Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Sujata <shevaroys AT yahoo.com>]

Hi Karl and Chris
I have no knowledge of Hebrew, but thought I will
share my thoughts on this.

Rotherham translation of Exodus 34:7  "Though he leave
not utterly unpunished"

Also, Ezekiel 18:18-19 explains this further.

Best wishes,
Sujata

--- wattswestmaas <wattswestmaas AT eircom.net> wrote:

> Hallo there Karl,  well the co-incidence is quite
> striking for me because I
> had read Genesis 24:41 and had at the back of my
> mind thought exactly the
> same about Ex 34:7 as you had just written  -- 
> "free from consequences..."
> but dismissed it and had all but given up trying to
> look for something that
> perhaps was never there in exodus 34:7.  However,
> your email quickly
> re-awakened that when I read:  "free from
> consequences". What is so
> inconsistent in the exodus and Jeremiah 'english'
> translation is the idea of
> forgiveness and punishment for what is supposed to
> have just been forgiven,
> getting too close together.  I am not saying that
> this can be construed, but
> simply that the translation brings these ideas, for
> me, in an unacceptably
> close proximity to each other.
> 
>    ,,,  He will in no way clear the guilty .... in
> ex 34: is still too
> ludicrous a translation for me.  It simply DOES NOT
> FIT.  It does not fit
> the context . And Jeremiah's occurence shows that it
> can not be translated
> like this. And there is no indication of to whom the
> object of this
> statement is directed.  It sort of just hangs
> there!!
> 
> 
> No where in the bible do we read about the children
> being punished for the
> sins of the fathers.  And I would vehemently
> challenge anyone to show this.
> Quite the contrary it is inconceivable that God
> would do something that HE
> HIMSELF HAS FORBIDDEN! (See Deut 24:16)  However we
> do read about the
> CONSEQUENCES of the sins of the Fathers ( I
> immediately think of David and
> Abshalom) a very different concept from punishment!!
> 
>    The point about the other occurences is that you
> are provided with a
> sense of the "object" of this pronouncment, ie, in
> Nahum it is written "the
> wicked" in Jeremiah it is written "Israel" but in
> exodus there is no object
> upon which to focus. 'Guilty' is a supplied word -
> as the object, but I see
> no logic at all for this.  It is a presumption on
> the basis of a lack of
> anything else.  So and therefore I attempted to try
> and understand what is
> this short passage really saying.
> 
> 
> As concerning the Hebrew grammar in Gen 24:41, I
> noticed the 2 different
> ways in which Abraham's servant uses the word for
> "cleared". The first time
> the verb is used, and in the second occurrence  a
> noun is used, a form of
> the verb, (not taken from it; according to shoshan)
> .  Are these just two
> different ways of saying the same thing, or is there
> a subtle change in
> stress or nuance that I have not yet learned to
> differentiate?
> 
> Thanks. Chris, Ireland
>  PS Sorry I have no time to look right now but this
> exact same construct is
> used elsewhere with a qualifying clause; namely ...
> NKH Lo YNKH of those
> that hate me!
> 
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
> 



                
__________________________________ 
Do you Yahoo!? 
Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site!
http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/