Indeed, my mistake as I was rushing this. I think in fact the subject of the clause must be impersonal, so meaning more like "Also against Judah will be the state of siege against Jerusalem", in other words not only Jerusalem but also Judah will suffer. NIV has "Judah will be besieged as well as Jerusalem", which gets my point.On 13/06/2005 22:06, Steve Miller wrote:concerning
Zechariah chapters 12-14 are "the burden of the word of Jehovah
Israel" (12:1). Putting 12:1-2 together could it also be rendered "the
burden of the word of Jehovah concerning Israel ... and also concerning
Judah"?
...
If the 2nd עַל־ is translated "concerning" like the 1st, then it is the
burden of the word of Jehovah which is on Judah, rather than the siege.
From: "Peter Kirk" <peterkirk AT qaya.org>
The subject of the second part of verse 2 is an interesting question. It
is not "they" as KJV, for it is singular. It is not YHWH for he is in
the first person. I think it must be the "cup of bewilderment". But it
cannot possibly be the burden, as this is far too remote. I think this
must be interpreted in the sense that whatever is against Jerusalem is
also against Judah, so meaning something like "this cup will also be
against Judah, a siege against Jerusalem".
Thanks Peter. But, the cup of bewilderment is what Jehovah will put on all
the nations that come against Jerusalem. It is not the portion of Jerusalem
or of Judah.
-Steve Miller
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.