Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: Re[2]: cantillation makes a difference

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Charles David Isbell" <cisbell AT home.com>
  • To: "Peter Kirk" <peter_kirk AT sil.org>, "Biblical Hebrew" <b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
  • Subject: Re: Re[2]: cantillation makes a difference
  • Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2000 13:58:02 -0600


I must apologize to the person who first mentioned the poetic
balance/parallel to the phrase in Isa 40:3 currently under discussion. He
noted only briefly the importance of ba'aravah in the line following. Since
no one picked up on his notation, let me expand on the significance of this
phrase in the verse, again with apologies and proper credit to the poster.
If we were reading the HB text without any te'amim, the phrase BA-MIDBAR
MIGHT go either with the "voice crying" or with following "prepare the path
of YHWH." However, even in such a case, the parallelism of the accompanying
line seems to me to settle the issue as far as the Hebrew text we now have
is concerned, with or without te-amim.

"Straighten in the wilderness a passageway for our God" is an appropriate
balance to "prepare in the desert a path for YHWH." I believe that this
meaning informed the Massoretes rather than the other way around. In other
words, I see no warrant for the view that the cantillation here was
polemically designed to attack the Christian view, which the Greek text
leaves open to both possibilities.

The Hebrew text is obvious as it stands, and I think rather obvious as well
is the Christian exegetical choice to perceive John the Baptizer as "Elijah"
(whose wilderness habitat was well known), the one who anticipates the
arrival of "the day of YHWH" (Mal 3:23). I believe it was this exegetical
decision that determined the NT reading rather than an alternate possibility
from an unpointed Hebrew text.

Cantillation does matter, but it is not merely a tacking on after the fact
of a desired model of interpretation. In this, and many other cases, it is
a necessary and valuable aid to an understanding of the text.

Charles David Isbell

----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Kirk" <peter_kirk AT sil.org>
To: "Biblical Hebrew" <b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2000 8:50 PM
Subject: Re[2]: cantillation makes a difference


> But surely the Greek (of LXX and Mark) is equally ambiguous? Here we
> have no cantillation to rely on, and if the sentence first
> prepositional phrase is unusual in Greek it may simply have arisen
> from over-literal translation, or perhaps the LXX translator seeking
> to retain the ambiguity in the unpointed MS in front of him.
>
> Now my LXX has a capital E to indicate the "Christian" interpretation.
> But how ancient is that capital E? And how ancient is the "Christian"
> interpretation? I don't think it is necessarily that of the New
> Testament authors, for both are compatible with the quotation being
> used to illustrate a story set in the desert.
>
> Peter Kirk
>
>
> ______________________________ Reply Separator
_________________________________
> Subject: Re: cantillation makes a difference
> Author: <ben.crick AT argonet.co.uk> at Internet
> Date: 31/01/2000 18:11
>
>
> On Mon 31 Jan 2000 (09:46:31), decaen AT chass.utoronto.ca wrote:
> > prepositional phrases in hebrew as in english are notoriously ambiguous
> > as to syntax. in this case, bammidbar "in the desert", could go both
ways.
> > but the cantillation forces the reading,"A voice crying, "In the
> > desert make way...."". However, this is a case where the other reading
> > has come down to us through the Christian scriptures: "A voice crying
out
> > in the desert, "Make way...."". Both are possible without context. Quite
> > different meaning, and again, this happens on a regular basis with such
> > syntax.
>
> A good point, Vincent. But don't you think it was the hellenistic Jewish
> Septuagint that gave the "Christian" version, FWNH BOWNTOS EN THi ERHMWi
> hETOIMASATE THN hODON KURIOU, ktl (Isaiah 40:3, quoted in Mark 1:2)?
>
> Maybe the Massoretes reacted against this in their definitive pointing of
> the verse in the MT, so as to wrong-foot the Christian interpretation?
> Or is it simply a case of Ben Naftali as against Ben Asher (a la Hillel
> and Shammai)?
>
> 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
>
>
>
>
> ---
> 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.
>
>
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to b-hebrew as: cisbell AT home.com
> To unsubscribe, forward this message to
$subst('Email.Unsub')
> To subscribe, send an email to join-b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu.
>





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page