Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - [b-hebrew] Septuagint vs. Masoretes/75 vs. 70: How Many Hebrews Did Jacob Lead into Eypt?

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: JimStinehart AT aol.com
  • To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: [b-hebrew] Septuagint vs. Masoretes/75 vs. 70: How Many Hebrews Did Jacob Lead into Eypt?
  • Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2008 15:05:42 EST


R. Brian Roberts:

1. You wrote: “Regarding your point #1, how do you make the determination
that the absence of "Huppim" as an "arbitrary" drop? You're assuming that it
was in the
source text used by the Greek translators in the Ptolemaic period, which
remained itself hidden for nearly a thousand years again before finding its
way into the MT? What evidence do you have to fortify that?”

(a) The Masoretic text is based on very ancient sources, and is even more
accurate than the fine Septuagint text. On your reasoning, the Septuagint
should be preferred in almost every case where there is a conflict with the
Masoretic text. In fact, the vast majority of scholars generally prefer the
Masoretic text overall, while recognizing that the Septuagint is also a
valuable
ancient source.

(b) The “evidence” is largely in the numbers, including numerical
symbolism, as alluded to in your point #2 immediately below.

2. You wrote: “Regarding #2, so, in your view, restoring your sense of
numeric symbolism to the texts is more important than getting to the facts of
what
they say?
You're presupposing with this idea that every number in the Pentateuch has
symbolism, and its use as representing real numbers in reality (redundancy
intended) means less in comparison to its symbolic meaning. You're also
presupposing that you, sitting here in the early 21st century, know better
how to interpret the intent of the LXX than its extant copies would have us
conclude.”

I am only talking about the Patriarchal narratives, not the rest of the
Pentateuch. No part of the Bible outside of the Patriarchal narratives
picked up
on the number 19 as being an awkward, inauspicious number. But the Koran
picked up on that particular number 19, big-time. Since Ishmael was age 19
“years”
when he was exiled by Abraham, the one number that signifies the beginning
of Islam is, precisely, 19. Rather than being awkward or inauspicious due to
its association with Ishmael’s exile, the Koran revels in the number 19,
precisely because the number 19 is associated with Ishmael’s exile, and hence
with
the birth of Islam. This particular numerical symbolism makes perfect sense
out of the otherwise famously mysterious sura 74: 30 in the Koran: "Over it
is
19." The Koran asserts that 19 angels will be on guard to see if the people
are being faithful to Islam. More broadly, the numerical implication there
could be seen as indirectly asserting that Islam (represented by the number
19,
which is the one number most closely associated with the Arabs’ founder
Ishmael
in the Patriarchal narratives) will ultimately triumph over all.

Once one starts analyzing the Koran in terms of the number 19, which is the
number that Mohammed associated with Ishmael, it is hard to know when to
stop.
The first verse of the Koran has 19 Arabic letters. The number of suras
(chapters) in the Koran is 114, which is 19 x 6. The number of verses in the
Koran
is 6,346, which is 19 x 334. Finally, the Arabic word for "name" is
transliterated into English as ISM, which recalls the first three sounds in
the name
"Ishmael", a Biblical name that is sometimes transliterated into English as
"Ismail" -- ISMail. ISM, meaning "name" in Arabic, is the root of the very
first
word in the Koran (with the full word meaning "in the name"). The Arabic
root word ISM, which so clearly recalls the name "Ishmael"/"Ismail"/ISMail
from
the Patriarchal narratives, appears in the entire Koran exactly 19 times.

Getting back now to the Patriarchal narratives and chapter 46 of Genesis,
each of Joseph, Dinah and Ishmael is age 19 “years” when he or she is
involuntarily separated from his or her father’s family. So 19 is an awkward
number in
the Patriarchal narratives (though not in the rest of the Patriarchal
narratives; and as just noted, the number 19 is viewed very positively in
the Koran).
Hence it would be eminently fitting for Rachel’s descendants to number 19 in
chapter 46 of Genesis, since it is awkward that Rachel’s son Joseph, who
saves all the Hebrews from starvation, is passed over in favor of Judah when
Jacob
names the leader of the next generation of the Hebrews. Simply put “Huppim”
back into the Septuagint text of chapter 46 of Genesis, and we’re there,
numerically, as to the awkward number 19 and Rachel’s descendants.

Your modern disdain for numerical symbolism comes through loud and clear: “…
restoring your sense of numeric symbolism to the texts is more important than
getting to the facts of what they say?” University scholars share your same
disdain for numerical symbolism. That’s why they have not been able to
figure
out what chapter 46 of Genesis originally said.

3. You wrote: “Regarding #3, so inauspicious numbers are okay, but awkward
glosses are not?”

(a) There are only two inauspicious numbers in the Patriarchal narratives:
13 and 19. Ishmael is age 13 “years”, in 6-month “years”, when he is
circumcised. Genesis 17: 25 Jacob is age 130 “years” (Genesis 47: 9), which
is
awkward 13, tenfold, when Jacob takes the awkward (though necessary) action
of
leading all the Hebrews out of beloved Canaan into Egypt. Likewise, the
awkward binding incident, when Abraham almost kills his son Isaac, occurs
when
Abraham is the awkward age of 130 “years” (that is, age 65 regular years).
The
bloody Shechem incident in chapter 34 of Genesis occurs 130 awkward regular
years after Abraham’s birth, with 130 once again being awkward 13, tenfold.
And
then 13 awkward regular years after that is the first year of the terrible 7
regular years of famine, which follow the 7 regular years of feast. The
entirety of the Patriarchal narratives works like that. Every number fits in
place
perfectly in the Patriarchal narratives.

If you don’t like the numbers 13 and 19 being used in the Patriarchal
narratives to indicate awkward situations, you’re missing a key clue as to
the
internal timeline of the Patriarchal narratives. (Not to worry, you’ve got
all the
university scholars on your side on this one. They loudly proclaim in their
published works that the internal timeline of the Patriarchal narratives is
completely incomprehensible. Not!)

(b) There are few glosses in the text of the Patriarchal narratives, in my
view. Those tiny handfuls of glosses are usually quite obvious, as they
don’t
fit in right. To me, the phrase “with Joseph” just does not fit in right at
Genesis 46: 27.

4. On this thread, we will look at the numbers, and we will look at the
numerical symbolism, regarding chapter 46 of Genesis. Then you can decide if
I
have made a convincing argument or not. But if you insist, at the beginning,
that you will not in any event consider numerical symbolism, then you are
voluntarily blinding yourself to what is going on in the Patriarchal
narratives.

The numbers tell the story in the Patriarchal narratives. The numbers even
give us the secular historical time period. In a word, the numbers are
important. We will see both the number 75, and the number 70, writ large in
chapter
46 of Genesis. That’s the unsurpassed genius of the Hebrew author of the
Patriarchal narratives.

Jim Stinehart
Evanston, Illinois




**************Start the year off right. Easy ways to stay in shape.
http://body.aol.com/fitness/winter-exercise?NCID=aolcmp00300000002489



  • [b-hebrew] Septuagint vs. Masoretes/75 vs. 70: How Many Hebrews Did Jacob Lead into Eypt?, JimStinehart, 01/17/2008

Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page