Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Jonathan Walther <krooger AT debian.org>]

On Tue, Feb 24, 2004 at 03:37:21AM -0800, Peter Kirk wrote:
> Jonathan, I apologise for any offence. But if you are really a 
> pure-blooded Jew I am surprised that you don't find Pastor Herrell's 
> material far more offensive.

I was not raised as a Jew, but I am now seeking out my heritage.  I am
unwilling to take the easy path.  I must know the truth, no matter how
painful.  I would be far more offended if Pastor Herrell tried to hide
his views from me, and the reasoning behind his views.  Besides, he is
pro-Israel.

> I don't hold anyone as immune. But conspiracies should be alleged 
> (especially in this very sensitive area) only when there is proper 
> evidence for them. Some simple checking of the facts, by Pastor Herrell 
> or by yourself, should make it clear that in this case the evidence does 
> not exist.

At the mouth of two witnesses a matter will be established.  Pastor
Harrell brought forth several witnesses against the Masoretes, two of
which I will list here.

Witness one: Isaiah 7:14.  Pastor Herrell says that in the Septuagint,
it reads "virgin", while in the Masoretic text this is altered to "young
woman".  Is this a true or a false witness?  The matter touches directly
on the New Testament account of the birth of Jesus.

Witness two: Luke 3:36.  Compare Genesis 11:12.  Pastor Harrell says
the Masoretic text permits no interpretation that includes Cainan, while
the Septuagint does.  Is he wrong on this point?

> I don't understand this comment. Are you suggesting that the New 
> Testament gives evidence of a Jewish conspiracy? The most that you can 
> legitimately read from it is that a particular group of Jews plotted 
> against Jesus and against the early church. That is not the same as 
> saying that Jews in general did.

My sheep know me, and heed my voice.  It was ever so, from generation to
generation, that each of my chosen may have an opportunity to be saved.

> 1) That what certain Jews were saying to Jerome, presumably about the 
> priority of the Hebrew text over the LXX, was untrue. Well, this is one 
> of Herrell's main themes, and I think it has been thoroughly discredited 
> by the evidence given by S?ren and Dave.

I appreciate your calm answer.  As a newcomer to this forum, and as one
unfamiliar with Hebrew and Greek, may I humbly request you give more
detailed pointers to the books and online writings I should have already
read?

> 2) That the Jews knew that what they were saying was untrue. This is 
> without any foundation and highly improbable. Whether or not they were 
> correct, they were surely sincere and not deliberately deceiving anyone.

Roman persecution of Christians at the behest of the Jews is
historically documented, even in the time of Nero (cf Seutonius and
Pliny the Younger).  That seems sufficient to sustain a reasonable
suspicion of intent.  Lack of copies of the Talmud in all the major
public libraries in my area is also suspicious.

> 3) That the dialogue between Jews and Jerome was the start of an ongoing 
> process. Sadly, this was not true. During Jerome's time the western 
> empire was overrun by "barbarians" (my ancestors!) and contact between 
> the western church and the Palestinian Jewish community was lost.

Pastor Harrell says Jerome spent 34 years in Palestine.  Also, there
were Jewish communities and synagogues in every major metropolitan
center of the empire.  Could that really be considered a "loss of
contact"?

> 3) What Herrell says about the contents of the scrolls has been 
> thoroughly discredited by the data posted on this list. Herrell may have 
> been writing partly from ignorance before 1991. He made certain 
> assumptions about the content of unpublished material which have now 
> been shown clearly to be false.

Harrell attributes the following quote to Lampe:

   From Qumran caves one, four, five and six come biblical texts in
   Hebrew which, according to reports, are related to the parent text
   of the Septuagint historical books. Particular interest attaches to
   Samuel fragments from cave four, because the text-form shows more
   obvious affinities with the Septuagint than do the others. Of
   course, it has long been agreed that the parent text of the
   Septuagint Samuel contained recensional divergences from the
   Massoretic Text.

Not knowing the names of the authoritative scholars in this field, I
must ask, is Lampe a reliable scholar?  Pastor Herrell also quoted
Eugene Ulrich and his book, "The Qumran Text of Samuel and Josephus" in
support of his thesis.  Is this also an unreliable source?

Jonathan

--
Address: 13685 Hilton Road, Surrey, BC V3R5J8 (Canada)
Contact: 604-951-4142 (between 7am and 10pm, PST)
Website: http://reactor-core.org