Biblical Hebrew Forum

["B. M. Rocine" <brocine AT twcny.rr.com>]

Hi Clay,

Thanks for your research into haqqodesh.  You wrote:

>[Rocine wrote:]
> >> I think the understanding is incorrect.  I think the reference is to
"the
> >> garments of the holiness."  In other words, the plain understanding is
*not*
> >> that the garments were holy or sacred.  Rather, the garments marked the
> >> holiness or the seperation of the priesthood.  Syntactically speaking,
> >> doesn't the fact that qodesh is a noun with the definite article
attached
> >> fight against the idea that the genitive is attributive?  When both
> >> syntax/morphology *and* context give a plain reading, why do we get to
make
> >> this sort of leap to "genitive of attribution?"

> I looked at hqd$ and qd$ in Exodus and Leviticus specifically as it
relates
> to equipment (e.g.. clothing) used in worship and I find myself in
> disagreement with your position on this. I also read the articles on qd$
in
> TWOT, TDNT 1:88ff. The consensus seems to be that the equipment itself was
> sanctified. It was set apart for the purpose of worship and not to be used
> in a secular/profane context.
>
> This appears to be a probable reading of texts like:
>
> Ex. 29:21 ... wqd$ hw) wbgdyw wbnyw wbgdy bnyw )tw
>
> Ex. 35:19 )t-bgdy h&rd l$rt bqd$ )t-bgdy hqd$ l)hrN hkhN w)t-bgdy bnyw
lkhN
>
> Ex. 35:19 could possibly be construed in the way you suggest but the bulk
of
> the evidence is against it.

It is interesting that with the noun-noun chain bigdey hassrad in Ex 35:19
we *cannot* accept that the genitive hassrad is attributive.  The semantics
of hassrad force us to see it as an expression of purpose, *like I alledge
for haqqodesh*.

>
> If we accept your reading then it would also to apply to "The Holy Place"
> hqd$ which seems improbable given the elaborate rules and prohibitions
that
> guard against profaning hqd$.
>

I don't follow you here.  Are you differentiating between the adjective
qadosh and the noun qodesh?  (It's hard to tell because your transliteration
doesn't indicate most of the vowels).  When the word haqqodesh by itself
means "the holy place" there is no genitive.  Why bring it up?

When the English expression "holy place" or "the holy place" comes from a
noun phrase in Hebrew, it will be hammaqom haqqadosh (<noun-adjective>).
Again, there is no genitive.  I brought up this <noun-adjective> phrase for
comparison with the <noun-noun> bigdey haqqodesh.  There's no difference in
function and/or meaning between qadosh and qodesh when they are linked to a
preceeding noun?

Shalom,
Bryan


B. M. Rocine
Living Word Church
6101 Court St. Rd.
Syracuse, NY 13206

ph: 315.437.6744
fx: 315.437.6766