Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Schmuel <schmuel AT bigfoot.com>]

Hello B-Hebrew,

   I am not too Hebrew-savvy, but would like to request assistance..
   This forum has been a big help to me...

   We were looking at the end of Isaiah 53-8

"... for the transgression of my people was he stricken "
                                                            "to him" .. lamo

Some say that the form "lamo" is a plural form and that it
could or should be "to them" (especially those to whom
it only represents Israel and not Messiah)

However there are singular usage for the same "he"
throughout Isaiah 53 ..

And  simliar forms, like ah-lamo in Job 27:23 seem to be
used at times in a unambigously singular fashion...

Also plural forms in Hebrew, I understand, are not always
plural in number .. (Elohim, mayim being the most well-
known type of examples, using often singular verbs..)

The Emphasized, which I use for literalness, has
".. For my people's transgression did the stroke fall on him"

Similarly .. Youngs literal has..
......By the transgression of My people he is plagued,

Soncino  (a Jewish translation)
" ..... stricken for the transgression of my people."
------------------------
Now watch these different ones..

The Jewish Publication Society - 1985 switches subject and object..
and changes the verb from stroke/plagued/stricken to "deserved"

"Through the sin of my people, who deserved the punishment.. "

My conjectural reaction is that they did this because they *wanted* to make
it plural (for theological reasons) but felt that "to them" would be
a little transparent, with all the other singulars around, so they changed
the verb a bit, ("deserved" ) and most of all objectified  the subject.....
Technically this feels a tad fishy, but I would like some experts views..

(Yes this is just layman's conjecture :-)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Art Scroll is similar to JPS though it doesn't make a verb change,
it does the same subject object change..

 because of the trangression of my people, a plague befell them
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please correct or comment on any of the thoughts here ...

Is "was he stricken", singular, appropriate ..
    (or similar words...as most translations have)

Is there any real argument for insisting on a plural for "lamo" ?

Is this idea of making "my people" the object textually legitmate
for lamo ?  Or is it a real translational stretch . ?

Is the JPS fishy, sorta like translation tampering glasses ?
  (I have an email from them that sort of implies that they translate
   for non-christological gloss)

Thanks for your assistance...


Schmuel AT bigfoot.com
Steven Avery

Messianic_Apologetic-subscribe AT yahoogroups.com
Messianic_Apologetic Yahoo! Group Page:-
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Messianic_Apologetic