Biblical Hebrew Forum

[kgraham0938 AT comcast.net]

Hey Karl, I think that your answer is possible.  I got an answer from a guy 
on the text criticism site who suggested that maybe the error occured during 
the copying of a paleo-Hebrew script when the unpointed letters were less 
distinguishable.

That makes sense as well, since I don't see a variant listed anywhere.  Or as 
you say maybe both accounts are correct.
--
Kelton Graham 
KGRAHAM0938 AT comcast.net

-------------- Original message -------------- 

> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: kgraham0938 AT comcast.net 
> > 
> > I put this up on text criticism site @ Yahoo, so I figured I put it 
> > here as well. 
> > 
> > 
> > I am assuming this is a variant, anyone got any ideas which reading 
> > it the correct one? 
> > 
> > Jer 52:12 WBAXODE$ HAXAMIY$IY BE`F&OR 
> > 
> > In the fifth month and 10th day... 
> > 
> > 2 Kings 25:8 WBAXODE$ HAXAMIY$IY B:WIBY$IY 
> > 
> > In the fifth month and 7th day.... 
> > 
> > -- 
> > 
> > 
> > -- 
> > Kelton Graham 
> > KGRAHAM0938 AT comcast.net 
> 
> Look at the context. 
> 
> Nebuzeardan may have arrived at the Nebuchadnezzar’s encampment on the 
> seventh, 
> but the city wasn’t taken until the nineth 2 Kings 25:3, delaying 
> Nebuzeardan’s entrance to the city until the tenth after mopping up 
> resistance 
> to the invasion. Thus both could be correct. Or we could be dealing with 
> scribal 
> error on one or the other account. It seems that in the context, the 
> entrance 
> into Jerusalem was the tenth. 
> 
> Karl W. Randolph. 
> -- 
> ___________________________________________________________ 
> Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com 
> http://promo.mail.com/adsfreejump.htm 
> 
> _______________________________________________ 
> b-hebrew mailing list 
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org 
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew 
>From kgraham0938 AT comcast.net  Thu May  5 09:15:38 2005
Return-Path: <kgraham0938 AT comcast.net>
X-Original-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Delivered-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Received: from sccrmhc11.comcast.net (sccrmhc11.comcast.net [204.127.202.55])
        by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 984C94C00B
        for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Thu,  5 May 2005 09:15:38 -0400 
(EDT)
Received: from 204.127.205.143 ([204.127.205.143])
        by comcast.net (sccrmhc11) with SMTP
        id <2005050513153801100ikf80e>; Thu, 5 May 2005 13:15:38 +0000
Received: from [69.136.149.33] by 204.127.205.143;
        Thu, 05 May 2005 13:15:38 +0000
From: kgraham0938 AT comcast.net
To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] YHWH Derivation -  a dead end
Date: Thu, 05 May 2005 13:15:38 +0000
Message-Id: 
<050520051315.10900.427A1C79000B8F1A00002A942200763704C8CCC7CF030E080E9D0905 AT comcast.net>
X-Mailer: AT&T Message Center Version 1 (Dec 17 2004)
X-Authenticated-Sender: a2dyYWhhbTA5MzhAY29tY2FzdC5uZXQ=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5
X-BeenThere: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Hebrew Bible List <b-hebrew.lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/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/listinfo/b-hebrew>,
        <mailto:b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 05 May 2005 13:15:38 -0000

@Rolf:

Hey Rolf, I think the reason why many translators as well as myself translate 
'EH:YEH 'E$ER 'EH:YEH as I AM who I AM as opposed to I will be who I will be 
is based upon Moses' statement to YHWH in the previous verse.  He says

" And they will say to me what is his name?  What do I say to them?"  

Moses:[question]  What is your name?
YHWH:[answer] I will be who I will be

Then he goes on to say " Tell them I will be sent you."  

Does not make any sense.  I will be who I will be does not answer the 
question.  And secondly if 'EH:YEH is a 1cs of YHWH (3ms), translated as "I 
will be" then you'd have to translate YHWH as "He will be."  
--
Kelton Graham 
KGRAHAM0938 AT comcast.net

