Tag Info

Hot answers tagged

13

That's not feminine; that's masculine. These are "pausal forms", so when the preposition lamed plus 2 msc sg suffix would normally be lĕkā, in "pause" it is lāk -- which is the same form as the 2 fem sg, and thus the confusion. See Gesenius-Kautzsch-Cowley, Gesenius' Hebrew Grammar (2nd edn; Clarendon Press, 1910), at § 27n, p. 97 (last line of that ...


10

The events of Job 1 say "in that same hour", so that chapter appears to have occurred at the same time. Job 2 occurs at the next meeting between God and the Accuser, but there is no mention of the frequency with which those occurred. But, Job 2 says: And they sat with him on the ground seven days and seven nights, and no one spoke a word to him, for they ...


6

The question is really an issue of what kind of cosmology the authors of the various biblical books assume in the course of their writing. When we read the Hebrew scriptures, the few books that have anything to say on the subject never explicitly say 'the earth is flat'. But if we can determine the overall shape of the cosmos as the different writers ...


6

It's not a feminine pronoun (although it looks like one)! Lakh (לָךְ) in this case is a form of the male pronoun lekha known as "pausal," which because of its position as the final word of the verse. Pausal forms generally expand a shva or e-vowel into a qamatz; for example, at the end of Genesis 1:1 eretz becomes aretz. See for example the chart here, or ...


5

It's important to look at these passages in the context of the whole of the book of Job. At the beginning of the book we learn that he is exemplary and at the end of the book he is rewarded by God, so the question is what happened in between. The challenge made by ha-satan in the previous chapter is that Job will "blaspheme You to Your face". (It doesn't ...


4

I was surprised by this translation of וְנִחַמְתִּי, because I generally think nacham in the sense of "comfort". However, BDB connects comforting to repentance: verb Niph`al be sorry, console, oneself, etc. (only in derived species) [...] be sorry, moved to pity, have compassion, for others be sorry, rue, suffer grief, repent, of one's own ...


4

I realise I'm a little late to the party, but in the interest of posterity and despite Ecclesiastes 1:15, I would like to answer all those comments and claims that the root רגע has no basis as "calm" or "peaceful" in the tanakh. I'm not sure this is the most natural reading of the verse or even the one I subscribe to, however it certainly has a very solid ...


4

An angel as a primeval enemy of humanity The Hebrew noun satan, along with related nouns and verbs, are semi-common in the Hebrew scriptures. These terms are used in a variety of contexts and refer to a variety of individuals. In Numbers 22.22,32, for example, it is an angel explicitly acting on God's behalf who is identified as a satan, meaning ...


3

Here is an interesting perspective I found in regard to this. Bullinger, in His Companion Bible, asserts in appendix #19, the Serpent of Genesis: The Hebrew word rendered "serpent" in Gen. 3.1 is Nachash (from the root Nachash, to >shine), and means a shining one. Hence, in Chaldee, it means brass or copper, because of its shining. Hence also, ...


3

Good question, and welcome to BHB. As you will find out very quickly if you continue to participate in BHB, perhaps the most important principle of hermeneutics is context. A good mantra for a site such as ours should be: "A text without a context is a pretext." The habit of contextualizing a text saves us students of the Bible from jumping to ...


3

In the the Zohar (Kabbalah) Pinchas page 231a the meetings between God and the accuser are said to have taken place on the Day of Judgement, which is the Jewish new year, which would mean the meetings were every year. Rabbi Yehuda said to Rabbi Shimon, Let my master say some beautiful [secret] things about Rosh Hashanah. Rabbi Shimon opened by quoting: ...


2

I would follow the view of Rashi who at Job 9:13 says that Rahab would be the angel assigned to assist Egypt. Rashi understands this from the use of the word Rahav (רָהַב), which he translates as "haughty," in Isaiah 30:7. There it says: "And the Egyptians help in vain and to no purpose, therefore I called this, 'They are haughty (רָהַב), idlers." They ...


2

In Job 26.7, we find the statement: He stretches out the north over desolation; he suspends the earth over nothing. We have a few things to take note of: The 'north' is sometimes used in biblical texts as something analogous to heaven, God's domain (e.g. Isaiah 14.13; Psalm 48.2; Job 37.22; cf. Ezekiel 1.4). The action of the north being 'stretched out' ...


2

Yes, God is being sarcastic with Job. Sarcasm is a rhetorical trope which gets its name from the verb "to tear the flesh from." In other words, "biting sarcasm" is a redundant expression. As with most tropes, sarcasm is best used judiciously and in moderation, since it tends to paint its user as possibly bitter, vengeful, hateful, merciless, and so on. ...


2

The Context of God's answer to Job is confrontational: Then the Lord answered Job out of a whirlwind, and said: 2 Who is this that wrappeth up sentences in unskillful words? 3 Gird up thy loins like a man: I will ask thee, and answer thou me. Job 38:1-3 Job is demanding an answer from God: Oh that one would hear me! behold, my desire is, ...


1

It's very unclear who תמים דעות that you translated as "one perfect in knowledge", refers to. There many commentary opinions on this: Elihu is speaking about Job, saying Job thinks he understands things (Rashi) Elihu is speaking about himself (An alternate edition of Rashi) Elihu is speaking about God (Nachmanides) Elihu is speaking apologetically to God, ...


1

Concerning the meaning of the word translated "repent" In the piel, "nacham" refers to comforting or consoling, but in the nifal, as it is in Job 42:6, it can also mean "repent" or "be sorry" (HALOT). And while "console" is also a possible meaning of the word in the nifal, "repent" makes more sense when juxtaposed with "dust and ashes". Concerning ...


1

The ending claims to be describing details "from" (Greek εκ) the Syriac book, indicating that the text itself was unlikely to have been written in Syriac. Moreover, as far as I know this ending of Job does not appear in any other versions than the Septuagint. It was likely written by a Jew, as it adds "And it is written that he will rise again with those ...


1

If Job is pre-Abrahamic then what we have here is possibly one of the 1st truly written cases of a Natural Theology. A Natural Theology addresses what might be known about God through looking at the natural world. Job is exciting in this sense because the text merely talks of a great 'man of the East' so he might not even be Semitic. God reveals Himself in ...


1

Rahab is indeed a sea monster, but not necessarily a mythical one as seems to be implied by some of the comments made on Behemoth and Leviathan. It is not at all impossible that dragons (AKA dinosaurs) existed among humans in centuries before ours. There is significant evidence in the fact that both the idea and image of dragons are world-wide, not limited ...



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible