Rolf,
Wait, if the Qumran sect did not use the tetragram, then what are the Phoenician characters I am seeing on some of the DSS in the middle of the Aramaic script? It's not YHWH?
Jay
>
>
>Dear Dan,
>
>
>I once wrote a thesis entitled "The tetragrammaton and its
>substitutes in the days of the second temple". Here are some points:
>
>All the LXX manuscripts from the second and first centuries B.C.E
>and
>the first century C.E have the tetragrammaton, either in old Hebrew
>script, square Aramaic script, or as the phonetic transcription IAW
>(
>indicating pronunciation). In the Chester Beatty Papyrii from 150
>C.E. the tetragrammaton is changed to KURIOS. While the Qumran sect
>and other groups did not use the tetragrammaton, other groups did,
>and we know nothing to which extent it was used by the people in the
>days of Jesus. The numerous claims that it was not used at all in
>the
>first century C.E. are unsubstantiated.
>
>In discussions about the tetragrammaton we should differentiate
>between "alternative words" and "substitutes". Different titles and
>designations are used for God both in the OT and the NT, but they
>are
>not "substitutes" for YHWH. Only if people were afraid of using YHWH
>and used another word instead can we speak of a "substitute". The
>use
>of "heaven" and "the power" in the NT where we would have expected
>YHWH do not necessarily represent a use of substitutes. We find the
>word "heaven" referring to God in the book of Daniel, where we also
>find the tetrgrammaton. A basic problem for the substitution theory
>YHWH -> )A:DONFY -> KURIOS is that the Qumran sect did not use
>)A:DONFY as asubstitute for YHWH but they used )EL as a substitute.
>It is extremely difficult to correlate the KURIOS of the NT with
>)A:DONFY. But a strong case can be made for the view that the KURIOS
>of NT is a *translation* of more than one Hebrew word, something
>which corroborates with the view that KURIOS was not original in
>the
>NT.
>
>George Howard has made quite a good case for the view that the
>tetragrammaton originally occurred in the NT (See his article in The
>Anchor Bible Dictionary), and that it was replaced by KURIOS just as
>was the case in the LXX in the second century C.E.
>
>
>
>
>Regards
>
>Rolf Furuli
>
>University of Oslo
>
>---
>You are currently subscribed to b-hebrew as: [selectjay AT hotmail.com]
>To unsubscribe, forward this message to
>leave-b-hebrew-134427U AT franklin.oit.unc.edu
>To subscribe, send an email to join-b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu.
>
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.