-------------- Original message -------------- 

> Dear Yigal, 
> 
> I agree with you that to discuss the origin of YHWH, or to try to derive 
> YHWH from the name/designation of another god is a dead end. We know 
> nothing about this, and we even do not have any clues. But there is much 
> speculation! 
> 
> I have a comment ont Ex. 3:14 though: The two most common English 
> glosses for the rendring of HYH is "be" and "become". This means, for 
> example, that the meaning of the word is very different from that of the 
> Greek EIMI, which basically signifies a state. When a person speaks of 
> himself and uses the YIQTOL form of HYH, the force is hardly that the 
> person "is"; just his act of speaking proves that he "is," so any 
> further statement is not needed. But the force is that he *will become* 
> something that is lacking at present. Because of this, all examples of 
> YIQTOL HYH, first person singular, save perhaps one or two, have future 
> reference (cf. Ex. 3:12), and is translated by future in the Bible 
> translations. It is an old tradition to translate Ex. 3:14 with "I am 
> what I am". To say that a rendereing in a Bible translation "is wrong" 
> is a very strong statement that seldom can be done, because passages can 
> legitimately be translated in different ways. But I would say that the 
> mentioned rendering of Ex 3:12 is tendentious and strange. Why should 
> HYH in this case have a present reference when first person YIQTOLs of 
> the root in most other cases are rendered with future? 
> 
> As for YHWH, the points above suggest that there need not be any 
> relationship between YHWH and HYH, even though this seems to be the case 
> in Ex. 3:14. One natural rendering of the verse would be: "I will 
> become (or:prove to be) what I will become (or:prove to be)." If this 
> was the way the writer understood the words, the clause relates to the 
> *acts* of God and not to his existence. It is often shown in the Tanakh 
> that YHWH becomes known on the basis of what he does, and when he did 
> somewthing great in the past, the people learned to know him in a new 
> way. Thus, YHWH is known by his personal name and by his acts. If this 
> is the thought behind the account in Ex. 3:13-15, it means that the 
> clause ")ehe a$er )hye" is not an explanation of the meaning or origin 
> of YHYH, but it points to another way of identifying God than by using 
> his name, namely to identify him by his acts. So the similarity between 
> YHWH and HYH need not be anything but a play of words, which is a tool 
> often used by Hebrew writers. 
> 
> The conclusion is that YHWH is the unique personal name of the God that 
> the Bible writers worshipped; it cannot be derived from anything, and 
> its meaning cannot be known with certainty. 
> 
> 
> Best regards 
> 
> Rolf Furuli 
> University of Oslo 
> 
> 
> Yigal Levin wrote: 
> 
> >The one answer that I don't think anyone has brought up is the Bible's 
> >own: 
> >")ehyeh a$er )ehyeh" - "I am that I am" (Ex. 3:14) seems to understand the 
> >name YHWH as derived from the root HYH. But in any case, this whole thread 
> >seems to be leading to a dead end. Do we know the etymology of most other 
> >ANE dieties? Hadad/Adad? Chemosh? Anat? Ashur (yes, that's also a toponym, 
> >but which came first?)? Marduk? Qws? I could go on and on.... 
> > 
> > 
> >Yigal 
> > 
> > 
> >_______________________________________________ 
> >b-hebrew mailing list 
> >b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org 
> >http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> _______________________________________________ 
> b-hebrew mailing list 
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org 
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew 
>From uhurwitz AT yahoo.com  Thu May  5 09:50:17 2005
Return-Path: <uhurwitz AT yahoo.com>
X-Original-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Delivered-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Received: from web51608.mail.yahoo.com (web51608.mail.yahoo.com
        [206.190.38.213])
        by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix) with SMTP id DD4754C00B
        for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Thu,  5 May 2005 09:50:17 -0400 
(EDT)
Received: (qmail 39602 invoked by uid 60001); 5 May 2005 13:50:17 -0000
Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com;
        
b=KDcktc4jjYYlUjvLHblbLiadpjQABNbVq0PZxfIWYOoagYB9AIm3n+pbUTPcSvThjg7S7vYZnGBLhynJqEtBVArYzIn+77iDtAyypXXl9Cad11kG4bKHNdY2BJGyU3kFmQlSkyJlck4xQGVPjVR+AopHD7PP8RIuLRsI6eHNHqA=
        ; 
Message-ID: <20050505135017.39600.qmail AT web51608.mail.yahoo.com>
Received: from [4.237.101.97] by web51608.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP;
        Thu, 05 May 2005 06:50:16 PDT
Date: Thu, 5 May 2005 06:50:16 -0700 (PDT)
From: Uri Hurwitz <uhurwitz AT yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] YHWH Derivation -  a dead end  ??
To: Yigal Levin <leviny1 AT mail.biu.ac.il>, b-hebrew 
<b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
In-Reply-To: 6667
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5
Cc: 
X-BeenThere: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Hebrew Bible List <b-hebrew.lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/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/listinfo/b-hebrew>,
        <mailto:b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 05 May 2005 13:50:18 -0000

  Is it really a dead end?..
 
