The Unusual Pe Preceding Ayin Order in the Acrostics of the Book of Lamentations (Eikhah)

The first four chapters of the book of Eikhah (Lamentations) are alphabetical acrostics (each line or stanza begins with a letter of the Hebrew alphabet in order). Surprisingly, in the acrostics in chapters 2, 3 and 4, the verses that begin with pe precede the verses that begin with ayin.

pe

ayin

The Soncino commentary to Eikhah remarks: “This unusual order has never been satisfactorily explained.” In light of the archaeological discoveries of recent decades, it is time to provide this explanation. We are really dealing with two separate problems:

(1) Why does pe precede ayin in chapters 2, 3 and 4?

(2) Why is there a difference in the order between chapter 1 and chapters 2, 3 and 4?

We would expect there to be consistency in a small Biblical book. We can perhaps answer the second question based on the Dead Sea Scrolls text of the first chapter: the pe verse precedes the ayin verse here. Perhaps this Dead Sea text reflects the original text of the first chapter. Read the complete article at -- http://jewishlinknj.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=8795:the-unusual-pe-preceding-ayin-order-in-the-acrostics-of-the-book-of-eikhah

The search for the most accurate ancient manuscripts of the biblical text.

An important component of the search for the original manuscripts of the books of the Bible – or later copies that are the most accurate – is called “Textual Criticism.”

(1) Textual criticism deals with the origin and nature of all forms of a text, in our case the biblical text.

(2) This involves a discussion of its supposed original form(s) and an analysis of the various representatives of the changing biblical text.

(3) The analysis includes a discussion of the relation between these texts, and attempts are made to describe the external conditions of the copying and the procedure of textual transmission.

Scholars involved in textual criticism not only collect data on differences between the textual witnesses (manuscripts) -- they also try to evaluate them. Textual criticism deals only with data deriving from the textual transmission (copying and recopying) — in other words, readings included in textual witnesses which have been created at an earlier stage.

The biblical text has been transmitted in many ancient and medieval sources which are known to us from modern editions in different         languages. The primary texts of the Jewish Scriptures we now have include are manuscripts (MSS) in Hebrew and other languages from the Middle Ages and ancient times as well as fragments of leather and papyrus scrolls two thousand years old or more.

These sources shed light on and witness to the biblical text, hence their name: “textual witnesses.” All of these textual witnesses differ from each other to a greater or lesser extent. Since no textual source contains what could be called “the” biblical text, a serious involvement in biblical studies clearly necessitates the study of all sources, including the differences between them. The comparison and analysis of these textual differences hold a central place within textual criticism.  

SHALOM

If you like this BHC Bible Study, please let us know by “Liking” BHC on Facebook by clicking here. Also, please share it with others.

History of the Name “Jesus”

The history of the name “Jesus” begins in the Torah in the account in which Yahweh commanded Moses to choose one man from each of the twelve tribes to spy out the land of Canaan.

Of the tribe of Ephraim, Hoshea[1] the son of Nun . . . These are the names of the men which Moses sent to spy out the land. And Moses called Hoshea the son of Nun Yehoshua.[1]

The root word of Hoshea is HOSHUA, which means "salvation." It is important to understand that "salvation" in the Hebrew Scriptures or the Jewish culture did not mean “go to Heaven after death.” It meant “being delivered from some danger or threat.” Read the complete blog at -- http://therealyesua.blogspot.com/2015/05/history-of-name-jesus.html

How We Received the Words of Jesus

Jesus wasn't an American who lived in the 21st century and spoke native English to his audience. He wasn't a Christian and didn't attend a church every Sunday. Based on what we know from the Synoptic Gospels, Jesus was a Jew who lived in the 1st century, spoke Hebrew and Aramaic, practiced Judaism, attended a synagogue every Shabbat and engaged in rituals at the Jerusalem Temple. This is very important information to know when our goal is to linguistically understand the words of Jesus.

In the previous blog I introduced the linguistic model we use at the Biblical Heritage Center to determine the meanings of the words of our Bibles. Words originate from a Source (author/speaker) and they are passed on to one or more Receptors (readers/hearers).

(Click on the graphic above to enlarge.)

Our goal is to determine what the words meant to the original Sources.

Jesus lived in the first decades of the 1st century. We live in the first decades of the 21st century. It is safe to say that none of us attended any of the meetings at which Jesus taught. The point is -- Jesus is not the direct Source of the words of Jesus we read. 

How did the words of Jesus travel across 2,000 years and make it to us? 

(Click on the graphic above to enlarge.)

It is important to understand that in the communications process, people often wear two hats -- Source & Receptor. When we are working to understand the meanings of the words of our Bibles we must do our best to identify all of the people involved in the transmission chain and factor their lives into the process. It is clear that their cultures, time periods, geographical locations, and personal experiences factor into the messages that send to the next Receptor -- just as yours does when you explain what the words of Jesus mean.

(1) Jesus didn't write down his messages, he spoke them to followers.

(2) The earliest accounts of Jesus's words were made by his followers.

(3) Copies of copies of copies, etc. of those accounts were made by scribes.

(4) English translators chose which copies of the manuscripts of the scribes they would translate.

(5) The translators made their translations.

(6) Readers determine what the words of the translators mean based on what's in their minds.

  

For the past five hundred years people have been reading the Bible without understand the linguistic laws that govern the human mind. The result has been that hundreds of different translations of the Bible are in circulation and literally thousands of Christian denominations have been created through conflicts over what the words of our Bibles mean. We can change things by simply asking the simple question above and working to find the answers:

What did the words mean to the original Sources?

Shalom,

Jim Myers

PS -- If you like this please let me know by “Liking” BHC on Facebook by clicking here.

 

         

Accurately Understanding the Words of the Bible

My Journey to Discovering the Real Yeshua

My journey to discovering the Real Yeshua began in 1980. I believe that it will help you understand what I write in our newsletters, blogs, groups, etc., if I share some of the most important events on my journey. Something that I quickly discovered is that one of the greatest obstacles I repeatedly faced on my journey was my own Belief System. Chances are, that as you read this, you may become aware of some conflicts with your Belief System too. Hopefully, my experiences will be beneficial and help you on your journey. Read the complete blog at -- http://therealyesua.blogspot.com/2015/04/my-journey-to-discovering-real-yeshua.html

Bald Spots on Clothing

The Torah portion that will be read in many synagogues tomorrow is Parashat Tazria (Leviticus 12:1 - 13:59). A literal translation of the end of Leviticus 13:55 is:

It shall be consumed in fire; it is an erosion, whether on its back bald spot (קרחתו) or its front bald spot (גבחתו).

Rabbi Dr. Zev Farber wrote:

“I first noticed this problem a few years ago when I was learning שנים מקרא ואחד תרגום with the LXX (Septuagint – Greek translation of the Hebrew text) as my preferred translation. I was oblivious to the problem with the MT (Masoretic Text – Hebrew), but noticed the fact that the Greek was unlike the Hebrew. It was only when I compared the two, it struck me that the Hebrew made no sense. I must have read the parasha over 100 times, and certainly had read Onkelos (an interpretation of the Torah) and Rashi (a commentary), both of whom creatively translate the phrase… and yet, it never clicked.  That Shabbat I turned to the person sitting behind me (an Israeli and amateur Bible scholar) and asked him what he thinks the verse means. He looked at it, thought for a moment, and said, this makes no sense. I then told him what the LXX said and he smiled and said: `So it’s a typo.’”

Read Rabbi Farber’s article about correcting the typo at -- http://thetorah.com/bald-spots-on-clothing-an-ancient-scribal-error/