Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] b-hebrew Digest, Vol 49, Issue 1 T Sirach 30:17

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] b-hebrew Digest, Vol 49, Issue 1 T Sirach 30:17
  • Date: Wed, 03 Jan 2007 17:20:12 -0600

Dear Peter,
Eva wrote:
could you guys translate Sirach 30:17 for me. I translated it and it does not
make since. I do not think the traditional translation makes since eighter
Eva Ritsema
Is that verse in Sirach one that we have a Hebrew fragment for? If you happen to have the Hebrew characters for what should be translated, that would certainly help. I know parts of it are extant in Hebrew.

Harold, you added this comment in your answer:
Sirach is not Scripture and so I don't have to agree with it.

That's merely an opinion of no relevance to answering her question. This is after all b-Hebrew, not b-protestant canon. A Scripture is but a Writing, and a vast majority of people that read Sirach are convinced it is a Hebrew Writing on par with the Tanakh as accepted by non-Christian Jews.

HH: It seemed relevant to me. She said that the text did not make sense to her, and the answer is that it doesn't have to make sense to her because it is not Scripture. The Jews did not and do not consider it to be Scripture, and they ought to know their own canon. I have studied all this to my satisfaction and in depth. If you don't agree, fine. There's nothing wrong with the standard translation about which she had doubts. Her doubts are an inward intuition that the statement is not true. I agree with that intuition.

Yours,
Harold Holmyard





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page