Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Uri Hurwitz <uhurwitz AT yahoo.com>]

    B.M. Rocine wrote, in part:
   
  "To lend support to the idea that Gen. 1:1 should be taken as a dependent 
clause,...."
   
    The first verses of Genesis 1 are heavily influenced by the Akkadian 
creation epic "Enuma Eli$".  This was widely recognized since its discovery 
and understanding.  It begins with the phrase  "When on high...."  and 
continues thorough several other dependent clauses. I think it was Speiser in 
his Anchor Bible  translation of Genesis who intorduced the dependent clause 
to Gen 1:1, but perhaps he had predecessors.
      On the other  hand, none of the ancient translations or versions used a 
dependent clause to begin this chapter,as far as I know.
   
     I personally prefer the unamended , traditional vocalization  "Bara" of 
the MT.
   
     As for the various  available current new translations I prefer for 
stylistic reasons the one by Fox, though I never studied any of the 
translations closely.
   
      Uri



                
---------------------------------
 Yahoo! FareChase - Search multiple travel sites in one click.  
>From kgraham0938 AT comcast.net  Tue Nov 22 20:03:42 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 sccrmhc14.comcast.net (sccrmhc14.comcast.net [63.240.77.84])
        by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 421AE4C008
        for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Tue, 22 Nov 2005 20:03:42 -0500 
(EST)
Received: from smailcenter57.comcast.net ([204.127.205.157])
        by comcast.net (sccrmhc14) with SMTP
        id <2005112301033601400luuu9e>; Wed, 23 Nov 2005 01:03:36 +0000
Received: from [164.76.122.166] by smailcenter57.comcast.net;
        Wed, 23 Nov 2005 01:03:34 +0000
From: kgraham0938 AT comcast.net
To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 01:03:34 +0000
Message-Id: 
<112320050103.11558.4383BFE60004EEB300002D262205886014C8CCC7CF030E080E9D0905 AT comcast.net>
X-Mailer: AT&T Message Center Version 1 (Dec 17 2004)
X-Authenticated-Sender: a2dyYWhhbTA5MzhAY29tY2FzdC5uZXQ=
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Daniel 6:27 (time indefinite) II
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, 23 Nov 2005 01:03:42 -0000


@Solomon:

Why do I get the feeling your going to hold to that view no matter what I say 
next?

By the way I looked up WLM in a modern version of BDB and could not find 
anything about indefinite time, except in regards to a future event.

Although being honest I was glancing because I was in a rush.
--
Kelton Graham
KGRAHAM0938 AT comcast.net


>  
> I fully understand that "time indefinite" does not work for you.   
> "Age-abiding" does not work for me, though some translations favor it.   
> Such is 
> life.
>  
> However, defining "olam" as "hidden time, i.e. obscure and long, of which  
> the beginning or end is uncertain or indefinite" worked for Gesenius, and 
> it  
> works for me.  
>  
> True, as used in the Bible, "olam" does not usually refer to 15 minutes,  
> but 
> there are places where it does not mean "forever," either.  When it  means 
> "forever" it may be augmented by "we'ad."  Or to indicate  "forever," 
> another 
> Hebrew word, "netsach," may be used.
>  
> Maybe it can be illustrated with a closed circle.  Where does it  begin, 
> where does it end?  Beginning and end are "indefinite," i.e.  undefined.
>  
> I think too much of this (over)long discussion has not really been about  
> what "olam" means in the Hebrew Bible or how it is used there. It seems to 
> be  
> about what "olam" or forever means to individual  posters. 
>  
> I like, and am quite comfortable with, "time indefinite."  Your are  not.  
> So, what's new?
>  
> Solomon Landers
>  
>  
> In a message dated 11/22/2005 6:17:06 A.M. Pacific Standard Time,  
> kgraham0938 AT comcast.net writes:
> 
> I think the  point is that time indefinite is not the same as OLAM.  As I 
> have pointed  out.
> 
> 'In' is a prefix meaning no or not.
> 
> So in essense what you  are saying is that OLAM means no specific time, and 
> that is not what the word  means.  It points to long duration, eternal etc.
> 
> If it is simply  pointing to no specific time, that time could be 15 
> seconds. 
>  Time  indefinite is not a good rendering.
> 
> And even if you argue hidden time,  that is not the same as indefinite time.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew