Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Garth Grenache <garthgrenache AT hotmail.com>]

Dear all,

A couple of writers on this group make frequent denials about the validity of 
the Masoretic vowels.  In the midst of a sensible discussion they interject 
that what is being said cannot be known because the vowel points are not 
reliable and should be removed from the text.  Is this a sensible conclusion?

Though they come from a reading tradition, and though there may be various 
interpretations of that tradition, the Masoretic points are one (imperfect) 
preservation of that tradition.  The Samaritan reading tradition is another.  
Hebrew names and writings in Greek are another.  Babylonian pointing is 
another.

My suggestion is that the Masoretic vowel points -to anyone who doesn't live 
in Biblical times of the 1st Millennium AD -that's you and me and everyone 
here- are a better starting point than an unvocalised text.  If we keep in 
mind that the vowel points were added, and we are open to *sensible 
emendations brought forth with evidence from other known reading traditions* 
then I suggest we will go well.

In plainer words to the point-rejectors> If you don't have a better evidenced 
suggestion about what the pronunciation or meaning of the discussed passage, 
then your rejection of the Masoretic points adds nothing of value to the 
discussion.

To the others who have to deal with point-rejectors>  Challenge them:  "How 
are you reading it and what evidence do you have from the other traditions to 
support your reading?  Or are you just being argumentative without evidence?"

I greatly affirm Yitzhak Sapir's words:
"There is nothing scholarly or critical about ignoring the vowels. Nor is it 
an issue that the Masoretes couldn't all unanimously agree what that 
tradition was.  The issue is complex. There are several traditions, all 
relevant and authentic.  A proper scholarly approach is actually to make use 
of the wealth of information and slowly reconstruct the tradition back based 
on the existing representatives.  Furthermore, the best way to analyze the 
text critically is to clearly understand the vowels.  Only with expertise in 
the vocalization (or, better yet, different vocalization systems in addition 
to the well-documented Tiberian system) can you consider alternatives."

Being sceptical isn't scholarly.  Making faithful use of all available data: 
that is scholarly.

Also, if you are claiming descent from one of the lost tribes: so what?  The 
lost tribes have not preserved the faith of Israel or the texts or reading 
traditions of their Scriptures: they are lost and 'not My people'.  Those who 
return to Him and become His people have no Hebrew Bible except that which is 
preserved by Jews(MT, LXX, etc.) and Samaritans(Sam.Pent.).  Just because I 
am of Israelite blood doesn't mean I can put the right vowels on the Hebrew 
Bible!  If I've got a suggestion that the Masoretic points are wrong for a 
particular passage, let me bring EVIDENCE, or be utterly ignored in any 
scholarly discussion!

Garth Grenache,
Australia.
                                          
_________________________________________________________________
View photos of singles in your area! Looking for a hot date?
http://clk.atdmt.com/NMN/go/150855801/direct/01/