Biblical Hebrew Forum

[peter_kirk AT sil.org]

I would interpret verse 21 as a clear example of irony, which is 
unfortunately completely lost in the archaic English. Maybe there is 
irony in the translation as given, but it would take a native speaker 
of this dialect of English to detect it, or maybe the translator 
failed to detect the irony. The translator of NRSV seems to have 
failed here, but the translators of NIV and CEV have done a good job, 
and the translator of TEV has made an attempt.

I think that your translation, NRSV and TEV all make a mistake in 
translating KIY 'IM at the start of verse 23 with "but", and (in NRSV 
and TEV) making this the start of a new sentence. (Your translation 
has a colon, I note, but its use of a capital letter in a new 
paragraph makes this seem even more important than a sentence break, 
when it should be less important.) CEV is even worse, translating 
"Instead".

The meaning of KIY 'IM is very often more like "except" or "unless" 
(see GKC 163a-d and BDB), "limiting the prec. clause" (BDB), though 
sometimes "the if being neglected... the clause is no longer a 
limitation of the preceding clause but a contradiction of it." The 
translation "but" forces the interpretation as a contradiction of the 
previous (negated) clause, i.e. verse 22, and also into a clear 
contradiction in another sense of the positive teaching of Jeremiah 
concerning sacrifices e.g. 17:26, 33:18, and of the clear statements 
in Leviticus, backed up throughout the rest of the Hebrew scriptures, 
that YHWH indeed did command burnt offerings and sacrifices at Sinai.

So do we have to interpret this as Jeremiah contradicting the rest of 
scripture? Or can we use this as evidence that the Bible contradicts 
itself? No, because the meaning of KIY 'IM is not to contradict any 
other clause, but in general only to limit it. It is thus quite in 
order, and indeed preferable, to translate verses 21-22 as follows: 
"...I did not give them commands about burnt offerings and sacrifices 
except when I also gave them this command:...", or else (as in NIV) 
"...I did not just give them commands about burnt offerings and 
sacrifices, but I gave them this command:...". A more idiomatic 
English version, taking up the irony in the context, might be "...If I 
didn't command them this, I didn't command them anything!..."

Peter Kirk


______________________________ Reply Separator 
_________________________________
Subject: Jer 7:21-23
Author:  <RHutchin AT aol.com> at Internet
Date:    09/01/2000 20:44


In Jeremiah 7, we find--
21   Thus saith the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel; Put your burnt 
offerings unto your sacrifices, and eat flesh.
22   For I spake not unto your fathers, nor commanded them in the day that I 
brought them out of the land of Egypt, concerning burnt offerings or 
sacrifices:
23   But this thing commanded I them, saying, Obey my voice, and I will be 
your God, and ye shall be my people: and walk ye in all the ways that I have 
commanded you, that it may be well unto you.

In context of the chapter, Israel seems to have reduced worship of God to the 
giving of the specified offerings and sacrifices as one might pay a tax.  We 
might conclude that the writer, in the above verses, does not mean to argue 
that God did not actually command that offerings and sacrifices be given but 
that God required much more than just offerings and sacrifices.  God required 
obedience of which the giving of offerings and sacrifices were a consequence.

The translations differ on v 22, with some emphasizing this idea while others 
do not.  A literal translation of the verse seems awkward.  Can someone 
explain how v 22 should be translated and why?

Roger Hutchinson
RHutchin AT AOL.com

---
You are currently subscribed to b-hebrew as: Peter_Kirk AT sil.org
To unsubscribe, forward this message to 
leave-b-hebrew-14207U AT franklin.oit.unc.e
du
To subscribe, send an email to join-b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu.