Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] Was the MT for public consumption?

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Bryant J. Williams III" <bjwvmw AT com-pair.net>
  • To: "fred burlingame" <tensorpath AT gmail.com>
  • Cc: B-Hebrew <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Was the MT for public consumption?
  • Date: Sat, 25 Dec 2010 01:07:04 -0800

Dear Fred,

Read my post again. It answers most of your questions.

Now, regarding your second point. Modern scholarship is divided over whether
there were one, two or three Isaiahs. Conservative scholarship treats Isaiah
being produced by one person, the prophet Isaiah. Most modern scholarship
treats Isaiah as being written by two, maybe three persons. It is based on
the discredited JEDP theory of Graf-Welhausen. SEE archives for previous
discussions. I gave you a very brief discussion. I will not comment further
since it is going into areas limited by List guidelines. Remember, ALL we
have is the text. To go beyond that is to give a pre-text which is no text at
all. Basically, it is eisegesis not exegesis.

It appears that you are making the classic dichotomy between faith and fact.
Faith and knowledge go hand in hand. Both are intuitive, intellectual and
experiential. Both are used in determing fact from fiction. Unfortunately,
too many people think that if something is stated by reason of faith that it
is automatically fiction. As I said, "Faith and knowledge go hand in hand."
Faith, belief, or trust is used in when determining the value placed in a
document that is being used as a source whether it speaks of fact or fiction.
Knowledge will lead a person so far. Faith takes up where knowledge leads
off. It looks at what is presented before with knowledge and proceeds from
there. This is not rocket science.

You seem to be questioning a lot of the presuppositions that are inherent in
what has gone before. This is always good to a certain extant. But,
sometimes, it could be construed as being pedantic or just arguing for
argument sakes. An example would be when I teach the High Schoolers or
College Age or, even, the Adults in Sunday School, or in the preaching
services, I make several statements. First, I am a Christian. Second, I am a
Baptist. I then ask the group that I am teaching or preaching to, "If you
claim to be a Christian, 'Why are you a Christian?'" "If you are a Baptist,
Why are you a Baptist?'" Give the reasons for your claims. This appears to me
is what you are doing on the list. If I am wrong, then please correct me and
accept my apologies. In fact, I may have inadvertantly exceeded List
Guidelines. To the moderators, If I have please accept my apologies.

Now, Luke 4 and the use of Isaiah 61 in the Synagogue of Nazareth. It is
clear that Jesus read from the Hebrew text (See Commentary on the NT Use of
the OT). He sat down and proclaimed that the Scripture passage was fulfilled.
It is also apparent that the congregation was being read to and that they
understood the Hebrew (at least according to all the evidence from antiquity
and archaeology). It is also possible, maybe probable, that it was read in
Hebrew, translated into Aramaic for the congregation. That is why I told
George that it is more than likely both/and not either/or.

Rev. Bryant J. Williams III
----- Original Message -----
From: fred burlingame
To: Bryant J. Williams III
Cc: George Athas ; B-Hebrew
Sent: Friday, December 24, 2010 8:45 AM
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Was the MT for public consumption?


Hello Bryant:
?
Thanks for your nice comments.
?
The issue can be clarified further, by the following?inquiry; what exactly
was happening at the nazareth synagogue, saturday morning,?december 25, 20
a.d.? (cf., luke 4:16-30 as a general example of the possible?type of
synagogue services);
?
1. Did the synagogue members bring along their individual?copies of the
book? Did anyone?in nazareth?possess a copy other than the synagogue?
?
2. Did the book consist of more than simply the words of one isaiah?
?
3. Did the person reading from the book to the congregation, then proceed
to explain what the book passage "really" meant? in another language? in the
same language?
?
4. Was the book recorded and read to the synangogue?members in aramaic? in
hebrew? in greek? the promise of hebrew?deliverance from the arameans and
greeks via a greek and aramaic book?
?
merry christmas
?
fred burlingame


On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 10:36 PM, Bryant J. Williams III
<bjwvmw AT com-pair.net> wrote:

George, Fred, et al,

I think that one of the problems we have is the "definition" of "public"
as you
say below. Fred is correct in one sense, the Torah, for that matter the
Tanakh,
was written/copied by priests/scribes/rabbis for primary use by the
priests/scribes/rabbis even when read in the synagogue. You, George, are
correct
that use of the text was in the synagogue which is a wider audience.
(This was
paralleled in the Church with Latin in the West and Greek in the East
being
limited to scholars, ecclesiastics, etc., from circa 150 AD - 1500 AD).
In fact,
the Torah was to be written, copied, read and taught to ALL Israelites by
the
Levites including the priests. It was only after the destruction of the
Second
Temple that things changed more dramatically. With no priests nor Levites
it was
left to the rabbis. Subsequently, it appears, that when the Talmud,
Mishnah,
Toseftah, etc., were completed (codification of the Oral Law), then they
took
the place of the Tanakh even when the Tanakh was read in the synagogue.

The Dead Sea Scrolls show that the Tanakh was copied (except for Esther)
numerous times. The sectarian manuscripts also show the importance of the
written text even within their group. They were not produced for a large
group.

As to the NT use of the OT quotes/allusions, I always remind myself that
it is
the LXX, ca. 250 BC, that was primarily used; although the Tanakh was
also used
when necessary. This was because most of the NT was written to
churches/Godfearers/Gentiles/Jews who attended the weekly meetings in the
Diaspora. As far as I can tell, the use of the OT in quotes and allusions
are in
the gospels and epistles that had a large number of Jewish believers in
their
assemblies and in which the Gentile believers were to know and learn
about also.
Revelation is a different kettle of fish altogether.

So it is really more of a "both/and" whether than "either/or."

Rev. Bryant J. Williams III



----- Original Message -----
From: "George Athas" <George.Athas AT moore.edu.au>
To: "B-Hebrew" <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Thursday, December 23, 2010 6:38 PM
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Was the MT for public consumption?



> We're obviously using different definitions. By 'public consumption'
you are
referring to literate use of a language as a means of communication
between a
large number of people. I'm using it to refer to people who are involved
in
hearing or reading it, regardless of whether they are using it in
day-to-day
conversation.
>
>
> GEORGE ATHAS
> Moore Theological College (Sydney, Australia)
> www.moore.edu.au
>
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
>
>

> --
> Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.3/696 - Release Date:
02/21/2007
3:19 PM

>
>

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





------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.3/696 - Release Date: 02/21/2007
3:19 PM




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page