Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Jan Hagen <jan.hagen AT gmx.de>]

Dear Jim,

I understand your position in 1. now. Point 2. seem more a matter of
opinion or statistics. For 3. I need some more time to think about it.

Jan Hagen

On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 17:58:06 EST
JimStinehart AT aol.com wrote:

> 
> Jan Hagen:
>  
> Let me address your various points in a different order.
>  
> 1.  You wrote:  “But getting back to the Hebrew text to get the grammar 
> analysed before the interpretation. For me the sentence Rachel is saying
>  יסף יהוה לי בן אחר 
>  looks like a nounclause ( the way it is vocalized be the Masoretes). Do 
> you, 
> Jim
>  and the others, agree?  If so I'd translate it as "YHWH is adding (for) me 
> another son".  I'm not yet that experienced with the grammar, so please 
> bear 
> with me taking
>  small steps.”
>  
> (a)  I am not qualified to analyze fine points of Hebrew grammar.  I will 
> let 
> the experts on the b-Hebrew list do that.
>  
> (b)  I myself have no problem at all with your proposed translation: "YHWH 
> is 
> adding (for) me another son".  I would not see that as a reference to 
> Benjamin, though, or as a reference to Rachel hoping that she will bear 
> another son 
> in the future.  No, Rachel is thinking about her precious newborn son at 
> this 
> moment:  Joseph.
>  
> Rachel desperately wants Jacob to view Joseph as being “another son”, that 
> is, another son of Leah-Rachel as Jacob’s one and only main wife #1.  What 
> Rachel does not want is for Jacob to view Joseph as being the firstborn son 
> of 
> Jacob’s main wife #2, Rachel.  Because if Jacob views Joseph in that way 
> (which 
> is in fact what ultimately turns out to be the case), then no matter how 
> much 
> Jacob favors Joseph, Joseph will end up having Ishmael’s sad fate.  Each of 
> Joseph and Ishmael is a Patriarch’s favorite son by the Patriarch’s main 
> wife 
> #2.  Each of Joseph and Ishmael is involuntarily separated from his 
> father’s 
> family at the age of 9½ regular years, marries an Egyptian woman, and has 
> no 
> realistic chance of being named the leader of the next generation of the 
> new 
> Hebrews.
>  
> 2.  You wrote:  “Why would a great sounding name further Joseph’s future?”
>  
> It worked wonders for Judah.  Judah is the one and only son of Jacob who 
> has 
> a grand name.  “Judah” means “praise YHWH”.  That’s a great name.  And 
> Judah 
> ends up being the winner.
>  
> 3.  You wrote:  “If indeed this was her thought it proved not that helpful, 
> as you mentioned. Jacob loved Rachel and I guess that's the reason he 
> Joseph 
> was his favourite son and not because his well chosen name.”
>  
> Yes, Jacob loved Rachel more than Leah, so it is no surprise that Rachel’s 
> son Joseph became Jacob’s favorite son.  After Jacob’s disappearance and 
> presumed death, Rachel’s other son, Benjamin, became Jacob’s favorite son.  
> Unlike 
> Joseph, Benjamin had little personal merit.  So you are right that the 
> favoritism toward first Joseph, and then Benjamin, is primarily reflecting 
> the fact 
> that Jacob loved Rachel more than Leah.
>  
> But note that Jacob’s love for Rachel, and Jacob’s love for Joseph, turned 
> out not to be a critical factor.  Each Patriarch is a younger son whose 
> marriage to a firstborn daughter produces the next leader of the new 
> monotheists.  
> Nefertiti was a firstborn daughter, and Akhenaten’s successor, Smenkhkare, 
> married Akhenaten’s firstborn daughter.  Note how the pattern is the same, 
> whether 
> in the well-documented secular history of the mid-14th century BCE or in 
> the 
> Patriarchal narratives.  The winning candidate is not a firstborn son, is 
> not 
> his father’s favorite son, does have as his birth mother the original main 
> wife 
> #1 of the prior leader, does marry a firstborn daughter, and, in every 
> case, 
> has a very pushy mother.  All these objective facts are the same.
>  
> J, E, P and D knew nothing, and cared less, about such things.  The 
> Patriarchal narratives were composed by a northern pre-Hebrew in the 
> mid-14th century 
> BCE, not by one or more southern Hebrews in the mid-1st millennium BCE. 
>  
> 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 mailing list
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew