Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Stephen Shead <srshead+bh AT gmail.com>]

Oops!! <blush> I've just been made aware of some shockingly careless reading
of Barry's post on my part. Barry said:

"You clearly, David, have a religious interest in this question which is not
shared by the majority of people on the list.  For me, the precise spelling
or pronunication is purely of academic interest."

...which took (without justification) to mean that Barry's interests more
broadly were purely "academic". In fact, now that I look again, I would
actually say exactly the same: *on this issue* of the precise spelling or
pronunciation of YHWH, my interest is purely academic.

Apologies, Barry!
Best regards,
Stephen Shead.

On 25 July 2010 16:12, Stephen Shead
<srshead+bh AT gmail.com<srshead%2Bbh AT gmail.com>
> wrote:

> Dave,
>
> > P.S. Why does this issue appear to be ignored on B-Hebrew?
>
>
> OK, I've been avoiding taking the bait with your repeated questions on this
> issue. However, I'm happy to give you my answer to this particular "why"
> question - basically because my answer may be a somewhat different "take" on
> the issues to what others have said.
>
> First, like Barry, I have an academic/linguistic interest in the precise
> "original" spelling and pronunciation of YHWH. I'm intrigued by it, and
> would love to know. However, as others have pointed out, the issue has been
> well and truly flogged many times on b-hebrew, and I'm not sure there's much
> to add, in terms of linguistics or manuscript evidence. If the poor horse
> isn't dead yet, surely it's cruel to make it suffer more...
>
> Second, unlike Barry -- though without wanting to insult him or anyone else
> in the world :)  -- I also have a profoundly "religious" interest in the
> name of God in the Bible. I consider myself a conservative Christian. (I
> just want to make it clear where I'm coming from - the last thing I am
> trying to do is start a faith-based debate!!!!!)
>
> However, my own faith-position, on the basis of my understanding of both
> the Hebrew Bible and the NT, is that the importance of the "name" of God in
> the Bible has little or nothing to do with pronouncing it correctly. (I'm
> not even sure just *why* correct pronunciation would be so important. So
> as not to offend Him, maybe? Genuine question...).
>
> Moreover, the evidence of both the LXX and the NT is that at least 
> *some*Jews or Jewish communities thought the same, since they rendered the 
> Name in
> Greek translations not with an attempted *transcription*, but rather with
> a sort of *translation*, if that's the best way to describe it (i.e.
> "kurios") - with something that they considered the Name to communicate
> about God. I know the LXX evidence is mixed on this front - but that makes
> no difference to my point. Some, at least, "translated" the significance of
> the Name.
>
> And incidentally, the manuscript evidence for the NT is not mixed. I have
> no doubt whatsoever that the NT authors were among those who chose to
> "translate" the Name rather than transcribe it.
>
> I am not willing to enter into a debate about whether I'm right or wrong in
> my theological interpretation of the Name (at least, not on list), because
> that would go beyond the list's charter. Sincere apologies if anyone
> considers that I've already over-stepped the mark! I neither want to push my
> agenda nor sneak in a religious debate. But Dave, you seem completely at a
> loss to understand why anyone might NOT consider the exact pronunciation of
> the name of utmost importance, so I wanted to show you that even some
> conservative "religious" sorts might actually have a well-thought-out reason
> not to.
>
> Best regards,
> Stephen Shead
> Centro de Estudios Pastorales
> Santiago, Chile
>