Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Rolf Furuli <furuli AT online.no>]

Title: Re: traditions regarding tetragrammaton?

Dear Jay,

In "The Rule of the Community" (VI,27-VII,2) of the Qumran sect, there seems to be a prohibition against using the tetragrammaton.The text is broken, but a prohibition is the most likely interpretation. In some of the DSS texts we find the tetragrammaton in Old Hebrew characters, and I suppose this is what you call "Phoenician characters". These characters are used, according to the majority view, to indicate that the tetragrammaton should not be pronounced.

Many of the DSS manuscripts were written by other groups and were imported to Qumran. Some of these have the  tetragrammaton in Aramaic characters, and this may suggest that these groups used the name. In the Greek Qumran manuscript 8HevXIIgr we find the tetragrammaton in Micah 1:2. Before the tetragrammaton the Masoretic text has )A:DONFY and this is translated by KURIOS. This suggests that the Greek KURIOS  was used as a translation of )S.DONFY and was *not* used as a substitute of YHWH (See E. Tov "The Greek Minor prophets Scroll from Nahal Hever (1990), p 85.

Regards

Rolf

Rolf Furuli

University of Oslo

> Rolf,
> Wait, if the Qumran sect did not use the
> tetragram, then what are the Phoenician characters I am seeing on
> some of the DSS in the middle of the Aramaic script?  It's not
> YHWH?
>  
> Jay
>
> >
> >
> >Dear Dan,
> >
> >
> >I once wrote a thesis entitled
> "The tetragrammaton and its
> >substitutes in the days of the
> second temple". Here are some points:
> >
> >All the LXX manuscripts from the
> second and first centuries B.C.E
> >and
> >the first century C.E have the
> tetragrammaton, either in old Hebrew
> >script, square Aramaic script, or as
> the phonetic transcription IAW
> >(
> >indicating pronunciation). In the
> Chester Beatty Papyrii from 150
> >C.E. the tetragrammaton is changed
> to KURIOS. While the Qumran sect
> >and other groups did not use the
> tetragrammaton, other groups did,
> >and we know nothing to which extent
> it was used by the people in the
> >days of Jesus. The numerous claims
> that it was not used at all in
> >the
> >first century C.E. are
> unsubstantiated.
> >
> >In discussions about the
> tetragrammaton we should differentiate
> >between "alternative
> words" and "substitutes". Different titles
> and
> >designations are used for God both
> in the OT and the NT, but they
> >are
> >not "substitutes" for
> YHWH. Only if people were afraid of using YHWH
> >and used another word instead can we
> speak of a "substitute". The
> >use
> >of "heaven" and "the
> power" in the NT where we would have expected
> >YHWH do not necessarily represent a
> use of substitutes. We find the
> >word "heaven" referring to
> God in the book of Daniel, where we also
> >find the tetrgrammaton. A basic
> problem for the substitution theory
> >YHWH -> )A:DONFY -> KURIOS is
> that the Qumran sect did not use
> >)A:DONFY as asubstitute for YHWH but
> they used )EL as a substitute.
> >It is extremely difficult to
> correlate the KURIOS of the NT with
> >)A:DONFY. But a strong case can be
> made for the view that the KURIOS
> >of NT is a *translation* of more
> than one Hebrew word, something
> >which corroborates with the view
> that KURIOS was not original in
> >the
> >NT.
> >
> >George Howard has made quite a good
> case for the view that the
> >tetragrammaton originally occurred
> in the NT (See his article in The
> >Anchor Bible Dictionary), and that
> it was replaced by KURIOS just as
> >was the case in the LXX in the
> second century C.E.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >Regards
> >
> >Rolf Furuli
> >
> >University of Oslo
> >
> >---
> >You are currently subscribed to
> b-hebrew as: [selectjay AT hotmail.com]
> >To unsubscribe, forward this message
> to
> >leave-b-hebrew-134427U AT franklin.oit.unc.edu
> >To subscribe, send an email to
> join-b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu.
> >
>

---

> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer
> at http://explorer.msn.com