Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] priest code?

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Paul Zellmer" <pzellmer AT sc.rr.com>
  • To: "'fred burlingame'" <tensorpath AT gmail.com>
  • Cc: 'B-Hebrew' <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] priest code?
  • Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2010 07:28:34 -0500

You have every right to your beliefs. However your statements are nothing
more than descriptions of your beliefs. You give absolutely no evidence for
any of your conclusions.

Why is it that a book of instruction should be prevented from using homonyms?
Why is it that the *language* of a קדש book cannot be common? Look at other
things that are described in that book as קדש. Was the gold in the
tabernacle and temple קדש *before* it was mined? Was it קדש at the time it
was being formed into the vessels or laminates? Or was it common before it
became קדש?

You stated that נחל in Numbers 32 cannot be based on homonyms. What is your
basis for that? Have you even done a most basic word study of the words in
your קדש text? There are some 130+ occurrences where the word family
describes a river, torrent, wadi, or other water feature. There are 220+
times where the word describes inheritance, heritage, or possession. If this
is not a demonstration that we have two roots here that happen to be
homonyms, then what is your explanation?

Homonyms are not exclusively used for wordplay. It is just that wordplay is
the easiest way to demonstrate that the homonyms exist. But, as to your
assertion that wordplay does not exist in the Hebrew scriptures, that it is
not fit for an instructive work, you obviously have not looked very far into
the book. One simple illustration is how Esau uses Jacob's name in Gen
27:36. According to Gen 25:26, the reason for calling the boy יעקב was
because he grabbed the heel (עקב) of his brother at their births. Yet, in
27:36, Esau makes a play on Jacob's name using another word spelled עקב (but
pronounced differently) that means "to deceive." How does you קדש text
belief handle this?

If what you are proposing is that we look at the entire text while we study
word usage and meaning, you will not get any disagreement from the people on
the list. That is part of how word studies are done--you examine the body of
works where the word is found. But that is not what your posts seem to be
suggesting. Instead, you pull out isolated cases, show no evidence of doing
even the most basic of research into the words, and leap to statements about
what you believe to be the case.

Hope this helps,

Paul Zellmer

-----Original Message-----
From: b-hebrew-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org
[mailto:b-hebrew-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of fred burlingame
Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 11:44 PM
To: K Randolph
Cc: B-Hebrew
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] priest code?

Karl:

You could be correct, in all of your points.

but ..... i have some doubts.

As I mentioned in my response to Stephen's post, I see a difference between
a comic book usage of homonym; and a קדש book usage of homonym. I believe
the latter type book more inclined to employ a richer usage of the homonym
than the comic book.






Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page