Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: tsav latsav qav laqav - Isaiah 28:10&13

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: ben.crick AT argonet.co.uk (Ben and Jo Crick)
  • To: haines AT alastairs.com
  • Cc: b-hebrew AT franklin.metalab.unc.edu
  • Subject: Re: tsav latsav qav laqav - Isaiah 28:10&13
  • Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 23:00:11 +0000


On Fri 22 Nov 2002 (08:57:25 +1100), haines AT alastairs.com wrote:
> 1. If 'QaW-QaW' is 'barbarous,' why is it *taught* in Kindergarten?
>
> OR
>
> 2. Could it be childish and meaningless rhyme, something like "da do
> ron ron, da do ron ron," in the words of the famous song?
>
> My basic question comes down to the fact that these verses must either
> have meaning in themselves or no meaning. It can't be both, but which
> is it? If they have no meaning that won't stop people from the natural
> desire to speculatively construct one. If they do have meaning, though,
> there should be support for the interpretation.
>
> What did the original hearers make of the verses? Did they recognize a
> well-known meaningless phrase like "da do ron ron?" or did they
> understand something more meaningful? Has that meaning been lost over
> time?

Dear Alastair,

The point of the quasi-Kindergarten oracle is that God is going to teach
Israel (and Judah) a basic Kindergarten lesson: hence the role-play imitating
the children reciting verses after Sir. The interpretation is that because
the
Israelites/Jews refused the plain language teaching of the Prophets, they
will
have to learn a bitter lesson from foreign invaders from Assyria (722 BC) and
from Babylon (586 BC). These "lessons" will be in harsh foreign language
which
none but the intelligentsia would understand.

The Word of God is not meaningless; the words do construe and can be
translated. But it is "baby talk": Lesson One in the Kindergarten Torah Schul
(simulated).

> I'm sure you understand the thrust of my enquiry, thanks for giving the
> Biblical cross references that are probably the best evidence available
> for understanding the meaning, if any, to the original hearers.

It is important in hermeneutics to determine (1) what the text *says*;
(2) what the text *meant* to the original hearers; and (3) what message is
in it for us today: what does it *mean* to us in the 21st century?

> Finally, are there any books you have found helpful in shaping your
> reading of these verses?

There are several classic commentaries on Isaiah, e.g. those by JA Alexander
(1865, modern reprint by Zondervan, Grand Rapids MI) and F Delitzsch (4th
Ed.,
1889). My favourite is JA Motyer, /The Prophecy of Isaiah/, Inter Varsity
Press, Leicester, 1993. Alec Motyer was one of my tutors at Clifton
Theological College, Bristol, in the early 60s so perhaps I'm biased!

Shalom

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







Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page