Biblical Hebrew Forum

[George F Somsel <gfsomsel AT juno.com>]

On Wed, 10 Aug 2005 10:43:00 -0500 "Karl Randolph" <kwrandolph AT email.com>
writes:
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "George F Somsel" <gfsomsel AT juno.com>
> > ...
> > ______________
> > ...
> > 
> > As regards the touching of the "feet" with the foreskin, it is 
> entirely
> > possible that this is actually a reference to touching Moses' 
> privates.
> > Such euphemisms are not uncommon (see the book of Ruth where she 
> uncovers
> > Boaz' "feet").
> > 
> > Why would Z know that the act of circumcision (and its symbolic
> > transference to Moses by touching his "feet" with the foreskin)?  
> We are
> > not told.  It would probably be a matter of "common knowledge" at 
> the
> > time.
> > 
> > george
> > gfsomsel
> 
> George, where do you get this euphemism?
> 
> In the case with Ruth and Boaz, Boaz was sleeping outdoors. 
> Outdoors nights are often cool, so it is hard to believe 
> that Boaz did not cover himself, feet included, with a 
> cloak or blanket brought along for that very purpose. 
> Notice, Naomi expected that Boaz would be sleeping next 
> to the threshing floor, so this was planned for, not 
> spontaneous as a drunken stupor. So from the text, there 
> is no justification from the text for such an euphemism.
> 
> Karl W. Randolph.
 ___________________________________________________________

Karl, 

Cf. Dt. 25.11

K.iY_YiN.fCW. ):aNf$iYM YaX:D.fW )iY$ W:)fXiYW W:Q:aR:BfH )"$eT Hf)eXfD
L:HaC.iYL )eT_)iY$.fH. MiY.aD MaC."HW. W:$fL:XfH YfDfH. W:HeX:eZiYQfH
B.iM:Bu$fYW . . .

Here the term for genitals is from BW$ or "shame" which is the same as
the root which is substituted for Baal in many names.  It was thus a
practice to use a euphemism.  You may read an expurgated TANAK if you
like, but you're missing the point.

The TDNT notes this euphemism and HALOT states

—4. a. dual, probably a euphemism for the pubic region Ex 4?25 Is 6?2,
cf. Wildberger BK 10:248 (see below, B CSH pi.), %a(aR HfRaG:LfYiM pubic
hair Is 7?20; —b. SCK: )eT_RaG:LfYW he covered his feet with a garment,
meaning he relieved himself Ju 3?24 1S 24?4 (? SCK: hif); —c. $fTfH
M"YM"Y RaG:L"YHeM (Q), $iYN"YHeM (K) = MHeb. M"Y RaG:LaYiM to drink their
own urine (? *$aYiN) 2K 1827/Is 36?12. 

george
gfsomsel
___________
>From gfsomsel AT juno.com  Wed Aug 10 12:47:48 2005
Return-Path: <gfsomsel AT juno.com>
X-Original-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Delivered-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Received: from m04.lax.untd.com (m04.lax.untd.com [64.136.30.67])
        by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix) with SMTP id E9A4A4C005
        for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Wed, 10 Aug 2005 12:47:47 -0400 
(EDT)
Received: from m04.lax.untd.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
        by m04.lax.untd.com with SMTP id AABBRWM55A28EM92
        for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org> (sender <gfsomsel AT juno.com>);
        Wed, 10 Aug 2005 09:46:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-UNTD-OriginStamp: w3STQS63J+y68QsFU7oRtDacVf8nKYRMT1urZk8+ybfF2QDzuwE+aQ==
Received: (from gfsomsel AT juno.com) 
        by m04.lax.untd.com (jqueuemail) id KZ3BMKSF;
        Wed, 10 Aug 2005 09:46:26 PDT
To: K0434995 AT kingston.ac.uk
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2005 12:56:43 -0400
Message-ID: <20050810.125643.-404335.5.gfsomsel AT juno.com>
X-Mailer: Juno 5.0.33
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 9-6, 8-10, 12, 14, 16, 18-19, 21, 23-24, 28, 30, 32, 34, 
36,
        38, 40, 42, 44, 46-47, 49, 51, 53, 55-56, 58, 60, 62, 64, 66,
        68-75, 84-85, 87-90, 91-32767
From: George F Somsel <gfsomsel AT juno.com>
X-ContentStamp: 24:12:2038976037
X-MAIL-INFO: 1aa0056945948484b9fd419d905495e195b0247070419531e4141d
X-UNTD-Peer-Info: 127.0.0.1|localhost|m04.lax.untd.com|gfsomsel AT juno.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.6
Cc: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] 2Sam24:1 subjects
X-BeenThere: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.6
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: Wed, 10 Aug 2005 16:47:48 -0000

On Wed, 10 Aug 2005 17:17:37 +0100 "Read, James C"
<K0434995 AT kingston.ac.uk> writes:
Hi George,

