b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum
List archive
- From: <tladatsi AT charter.net>
- To: "Vadim Cherny" <VadimCherny AT mail.ru>, "Read, James C" <K0434995 AT kingston.ac.uk>
- Cc: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
- Subject: [b-hebrew] YHWH & Elohim - Equivalence
- Date: Sun, 7 Aug 2005 14:24:53 -0400
Vadim,
Thank you for your email. I would agree that all of the
divine names are equivalent in as much as they refer to the
same object, the God of Isreal. What I think may have been
the case is that the authors of the OT did not think them
equivalent for writing purposes. I am guessing that the
ancient scribes and priests perferred to write the name of
God as either Elohim, Eloah, or Yahweh and not as El, Yah,
or Yahu. I would also guess that this changed occurred
after many of individuals named in the OT were given their
names. It would not be possible to go back and * correct *
Samuel or Isaiah's names. Further, the average person may
not have been aware of this shift in practice and continued
to use the old, more common names, both to refer to the
Deity and for theophoric personal names. This is a nuance
I know, but perhaps an important one.
> From: "Vadim Cherny" <VadimCherny AT mail.ru>
> Date: 2005/08/07 Sun PM 12:45:42 EDT
> To: "Read, James C" <K0434995 AT kingston.ac.uk>, <
tladatsi AT charter.net>
> CC: <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
> Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] YHWH & Elohim - A Bit More
>
> Jack's reasoning makes sense for me. But, then, I assume
that Yah/ Yahu/
> Yaho is just a variant spelling of YHWH, incorporating
the same Iao base of
> 1-2-3 pronoun suffixes.
>
> Vadim Cherny
>
> >
> > I was actually thinking of personal names rather than
place
> > names. Sorry I was not clear. My note was just an
initial
> > observation and a thought, it is not in opposition to
much
> > of anything yet.
> >
> > Here are my initial thoughts in regards to your email.
> >
> > 1) What is the point of shortening the full formal
personal
> > name to begin with? The ancient Israelites did not
seem
> > particularly adverse to having long formal personal
names.
> > Obviously shortened nick-names were probably quite
common
> > but those only make sense relative to the full formal
name.
> > I would expect in the context of the OT, the authors
would
> > have naturally favored the more formal names over nick-
> > names. Even if some of these names are nick-names
surely
> > there should be at least some theophoric names that
were
> > not shortened? There should be a few personal
theophoric
> > name that include YHWH or Elohim if shortening were the
> > process.
> >
> > 2) If one wished to shorten a theophroic name, I do not
see
> > any particular motive to shorten the divine portion of
a
> > theophoric name. It seems to me that the only point of
> > having a theophoric name is to include God?s name.
> > Shortening the divine element of a person?s theophoric
name
> > seems to defeat the entire purpose of having a
theophoric
> > name. Why not shorten the non-divine elements?
> >
> > 3) If the names were shortened, they were not shortened
by
> > much, if at all in many cases. For example Yahu-
natan(Yahu
> > gave)is no shorter than Yahweh-natan when spoken (four
> > syllables each)and only one letter shorter when
written.
> > Yesha ? Yah (Yah saved)is but one syllable shorter than
> > Yesha ? Yahweh. Shama-El is significantly shorter than
> > Shama-Eloah or Shama-Elohim.
> >
> >
> >
> > > From: Peter Kirk <peterkirk AT qaya.org>
> > > Date: 2005/08/06 Sat PM 06:43:33 EDT
> > > To: tladatsi AT charter.net
> > > CC: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> > > Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] YHWH & Elohim
> > >
> > > On 06/08/2005 23:20, tladatsi AT charter.net wrote:
> > >
> > > >...
> > > >Even more interesting, YHWH and Elohim never occur
in
> > > >theophoric names, at least I found none. ...
> > > >
> > >
> > > There is Gibeath-haElohim or Gibeah of God in 1
Samuel
> > 10:5.
> > >
> > > ...
> > >
> > > >The logic of lengthening a short name to a longer
name
> > is
> > > >pretty obvious. It is both visually more impressive
and
> > > >sounds better. ...
> > > >
> > >
> > > I see your point. But isn't there an even more
obvious
> > logic to
> > > shortening a long name, especially when it is
> > incorporated within a
> > > compound name? In that case YHWH and Eloah/Elohim
would
> > have been the
> > > original full forms, and YH/YHW and El abbreviated
> > versions used largely
> > > in names and (perhaps where it fits the "metre"
better)
> > in poetry.
> > >
> > > So why is your suggestion better than my tentative
one?
> > >
> > > --
> > > Peter Kirk
> > > peter AT qaya.org (personal)
> > > peterkirk AT qaya.org (work)
> > > http://www.qaya.org/
> > >
> >
> > Jack Tladatsi
> > _______________________________________________
> > b-hebrew mailing list
> > b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
> >
> > This email has been scanned for all viruses by the
MessageLabs Email
> > Security System.
> >
> >
> > This email has been scanned for all viruses by the
MessageLabs Email
> > Security System.
> >
>
Jack Tladatsi
-
[b-hebrew] YHWH & Elohim - Equivalence,
tladatsi, 08/07/2005
- Re: [b-hebrew] YHWH & Elohim - Equivalence, Vadim Cherny, 08/07/2005
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.