Biblical Hebrew Forum

[ben.crick AT argonet.co.uk (Ben Crick)]

On Sun  2 Jan 2000 (18:08:43 +0200), ronning AT nis.za wrote:
> Luther popularized taking 'et as the accusative marker for a
> messianic interpretation (he said something like "if it
> pleases no one else it is sufficient that it pleases me"!),
> to go along with his (erroneous) singular interpretation of
> the woman's seed in Gen 3:15.

 Dear John,

 Without taking sides on the "Messianic" question, is it not possible that
 Eve was expecting an immediate follow-up on the Seed promise of 3:15, and
 that she took her firstborn QaYiN to be that Seed of the Woman (herself)
 who was to bruise the serpent's head?  It was not to be; but Eve in the
 narrative scenario could well have hoped so.

 'eT "is a preposition in the sense of helpful association, as in chap.
 xxi.20, xxxix.2, 21, etc. ... she sees in the birth of this son the
 commencement of the fulfilment of the promise, and thankfully acknowledges
 the divine help in this display of mercy..." (Keil & Delitzsch, ad loc).

 I don't think this is a "semantic anglicism" (Dan Wagner). Jerome has it
 in his Vulgate: "Adam vero cognovit Havam uxorem suam concepit et peperit
 Cain dicens possedi hominem *per Dominum*". Non angli sed angeli?  8-^)

 Keil & Delitzsch refer to Luther's solution ('eT as the sign of the direct
 object) "So far as the grammar is concerned, the expression 'eT-YHWH
 might be rendered, as in apposition to 'iY$, /'a man, the LORD'/ (Luther),
 but the sense would not allow it". (ibid)

 Shalom,
 Ben
-- 
 Revd Ben Crick, BA CF
 <ben.crick AT argonet.co.uk>
 232 Canterbury Road, Birchington, Kent, CT7 9TD (UK)
 http://www.cnetwork.co.uk/crick.htm