Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Dave Washburn <dwashbur AT nyx.net>]

Uh, I didn't say it did affect his theological viewpoint.  I explicitly said 
it wasn't a theological statement at all.

On Wednesday 16 November 2005 16:44, you wrote:
> Solomon may well have written this on a bad day but it unfair to presume
> that this means it affected his theological viewpoint. There is much great
> godly wisdom to be gleaned from Qohelet and in fact some of David's most
> beautiful psalms were the result of times of great distress.
> It is clear what Solomon thought about the afterlife and this view is in
> complete agreement with the rest of the Tanakh. It may well be that he was
> having a bad day but nothing in Qohelet present a theological viewpoint any
> different to the testimony of the rest of the hebrew bible.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: b-hebrew-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org on behalf of Dave Washburn
> Sent: Mon 11/14/2005 11:35 PM
> To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Eccl 1:4 was Re:  Daniel 6:27 (time indefinite)
>
> Paying attention to things like genre, context and clear authorial intent
> hardly constitutes "interpretation." One of the most important questions we
> can ask in translation and exegesis is "what questions should I be asking?"
> This is true especially in a book like Ecclesiastes.  Both the immediate
> and wider context of the book make it quite clear that the author is not
> making a theological statement in 1:4, but a comment about what things
> *seem to be* from his limited (and somewhat despairing) perspective.  A
> translation that doesn't take such things into account is not giving the
> reader everything s/he needs in order to make an interpretation.
>
> On Monday 14 November 2005 14:41, Rolf Furuli wrote:
> > Dear Dave,
> >
> > Your words below are your interpretation, and it is your privilege to
> > make one. I would let the reader make his or her interpretation, and
> > therefore I find "time indefinite" fitting.
> >
> > > On Monday 14 November 2005 10:25, Rolf Furuli wrote:
> > >> Dear Peter,
> > >
> > > [snip]
> > >
> > >> Translators using the idiomatic method all the time make decisions in
> > >> behalf of the readers, and the readers have no part in the translation
> > >> process. Translators of the literal translation make as few decisions
> > >> as possible in behalf of the readers, and therefore the readers can
> > >> have a part in the very translation process.  This is one way to
> > >> interpret the term
> > >> "semi-translation".
> > >>
> > >> A good example is Ecclesiastes 1:4.
> > >> NIV: Generations come and generations go, but the earth remains for
> > >> ever. NWT: A generation is going and a generation is coming; but the
> > >> earth is standing even to time indefinite.
> > >>
> > >> An important question here is: Who is going to decide whether the
> > >> writer implies that the earth may stand a long time and then be
> > >> destroyed, or whether the meaning is that the earth will continue to
> > >> stand without an end? The translator or the reader?
> > >
> > > [snip]
> > >
> > > Actually, this is the wrong question.  A more important and pertinent
> > > question
> > > is context: is this a theological statement at all?  The answer is a
> > > resounding "no."  The whole book repeatedly uses statements like "as I
> > > have
> > > seen," "man under the sun," and so forth.  Neither the author nor the
> > > narrator is making any kind of theological statement in this verse. 
> > > He's saying "From what I've seen, nothing ever changes.  Generations
> > > rise and fall, the earth is always there."  From this kind of POV, and
> > > in such a context, "forever" is a much better rendering because it
> > > conveys the perspective of the observer making the statement.  Whether
> > > it is theologically in accord with the rest of the Hebrew Bible is
> > > irrelevant, because that's not where this narrator is coming from. 
> > > From his earthly, somewhat despairing viewpoint, the earth does indeed
> > > continue forever. So if
> > > we're going to be true to the intent of the text, this is how we ought
> > > to render it.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Dave Washburn
> > > http://www.nyx.net/~dwashbur
> > > "Maybe I'll trade it for a new hat."
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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

-- 
Dave Washburn
http://www.nyx.net/~dwashbur
"Maybe I'll trade it for a new hat."