Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] Replaying

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Isaac Fried <if AT math.bu.edu>
  • To: <pporta AT oham.net>
  • Cc: b-hebrew Hebrew <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Replaying
  • Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2007 08:36:56 -0500

Pere,

It has been my experience of many years that planting a new idea is easy but supplanting an existing idea is nigh impossible. Planted ideas are the MASMROT NTU(IM of Ecclesiastes 12:11. Explaining is also best done interactively.
You appear to agree with David that "gender-marking is not person- marking!", so pray, explain to me first what is in your opinion a Hebrew "gender-marking", what is a Hebrew "person-marking", and why "gender-marking IS NOT [or can not be] person-marking".
I really want to hear this from you, not David.

Isaac Fried, Boston University

On Dec 13, 2007, at 6:54 AM, <pporta AT oham.net> wrote:

person-marking. I repeat: gender-marking is not person-marking!

David,

As regards noun-adjective, yes, I agree.

By the way, I think the problem with Isaac Fried is this: either he does not
want to strive to explain things in such a manner that most of us can
understand what he says.... or really his theories, statements, assertions
and so on are without any solid base.

If it is the first thing .... there is no point in keeping discussing with
him. And if it is the second thing... ... the same!

If he sincerely thinks he is right, he should do every effort to explain his
ideas... specially when some of listers have read his writing/s -- whose URL
Isaac himself gave us here some days ago-- and his ideas or message did not
become clearer to readers after reading it/them.

This is, imho, the central issue, the core thing with him.

Pere Porta
Barcelona

[cut]
From JimStinehart AT aol.com Thu Dec 13 10:08:45 2007
Return-Path: <JimStinehart AT aol.com>
X-Original-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Delivered-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Received: from imo-m23.mx.aol.com (imo-m23.mx.aol.com [64.12.137.4])
by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 371794C01E
for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Thu, 13 Dec 2007 10:08:43 -0500
(EST)
Received: from JimStinehart AT aol.com
by imo-m23.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v38_r9.3.) id 3.d2c.19d8b7b4 (41810)
for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Thu, 13 Dec 2007 10:08:39 -0500
(EST)
From: JimStinehart AT aol.com
Message-ID: <d2c.19d8b7b4.3492a4f6 AT aol.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2007 10:08:38 EST
To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: 9.0 SE for Windows sub 5044
X-Spam-Flag: NO
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.9
Subject: [b-hebrew] Genesis 49: 6: The Joint Curse of Simeon and Levi
X-BeenThere: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Biblical Hebrew Forum <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: Thu, 13 Dec 2007 15:08:45 -0000


