Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - RE: [b-hebrew] LORD

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: furuli AT online.no
  • To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: RE: [b-hebrew] LORD
  • Date: Sun, 9 Feb 2003 22:12:53 +0100

Dear Liz,

A couple of years ago E. Tov visited Oslo and gave a series of lectures. A principal theme in these was that many, or even most of the Qumran manuscripts were made by different people in different places outside Qumran, and then they were imported to Qumran.

"The Rule of the Community" VI,27-VII,2 seems to indicate that a substitute was used for the name by the Qumran community. Evidence for this is seen in non-biblical manuscripts which use )L where we expect the tetragrammaton. There are, however, many non-biblical manuscripts that use YHWH, which may suggest that they were written by people in other localities who used the name. The witness of the biblical manuscripts you mention, is harder to interpret. One could argue that because these manuscripts were copies and the tetragrammaton was in their Vorlage, it was copied. Even if it occurred in the manuscript they could use a substitute when they read the text. Or, if biblical manuscripts were copied outside Qumran, the tetragrammaton may have been pronounced by the people in these localities.

The occurrence of the tetragrammaton in a manuscript, therefore, cannot settle the question whether it was pronounced or not. However, the occurrence of IAW in 4QLXXLevb suggests pronunciation because it is a phonetic transcription.

One important fact regarding the DSS is for the most part neglected in discussions about the name, namely, that the substitute used in Qumran manuscripts is *not* )DNWNY but )L. Thus the KURIOS of NT and LXX manuscripts of the 2nd century C.E. have no antecedent! The argument is that at the beginning of C.E. the name was no longer pronounced, but was substituted by )DNWNY. Because of this the LXX translators and the NT writers translated )DNWNY with KURIOS. And that is the reason why KURIOS with reference to God is found both places. But the problem is the the most important link, the first one is lacking. There is no indication that )DNWNY (or Aramaic MR)/MRY) was used as a substitute for YHWH in B.C.E.! And there is no evidence that i generally was substituted in the days of Jesus. Thus the pointing of YHWH by the Masoretes cannot be traced back longer than to the days of Jehuda hannasi and Mishnaic times.


Best regards

Rolf Furuli
University of Oslo



Dear Rolf,
What troubles me about your excellent discussion
is that YHWH is used in the DSS copies
of the biblical texts.
Liz


>
Dear Bill,

If we look at the question from a historical point of view, it was
not a particular interpretation of Scripture that caused people to
stop pronouncing YHWH, but rather foreign influence. In the centuries
after Alexander the Great, the Jews were in many ways influenced by
Greek thoughts, including Plato's view that God is nameless. "A
bitter struggle between Hellenists and Hasidim centered around the
pronunciation of the Divine Name." according to rabbi A. Marmorstein
> (1927) "The Old Rabbinic Doctrine of God", p 13. The people at Qumran
> ceased pronouncing the name while the Pharisees, Haemerobaptistae and
> others continued to pronounce the name.

There are three passages in the Tanach that has something to do with
the use of the name, namely, Lev 24.16, Ex 3.15 and 20:7.
Manuscripts of the LXX from the second century C.E. translate Lev
24:16 in a way suggesting that the name should not be used (we do not
know the original wording); Targum Onkelos does about the same.
However, the rabbis of old did *not* use Lev 24:16 or Ex 20:7 as
reason for not pronouncing the name, according to G. F. Moore (1955)
"Judaism in the First Centuries of the Christian Era. the Age of the
Tannaim Judaism", vol I, p. 428.

It is quite strange that the very passage that definitely says that
the name should always be used, is the passage that was used to show
that the name should not be pronounced, namely, Ex 3:15. For those
interested in the four fanciful ways the words of this verse were
explained to say the opposite of what they do say, please look at the
> Jewish lexicon M. M. Kasher (1967) "The Encyclopedia of Biblical
> Interpretation", vol II, p. 109.
>
>
>
> Best regards
>
> Rolf Furuli
> University of Oslo
>




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page