  To many scholars, past and present, it is clear that YHWH is 3rd p m 
imperfect for the Aramaic root HWH , the equivalent to the the Heb HYH.
 
 This was clear  the later scribe in Ex 3:14 who  while he no longer 
understood the original meaning of the word -- part of a larger term  -- 
still connected it to the  Hebrew root.
 
  Uri
 
 

Yigal Levin <leviny1 AT mail.biu.ac.il> wrote:
The one answer that I don't think anyone has brought up is the Bible's own:
")ehyeh a$er )ehyeh" - "I am that I am" (Ex. 3:14) seems to understand the
name YHWH as derived from the root HYH. But in any case, this whole thread
seems to be leading to a dead end. Do we know the etymology of most other
ANE dieties? Hadad/Adad? Chemosh? Anat? Ashur (yes, that's also a toponym,
but which came first?)? Marduk? Qws? I could go on and on....


Yigal


_______________________________________________
b-hebrew mailing list
b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 
>From joel AT exc.com  Thu May  5 11:36:49 2005
Return-Path: <joel AT exc.com>
X-Original-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Delivered-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Received: from mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net (mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net [167.206.4.199])
        by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 016624C00B
        for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Thu,  5 May 2005 11:36:48 -0400 
(EDT)
Received: from exc.com (ool-44c6ce71.dyn.optonline.net [68.198.206.113])
        by mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net
        (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.25 (built Mar  3 2004))
        with ESMTP id <0IG000JAHWNHTB AT mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> for
        b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org; Thu, 05 May 2005 11:35:42 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (2523 bytes) by exc.com       via sendmail with 
P:stdio/R:smart_host/T:smtp
        (sender: <joel AT exc.com>)        id <m1DTiHh-000GhjC AT exc.com>    for
        peterkirk AT qaya.org; Thu, 05 May 2005 11:29:05 -0400
Date: Thu, 05 May 2005 11:29:05 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Dr. Joel M. Hoffman" <joel AT exc.com>
In-reply-to: <20050505064428.0BA714816F AT metalab.unc.edu>
To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Message-id: <m1DTiHh-000GhjC AT exc.com>
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
References: <20050505064428.0BA714816F AT metalab.unc.edu>
Cc: 
Subject: [b-hebrew] Re: b-hebrew Digest, Vol 29, Issue 6
X-BeenThere: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Hebrew Bible List <b-hebrew.lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/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/listinfo/b-hebrew>,
        <mailto:b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 05 May 2005 15:36:49 -0000

>>It also accords well with the fact that the Israelites seem to have
>>used their matres lectiones for other important tasks, including
>>adding a Hey to the names of their Patriarch (AVRM --> AVRHM),
>>Matriarch (SHY --> SRH) and deity (ELYM --> ELHYM).
>>
>This cannot be an adequate explanation for the form 'LHYM. The he as a 
>root letter is found in other Semitic languages, including Arabic 
>"Allah", "ilaha" etc, Aramaic "elah", all with a fully pronounced (not 
>mater lectionis) he. So it can hardly be a Hebrew invention, or one 
>dating from after the introduction of matres lectionis which was not 
>long before the Exile.

We can rule Arabic out right away, because the writing comes from the
middle of the first millenium CE, almost 1,500 years too late to be
relevant.  (Right?)

Aramaic is trickier, for two reasons.  

We don't know have any clear idea how a final HEH was pronounced.  A
pronounced final /h/ sound is rare in the world's languages, but
common in the world's writing systems, leading one to conclude that
written H's aren't usually pronounced.  Of course, part of the reason
final unpronounced H's are so common goes back to the matres
lectiones, so any application of current generalities to
pre-matres-lectiones writing is dubious.  And we left not knowing
enough about final H's back then.

But we also don't have enough (any?) pre-Hebrew Aramaic writing to
come to any clear conclusion about Aramaic.  Typical of current
thinking is Beyer's claim that "Ancient Aramaic in written form
appeared in the 11th cent. b.c. ... [but] the oldest witnesses to it
are inscription from [...] the 10th-8th [centuries]" (K. Beyer _The
Aramaic Language_ [1896, Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht]) But such a claim,
which only narrows down the introduction of Aramaic writing to perhaps
200 years, is not precise enough to date Aramaic writing before Hebrew
matres lectiones.

I'd be very interested to know if there are any examples of Aramaic
ELEH meaning God that clearly predate Hebrew.

Also, while on the topic, can someone recommend a really good book
about the history of Arabic and its writing?

Thanks.

-Joel