Kenneth Greifer:
=20
1. You wrote: =E2=80=9CI don't think the curse of Simon and Levi is so bad=
. I=20
think Jacob cursed their anger, and not really them.=E2=80=9D
=20
(a) You=E2=80=99re right that Jacob curses the anger of Simeon and Levi.
=20
(b) But you=E2=80=99re wrong to say it=E2=80=99s not a terrible curse. He=
re it is:
=20
=E2=80=9CCursed be their anger, for it was fierce, and their wrath, for it w=
as cruel;=20
I will divide them in Jacob, and scatter them in Israel.=E2=80=9D Genesis=20=
49: 7
=20
Rather than winning the coveted leadership role, each of Simeon and Levi get=
s=20
no good inheritance at all, being =E2=80=9Cdivided in Jacob=E2=80=9D and=20=
=E2=80=9Cscattered in Israel
=E2=80=9D. That=E2=80=99s a quite nasty curse, in my view.
=20
Especially when contrasted to the very next lines of text:
=20
=E2=80=9CJudah, thee shall thy brethren praise; thy hand shall be on the ne=
ck of=20
thine enemies; thy father's sons shall bow down before thee.=E2=80=9D Gene=
sis 49: 8
=20
Now there=E2=80=99s a wonderful blessing, as a startling contrast to the imm=
ediately=20
preceding nasty curse. As we will soon see on this thread,
Judah=E2=80=99s=20=
great=20
blessing is beautifully foreshadowed by the magnificent birth name, =E2=80=
=9CJudah=E2=80=9D. =20
Likewise, Joseph=E2=80=99s surprisingly mediocre (though long) blessing is b=
eautifully=20
foreshadowed by the mediocre birth name, =E2=80=9CJoseph=E2=80=9D. But I=
=E2=80=99m getting ahead of=20
myself. And I haven=E2=80=99t even discussed =E2=80=9Coxen=E2=80=9D at Gene=
sis 49: 6 yet.
=20
You just can=E2=80=99t beat the pulsating excitement of the Patriarchal narr=
atives.
=20
2. You wrote: =E2=80=9CYou said Joseph was eight and a half years old (hal=
f of 17=20
years), but the curse said they killed or as you say tried to kill a
"man".=20=
=20
Did they use to call young boys that old men or boys or youths? If he was 1=
7=20
and called a man, at least that would fit your idea better.=E2=80=9D
=20
(a) You actually raise a good point there. Aleph-yod-shin (which appears a=
t=20
Genesis 49: 6) really means =E2=80=9Cmale=E2=80=9D, not =E2=80=9Cman=E2=80=
=9D. It means man as opposed to=20
woman, and as such can mean husband. And sometimes it means man as
opposed=20=
to=20
beast. But in Hebrew, unlike the English word =E2=80=9Cman=E2=80=9D, aleph-=
yod-shin does=20
not mean man/adult male as opposed to a mere boy. Rather, the fundamental=20
meaning of aleph-yod-shin is =E2=80=9Cmale=E2=80=9D. Thus consider
Genesis=20=
4:1, where=20
aleph-yod-shin refers to male offspring, that is, a male infant:
=20
=E2=80=9CAnd the man [Adam] knew Eve his wife; and she conceived and bore C=
ain, and=20
said: 'I have gotten a man [aleph-yod-shin] with the help of the LORD [YHWH=
].'
=E2=80=9D Genesis 4: 1=20
=20
So what the Hebrew text is really saying at Genesis 49: 6, then, is that=20
Simeon and Levi =E2=80=9Cin their anger would slay a male=E2=80=9D. The nor=
mal English=20
translation =E2=80=9Cman=E2=80=9D is in fact not quite accurate. Thank
you=20=
for raising that issue.
=20
(b) As to Joseph at the beginning of chapter 37 of Genesis, since he is onl=
y=20
age 8=C2=BD regular years, naturally the narrator refers to young Joseph
as=20=
being=20
a =E2=80=9Cnar=E2=80=9D, a =E2=80=9Cboy=E2=80=9D or =E2=80=9Clad=E2=80=9D:
=20
=E2=80=9CJoseph, being seventeen years old, was feeding the flock with his b=
rethren,=20
being still a lad [=E2=80=9Cnar=E2=80=9D] even with the sons of Bilhah,
and=20=
with the sons of=20
Zilpah, his father's wives; and Joseph brought evil report of them unto the=
ir=20
father.=E2=80=9D Genesis 37: 2=20
=20
Note that everything about Genesis 37: 2 makes perfect sense if Joseph is ag=
e=20
17 =E2=80=9Cyears=E2=80=9D, in 6-month years, being age 8=C2=BD in regular y=
ears, whereas Genesis=20
37: 2 is utterly senseless if Joseph is a grown adult man age 17 regular=20
years. Young Joseph is helping his father=E2=80=99s sons by minor wives ten=
d the flock,=20
and young Joseph tattles on these older half-brothers to his father. That a=
ll=20
makes perfect sense for an 8=C2=BD-year-old boy, but would not make sense fo=
r a=20
grown man (in the ancient world) age 17 years in regular, 12-month years, wh=
o was=20
his father=E2=80=99s favorite son.
=20
3. Everything makes perfect sense in the Patriarchal narratives. Especiall=
y=20
everyone=E2=80=99s ages. And the birth names of Jacob=E2=80=99s 12 sons. A=
nd everything=20
else as well.
=20
Jim Stinehart
Evanston, Illinois




**************************************See AOL's top rated recipes=20
(http://food.aol.com/top-rated-recipes?NCID=3Daoltop00030000000004)




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page