Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] And Samuel turned back after Saul: the meaning of 1 Samuel 15:31

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: James Read <J.Read-2 AT sms.ed.ac.uk>
  • To: James Read <J.Read-2 AT sms.ed.ac.uk>
  • Cc: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] And Samuel turned back after Saul: the meaning of 1 Samuel 15:31
  • Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2009 19:45:31 +0100

Apologies,

the Greek may not have rendered in you email client. You can see it direct here:

http://www.myriobiblos.gr/bible/ot/chapter.asp?book=9&page=15

and here is the Vulgate online:

http://www.latinvulgate.com/verse.aspx?t=0&b=9&c=15

James Christian

Quoting James Read <J.Read-2 AT sms.ed.ac.uk>:

You yourself provided his agenda when you opened this thread. Alter
evidently has a problem with Samuel being with Saul at the moment in
question. There are many inadequacies of the NWT but one thing I like
about it is its literalness which helps those who don't know Hebrew
see at a glance what the original Hebrew says literally:

So Samuel returned behind Saul, and Saul proceeded to prostrate
himself to Jehovah.

Quite literally Samuel returned behind/after Saul. Alter's reasons for
his translation are quite clearly not linguistically based. They are
theologically based.

I don't know if you read Greek but here it is in the Greek translation:

??? ????????? ??????? ????? ?????

opiso is quite literally behind. The Greek translations of old are in
agreement with the Hebrew.

For completeness here is the Vulgate translation:

reversus ergo Samuhel secutus est Saulem

The Latin has secutus (sense of following).

So, you see, there is a very long and ancient tradition of this
understanding. It is not something which merely appeared in English
renditions. Karl has already explained why the Hebrew commands such a
translation. Alter, whoever he is, has not provided any other
linguistic argument other than the use of his reputation (which I know
nothing of).

All in all, the linguistic evidence is strongly stacked against
Alter's commentary and his comments have all the signs of a
theologically based objection which introduces bias to his translation.

Beware of idolatry. It is possible to idolise men as well as statues.

James Christian





Quoting Jay Frank <jif95 AT mac.com>:

James,

You write: "Karl has given you the linguistic arguments."
Yes, and I am grateful.

Having written regarding Professor Alter: "I have to admit I don't
know who he is either." you then write: "I strongly suspect that
Alter has theological reasons for his interpretation."

I strongly suspect that you have qualitatively insufficient warrant
to make such a claim, nor do I see what possible theological
reason(s) might serve as an agenda underling his translation.

With regards,

Jay

_______________________________________________
b-hebrew mailing list
b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew





--
The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
Scotland, with registration number SC005336.


_______________________________________________
b-hebrew mailing list
b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew





--
The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
Scotland, with registration number SC005336.






Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page