Biblical Hebrew Forum

[LM Barre <l_barre AT yahoo.com>]

Alright.  Here you go.


 
Lloyd Barré
the unknown god
http://freewebs.com/lmbarre
 



>From kwrandolph AT gmail.com  Fri Jan 30 12:36:41 2009
Return-Path: <kwrandolph AT gmail.com>
X-Original-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Delivered-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Received: by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix, from userid 3002)
        id 62D044C014; Fri, 30 Jan 2009 12:36:41 -0500 (EST)
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on malecky
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE
        autolearn=disabled version=3.2.3
Received: from rn-out-0910.google.com (rn-out-0910.google.com 
[64.233.170.188])
        by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64B084C00F
        for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Fri, 30 Jan 2009 12:36:40 -0500 
(EST)
Received: by rn-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id j66so393207rne.18
        for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Fri, 30 Jan 2009 09:36:39 -0800 
(PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.142.173.8 with SMTP id v8mr600034wfe.181.1233336999320; Fri,
        30 Jan 2009 09:36:39 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <4983352A.4010103 AT earthlink.net>
References: <17728.75259.qm AT web110013.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
        <498107FF.2000407 AT earthlink.net>
        <acd782170901282049w433df403v521b2cfea1a7e238 AT mail.gmail.com>
        <4981D173.3070101 AT earthlink.net>
        <acd782170901291128rc64ec20ya27fde42227f2949 AT mail.gmail.com>
        <4982127D.8060402 AT earthlink.net>
        <acd782170901291611t42282be2r42a7ff9135f8e825 AT mail.gmail.com>
        <4982682B.7030708 AT earthlink.net>
        <acd782170901300901r5de2436fwe6274995c3f253ac AT mail.gmail.com>
        <4983352A.4010103 AT earthlink.net>
Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2009 09:36:39 -0800
Message-ID: <acd782170901300936q71c38883l300d778a60fd357e AT mail.gmail.com>
From: K Randolph <kwrandolph AT gmail.com>
To: Harold Holmyard <hholmyard3 AT earthlink.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.9
Cc: "b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org" <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] barak (bless? curse?) in the Book of Job
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: Fri, 30 Jan 2009 17:36:41 -0000

Harold:

On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 9:13 AM, Harold Holmyard
<hholmyard3 AT earthlink.net>wrote:

> Karl,
> > Harold:
> > Right now we are dealing with what did the text originally say, I am
> letting
> > the what it means slide until later.
> >
> > I found my dead tree version of Tanakh, which has a list of variants, to
> see
> > what the critical apparatus would say. Yes, the apparatus lists all the
> tiqune
> > sopherim and what they were changed from. The exact words are given.
> There
> > is no question what the original words were.
> >
> > But when I come to the first two chapters of Job, there is only a
> speculated
> > correction, with a range of possible "originals". There are no variant
> > readings from other MSS.
> >
>
> HH: The Biblica Hebraica Stuttgartensia says that it is a correction or
> euphemism for WQLLW or something similar. The Sopherim functioned very
> early. As I gave you yesterday:
> http://www.geocities.com/hebrew_roots/html/hr-2-3-02.html
>

That's theory based on tradition. Is there anything to back it up? What
evidence is there from the DSS?

>
> > So what textual evidence do you have that these verses were changed?
> >
>
> HH: There is no textual evidence. And again, there would not necessarily
> be any.


No evidence? How can I accept that there was a change based on no evidence?

>
> > What is the evidence from the DSS concerning the tiqune sopherim? Were
> any
> > of them found among the DSS?
> >
>
> HH: The changes, if they occurred after the original composition of the
> text, could have been a hundred or more years before the Dead Sea Scrolls.
>

That's theory. What do the DSS actually say?

Now I realize that the DSS are often quite fragmentary, and it is possible
that none of the tiqune sopherim show up in the DSS, but have the DSS
actually been checked for them?

>
> Yours,
> Harold Holmyard
>

 Karl W. Randolph.