how I see that the verb HWM fits the context. If
this is the original, this is how we can reconcile the written word and the
context.

>
>
> Remark: the LXX writes "apektágkate", you killed: in the 3rd century b.C.E
> (2,300 years ago). they understood "HMTM" as being related to verb "MWT" and
> not to verb "HWM".
>

I have found I cannot trust the LXX, hence I use it merely for illustrative
purposes. It appears that many Biblical Hebrew terms were forgotten by the
time the LXX came out, hence the LXX translators were guessing when dealing
with those terms.

>
>
> Friendly,
>
> Pere Porta
>
>
>
Karl W. Randolph.



More information about the b-hebrew mailing list