Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] daughters jacob never spoke of

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Harold Holmyard <hholmyard AT ont.com>
  • To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] daughters jacob never spoke of
  • Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2006 06:35:43 -0500

Shoshanna Walker wrote:

I'm talking about the article you posted, reprinted below.

If it's not in Torah, then it is just someone's theory, and if it is not in Torah, then I don't believe that it is the Truth.

Especially the last sentence, which shows no understanding of Torah. Who wrote this article?

Everything is sufficiently explained by Oral Torah, by all our Sages and Commentaries, there is no need for the theorizing you presented.


HH: Here is the last sentence to which you refer:

This double relationship suggested to Abraham the expedient that he
twice used when he lacked faith in God to protect his life and in
cowardice sought his own safety at the price of his wife's honor.

_________________________


HH: The article was written in 1915 by J. Oscar Boyd. I don't know much about him except that he wrote a number of articles for the International Standard Bible Encyclopedia. I used it because it is available online. I have the modern edition of this encyclopedia, and the same idea is presented by P. J. Scalise. Scalise was one of the authors of the commentary on Jeremiah 26-52 in the Word Bible Commentary series. I don't know why you say this sentence above shows no understanding of the Torah. And I don't what makes your "Sages and Commentaries" more authoritative than this sentence above. God gave his word for people to understand, and you don't necessarily have to be Jewish to understand it. It seems very chauvinistic to talk the way you do about not needing anything beyond the Oral Torah and the Sages and Commentaries. It also stultifies the progress of thought to assume that everything correct that can be said about Scripture has already been said. I personally don't believe that at all, and Scripture itself indicates that some things won't be known until the end times (though it would not relate to this point):

Dan. 12:9 And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end.

HH: At any rate, with the flood of new information about ancient culture and languages provided by archeology, we know a lot about the words of the Bible that the Oral Torah, the Sages, and Commentaries may not have retained. It may possibly bear on stories in Genesis. I am not saying that this is the issue here. Really, here the issue is simply whether Abraham is to be believed, and I see no reason to doubt him.

HH: To me it is insulting to Abraham to say it shows no understanding of Torah to believe Abraham when he admitted and explained what's he'd done. The sentence above to which you object simply accepts Abraham at his word. There is no way that it cannot show understanding of the Torah.

Yours,
Harold Holmyard





Shoshanna



HH: Do you mean you don't think the events happened? What are you
talking about?




http://www.studylight.org/enc/isb/view.cgi?word=Sarah&search.x=28&sear
ch.y=14&search=Lookup&action=Lookup



The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia


SARAH; SARAI

sa'-ra, sa'-ri:

(skip)


We are introduced to Sarai in Genesis 11:29. She is here mentioned as
the wife that Abraham "took," while still in Ur of the Chaldees, that
is, while among his kindred. It is immediately added that "Sarai was
barren; she had no child." By this simple remark in the overture of his
narrative, the writer sounds the motif that is to be developed in all
the sequel. When the migration to Haran occurs, Sarai is named along
with Abram and Lot as accompanying Terah. It has been held that the
author (or authors) of Genesis 11 knew nothing of the relationship
announced in 20:12. But there can be no proof of such ignorance, even on
the assumption of diversity of authorship in the two passages.

Sarai's career as described in Genesis 11 was not dependent on her
being the daughter of Terah. Terah had other descendants who did not
accompany him. Her movements were determined by her being Abram's wife.
It appears, however, that she was a daughter of Terah by a different
mother from the mother of Abram. The language of 20:12 would indeed
admit of her being Abram's niece, but the fact that there was but 10
years' difference between his age and hers (Genesis 17:17) renders this
hypothesis less probable. Marriage with half-sisters seems to have been
not uncommon in antiquity (even in the Old Testament compare 2 Samuel
13:13).

This double relationship suggested to Abraham the expedient that he
twice used when he lacked faith in God to protect his life and in
cowardice sought his own safety at the price of his wife's honor.

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

.







Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page