Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Awohili AT aol.com]

In a message dated 02/08/2003 4:09:19 AM Pacific Standard Time, 
Polycarp66 AT aol.com writes:

> I know where you're coming from Rolf, and I'm not buying.  This version of 
> the name of God is not supported by scholars, but is desired by one 
> particular faith group.  Let's just drop any discussion of what that 
> vocalization might have been.
> 

Actually, I fail to see how discussion of the ancient pronunciation of the 
Name is beyond the pale of a biblical Hebrew discussion list.  The matter is 
hardly finalized as of this time.  Should research on the matter be 
discouraged?  Does the ancient matter of using substitutes for the Name brook 
no dispute, i.e., are they still even valid in the 21st century C.E.?

Not all scholars agree that the evidence for "Yahweh" is conclusive; even the 
scholarly Anchor Bible dictionary downgrades it to a "scholarly guess."  
Scholars such as George Wesley Buchannan have argued for a three-syllable 
pronunciation as opposed to a two-syllable one.

How will we ever know unless we continue to investigate?

Solomon Landers
>From Polycarp66 AT aol.com  Sat Feb  8 13:56:01 2003
Return-Path: <Polycarp66 AT aol.com>
Delivered-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Received: from imo-r06.mx.aol.com (imo-r06.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.102])
        by happyhouse.metalab.unc.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4550720017
        for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>;
        Sat,  8 Feb 2003 13:56:01 -0500 (EST)
Received: from Polycarp66 AT aol.com
        by imo-r06.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.21.) id 9.11b.1dea8bca (4552);
        Sat, 8 Feb 2003 13:56:57 -0500 (EST)
From: Polycarp66 AT aol.com
Message-ID: <11b.1dea8bca.2b76acf9 AT aol.com>
Date: Sat, 8 Feb 2003 13:56:57 EST
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Nephesh Mesopotamian myths
To: Awohili AT aol.com, furuli AT online.no, b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: AOL 8.0 for Windows US sub 4104
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1
X-BeenThere: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: A forum on the Hebrew Bible, its language and interpretation
 <b-hebrew.lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman-2.1/listinfo/b-hebrew>,
        <mailto:b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/b-hebrew>
List-Post: <mailto:b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sympa AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=HELP>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman-2.1/listinfo/b-hebrew>,
        <mailto:b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 08 Feb 2003 18:56:01 -0000

In a message dated 2/8/2003 1:50:09 PM Eastern Standard Time, Awohili AT aol.com 
writes:

> In a message dated 02/08/2003 4:09:19 AM Pacific Standard Time, 
> Polycarp66 AT aol.com writes:
> 
> >I know where you're coming from Rolf, and I'm not buying.  This version of 
> 
> >the name of God is not supported by scholars, but is desired by one 
> >particular faith group.  Let's just drop any discussion of what that 
> >vocalization might have been.
> >
> 
> Actually, I fail to see how discussion of the ancient pronunciation of the 
> Name is beyond the pale of a biblical Hebrew discussion list.  The matter 
> is 
> hardly finalized as of this time.  Should research on the matter be 
> discouraged?  Does the ancient matter of using substitutes for the Name 
> brook 
> no dispute, i.e., are they still even valid in the 21st century C.E.?
> 
> Not all scholars agree that the evidence for "Yahweh" is conclusive; even 
> the 
> scholarly Anchor Bible dictionary downgrades it to a "scholarly guess."  
> Scholars such as George Wesley Buchannan have argued for a three-syllable 
> pronunciation as opposed to a two-syllable one.
> 
> How will we ever know unless we continue to investigate?
> 

Just a few points:

1.  I never suggested that it was beyond the pale of discussion on the list.  
What I did suggest was that it would be unprofitable to discuss it on the 
list.

2.  The fact that there is no agreement on the matter of the pronunciation of 
the tetragrammaton after much scholarly consideration is precisely why it 
would be unprofitable to discuss the matter absent any new evidence.

3.  If memory serves me correctly this matter has been previously discussed 
at length here.  Are we to become a forum dedicated to one theme?

gfsomsel
>From jharper AT woh.rr.com  Sat Feb  8 14:06:22 2003
Return-Path: <jharper AT woh.rr.com>
Delivered-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Received: from ohsmtp02.ogw.rr.com (ohsmtp02.ogw.rr.com [65.24.7.37])
        by happyhouse.metalab.unc.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 672B220017
        for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>;
        Sat,  8 Feb 2003 14:06:22 -0500 (EST)
Received: from computer.woh.rr.com (dhcp024-210-247-071.woh.rr.com
        [24.210.247.71])
        by ohsmtp02.ogw.rr.com (8.12.5/8.12.2) with ESMTP id h18J7OHl020018
        for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>;
        Sat, 8 Feb 2003 14:07:24 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <5.0.0.25.2.20030208140058.00a19b20 AT pop3.norton.antivirus>
X-Sender: jharper/pop-server.woh.rr.com AT pop3.norton.antivirus
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0
Date: Sat, 08 Feb 2003 14:01:10 -0500
To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
From: Jane Harper <jharper AT woh.rr.com>
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] LORD
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
X-BeenThere: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: A forum on the Hebrew Bible, its language and interpretation
 <b-hebrew.lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman-2.1/listinfo/b-hebrew>,
        <mailto:b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/b-hebrew>
List-Post: <mailto:b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sympa AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=HELP>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman-2.1/listinfo/b-hebrew>,
        <mailto:b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 08 Feb 2003 19:06:22 -0000

At 09:24 2/8/2003, you wrote:
>I teach my students of Hebrew that they should read adonay or elohim when 
>they meet YHWH in the text, as you probably do as well. When they 
>translate the text, they are free to use "the Lord", "Yahweh", or 
>"Jehovah", or "Yahu".  Why would it be "a very unwelcome situation" if 
>people said Yahweh? I would view it as a very welcome situation.

I can't speak to this with any scholarly credentials, but I *will* say that 
as an observant Jew I found it problematic.  In fact, I dropped out of a 
course where a teacher asked that it be read "as written".

There may not be any scholarly warrant for substitution, but there is at 
least a thousand or two years of Jewish tradition and I believe that 
deserves respect.

Jane Harper

Every complex problem has a solution that is simple, direct, plausible, and 
wrong. -- H.L. Mencken