I don't know how to cut and paste hebrew text and make it displayable on
this mailing list but if it will
make you feel better and you instruct me how to do it I will do it for
you.
My referrals to the LXX and Acts were not out of lack of ability to read
this simple hebrew passage but to
show that other translators much earlier and more acquainted with the
language than us did not understand the
agent to be YHWH himself.
Making belittling accusations is all very well but it hardly addresses
the question at hand and I really don't
feel like getting into an "I know b-hebrew better than you" discussion as
I feel it would bring little of value
to the discussion.
The fact remains that the various subjects and objects in the Tanakh are
not always as clear as we would like them to be and only context can make
them clearer. Failing context we can look at how ancient translators
viewed
them and then we can decide if we feel we are in a position to know
better than they.
The whole theology of the torah presents yah as being too holy to view
and both to me, to the LXX translators and
to the author of Acts the logical conclusion is that Yah is used as a
substitute subject as one of his messengers.
In a similar wayin English we say 'King... built such and such a bridge'.
But do we really imagine that the King
got off his throne and went and hauled tonnes of stone and single
handedly erected the bridge? Not by a long
stretch of the imagination. We reasonably conclude that the King ordered
and was responsible for the building of
the bridge and that hired-labourers or slaves did the actual physical
labour.
In the same way, in b-hebrew, it is possible to say that Yah tried to
kill Mose in the street when really it
was his messenger. This is a normal manner of expression in all modern
languages that I am familiar with.

Anyway, the later objects in the quote are far more interesting and I
have already admitted that my interpretation
is by no means the last word. But that is the whole point. We cannot be
100% sure at whose feet the skin fell
because there are three males in the context of the story and one of
which may have one of two identities
(Yah/Yah's messenger). NWT has chosen to preserve the ambiguity here and
allow the reader to reach his/her own
conclusions.
2Sam24:1 is ambiguous because the inferred subject of the second clause
makes absolutely no sense what-so-ever
in the context of the chapter (not just the context of the entire
tanakh). The Chronicler, who knew b-hebrew
far better than I will ever, seemed to think that the subject of the
second clause was not Yah and that the
text is 2Sam24:1 allowed for another subject and I have to say that I
agree with him.
It is not justifiable to say that the Chronicler had problems with Yah
being capable of 'bad' because other
sections of Chronicles directly connect Yah with both blessing and with
malediction. 

This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
Security System.


____________

It isn't necessary to cut and paste Hebrew into the text of your posts. 
It is perfectly acceptable (preferred?) that the Hebrew be transliterated
according to the schema on the b-hebrew website.  That wasn't intended to
be belittling but to express a question that came to me as I read your
posts.  This was caused by your raising the question "Who attacked whom"
since YHWH was clearly the subject of the verbs.  If I offended you, I
apologize.  Your assurance that you do read Hebrew is sufficient.  I
simply have encountered too many who look up words in Strong's and then
pretend that they are able to discuss the original language.

I would tend to go the other way and suggest that when an agent of YHWH
is mentioned it actually refers to YHWH himself.

george
gfsomsel
___________
>From dwashbur AT nyx.net  Wed Aug 10 12:56:37 2005
Return-Path: <dwashbur AT nyx.net>
X-Original-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Delivered-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Received: from S2.cableone.net (s2.cableone.net [24.116.0.228])
        by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACBA84C005
        for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Wed, 10 Aug 2005 12:56:37 -0400 
(EDT)
Received: from [192.168.0.105] (unverified [24.119.169.114]) 
        by S2.cableone.net (CableOne SMTP Service S2) with ESMTP id 27001131 
        for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Wed, 10 Aug 2005 10:52:55 -0700
From: Dave Washburn <dwashbur AT nyx.net>
To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2005 10:56:34 -0600
User-Agent: KMail/1.7
References: 
<6B84A53BD25BCA46B070A05DD8C8C9F813A470 AT KUDBEX01.kuds.kingston.ac.uk>
In-Reply-To: 
<6B84A53BD25BCA46B070A05DD8C8C9F813A470 AT KUDBEX01.kuds.kingston.ac.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200508101056.34870.dwashbur AT nyx.net>
X-IP-stats: Incoming Last 0, First 218, in=268, out=0, spam=0
X-External-IP: 24.119.169.114
X-Abuse-Info: Send abuse complaints to abuse AT cableone.net
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] 2Sam24:1 subjects
X-BeenThere: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.6
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: Wed, 10 Aug 2005 16:56:38 -0000

James,
A much better example of ambiguous subjects would be that wonderful verse in 
Kings - I can't seem to find it right now but I'm not near any resources and 
am just doing this off the top of my head, so to speak - where YHWH killed a 
whole enemy army during the night, and the KJV gives that delightful 
rendering that goes something like "When they awoke in the morning, they were 
all dead."  As the German soldier said in the movie "Bedknobs and 
Broomsticks," ein gute Trick!

-- 
Dave Washburn
http://www.nyx.net/~dwashbur
"Well, if I'd wanted a safe life, I guess I wouldn't have 
married a man who studies rocks." - Betty Armstrong (Fay Masterson)