Tell me more ×
Biblical Hermeneutics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for professors, theologians, and those interested in exegetical analysis of biblical texts. It's 100% free, no registration required.
up vote -1 down vote favorite

It was suggested here that 'kissing the calf' may be a play on words for 'burning the calf'. Is there other support in scripture where the use of 'kiss' and 'burn' has interpretive significance?

See How to identify puns

share|improve this question
2  
Not clear to me where this comes from. Can you cite specific verses in codex where this occurs? – Eli Rosencruft Jun 8 '12 at 13:19
1  
This would be a good question if about these specific words and with citations (as Eli said). If it's about the general idea of "kiss" and "burn" in translation, from a variety of source words, then it doesn't seem like a good fit to me. Could you clarify what you're asking for? – Monica Cellio Jun 8 '12 at 14:32
I posted this as a self-answered one by Jon's invitation, as further evidence in the 'kissing the calf' question. However, the rabbis linked verses by shared words, so if kiss means burn, are there other scriptures which demonstrate plausible substitution? Below we see that burn means to be totally devoted, so we would expect to be able to substitute the idea of total devotion where we find kiss or burn. Be aware that such ideas have two aspects, fire purifies and burns up, water destroys and gives life, etc. Total devotion comes with a total destruction of something as well. – Bob Jones Jun 8 '12 at 16:27
The rabbis wouldn't have been comparing kiss and burn; they would have been comparing nashak and nasak (if in fact anybody did). That's my point -- there are other words that can be translated kiss or burn, so are you asking about all such words, which seems too open to me (the bible isn't written in English), or are you asking specifically about the words in the title of this question? – Monica Cellio Jun 10 '12 at 3:20

1 Answer

up vote 0 down vote accepted

There are three passages when considered literally do not appear to be related, but when kiss and burn are considered allegorically as being related, confirm a NT teaching.

Though the following events took place in the wilderness, at first glance they do not appear to be related:

Israel desired to sacrifice in the wilderness(Ex 3:18)

Aaron met Moses in the wilderness and kissed him (Ex 4:27)

Satan met Jesus in the wilderness and tempted him (Mt 4:1)

'Burn' is used in sensus plenior to indicate the total devotion of the Son to the Father, even unto death as represented by the burnt offering. In the burnt offering, the priests do not eat of it, but it is totally consumed by the fire, such that it represents a relationship between Father and Son at which we can only marvel.

Using the pun relationship between nasak and nashak 'kiss' also takes on the meaning of 'burn'.

Israel, called the Son of God (Ex 4:23), desired to go to the wilderness to burn a sacrifice. Though zabach 'kill' is used, not nasak, there is no killed sacrifice that isn't burned.

From the following verse, Moses takes on the allegorical representation of God and Aaron represents Jesus, his mouthpiece and Son:

Ex 7:1 ¶ And the LORD said unto Moses, See, I have made thee a god to Pharaoh: and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet.

When Aaron meets Moses in the wilderness rather than 'kiss' he now 'burns' a sacrifice.

We have two cases now where we see pictures of Christ meeting God in the wilderness and giving his total devotion, Israel in the desert, and Aaron with Moses. The third is troublesome, since Jesus met Satan there.

The purpose of the linking pun is made clear:

1Sa 15:22 And Samuel said, Hath the LORD as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of the LORD? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to hearken than the fat of rams.

Heb 10:8 Above when he said, Sacrifice and offering and burnt offerings and offering for sin thou wouldest not, neither hadst pleasure therein; which are offered by the law;9 Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second.

In the wilderness where Jesus met Satan, he offered "a better sacrifice" in his obedience. All the burnt offering were but a "shadow of the good things coming". Heb 10.1

share|improve this answer
4  
The word nashak/nasak does not appear in Ex.3:18. I'm guessing it also doesn't appear in the gospels. – Monica Cellio Jun 8 '12 at 13:02

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.