A common theme in Exodus and Ezekiel is "the glory of YHWH (Jehovah)," but we witness this phenomenon in Leviticus too; for instance, we read about the glory of YHWH in Leviticus 9:5-6; however, for this entry, I will discuss 9:23-24 in the Hebrew (MT) and LXX:
"And Moses and Aaron went into the tent of meeting, and when they came out they blessed the people, and the glory of the Lord appeared to all the people. And fire came out from before the Lord and consumed the burnt offering and the pieces of fat on the altar, and when all the people saw it, they shouted and fell on their faces." (ESV)
"Finally Moses and Aaron went into the tent of meeting and came out and blessed the people.
Jehovah’s glory now appeared to all the people, and fire came out from Jehovah
and began consuming the burnt offering and the pieces of fat on the
altar. When all the people saw it, they started shouting and they fell
with their faces to the ground" (NWT 2013).
When discussing Hebrews 1:3, B.F. Westcott defines the glory of God as "the full manifestation" of divine attributes insofar as humans can apprehend them, and these attributes include God's goodness (Westcott, Epistle to the Hebrews, page 11). See Exodus 24:16-17; 33:19-20; 40:34; Deuteronomy 5:24; Ezekiel 43:2. However, a close study of Exodus and Leviticus suggest that the "glory of YHWH" (Jehovah) must be ascertained from its contextual use because the utterance does not mean the same thing every time it occurs. Therefore, what is "Jehovah's glory" in Leviticus 9:23-24?
וַיָּבֹ֨א מֹשֶׁ֤ה וְאַהֲרֹן֙ אֶל־אֹ֣הֶל מֹועֵ֔ד וַיֵּ֣צְא֔וּ וַֽיְבָרֲכ֖וּ אֶת־הָעָ֑ם וַיֵּרָ֥א כְבֹוד־יְהוָ֖ה אֶל־כָּל־הָעָֽם׃
וַתֵּ֤צֵא אֵשׁ֙ מִלִּפְנֵ֣י יְהוָ֔ה וַתֹּ֙אכַל֙
עַל־הַמִּזְבֵּ֔חַ אֶת־הָעֹלָ֖ה וְאֶת־הַחֲלָבִ֑ים וַיַּ֤רְא כָּל־הָעָם֙
וַיָּרֹ֔נּוּ וַֽיִּפְּל֖וּ עַל־פְּנֵיהֶֽם׃
The Hebrew text above is from the Leningrad Codex.
LXX: καὶ εἰσῆλθεν Μωυσῆς καὶ Ααρων εἰς τὴν σκηνὴν τοῦ μαρτυρίου καὶ ἐξελθόντες εὐλόγησαν πάντα τὸν λαόν καὶ ὤφθη ἡ δόξα κυρίου παντὶ τῷ λαῷ καὶ ἐξῆλθεν πῦρ παρὰ κυρίου καὶ κατέφαγεν τὰ ἐπὶ τοῦ θυσιαστηρίου τά τε ὁλοκαυτώματα καὶ τὰ στέατα καὶ εἶδεν πᾶς ὁ λαὸς καὶ ἐξέστη καὶ ἔπεσαν ἐπὶ πρόσωπον.
Brenton: "And Moses and Aaron entered into the tabernacle of witness. And they
came out and blessed all the people, and the glory of the Lord appeared
to all the people. And fire came forth from the Lord, and devoured the offerings on the
altar, both the whole-burnt-offerings and the fat; and all the people
saw, and were amazed, and fell upon their faces."
Targum Onkelos: "And Mosheh and Aharon entered the tabernacle of ordinance, and came forth and blessed the people; and the glory of the Lord was revealed unto all the people: And fire came forth from before the Lord, and consumed upon the altar the burnt sacrifice and the fats: and all the people saw, and gave praise, and fell upon their faces"
Compare 1 Kings 8:10-12; 2 Chronicles 7:1-2.
One commentator proffers these remarks (John E. Hartley, Leviticus, page 124):
It is striking that on leaving the Tent of Meeting Moses and Aaron bless the people again. Having been in the presence of God, they themselves have been blessed. Overflowing with the joy of this blessing, they share their abundance by again blessing the people who have been anxiously awaiting their coming out of the Tent of Meeting. Then the glory of Yahweh appears to all the people. While the nature of Yahweh's manifestation of his presence is not stated, it was most likely in the cloud as on other occasions in the wilderness journey (Exod 24:16). It was this glory that filled the tabernacle after Moses had erected it (Exod 40:34) . Fire comes from the glory and consumes all the sacrifices. Earlier Aaron had begun to burn these sacrifices; now the divine fire quickly consumes the pieces of meat and fat slowly smoldering on the altar. Snaith (57) , however, reconstructs the scene differently. In his view Aaron had burned his own offering and then prepared the people's sacrifices, but had not yet burned them. The divine fire comes and devours these first public offerings. With this manifestation Yahweh dramatically accepts the sacrifices offered at the new sanctuary. This appearance of Yahweh also corresponds to his appearance at the dedication of the Temple by Solomon (2 Chr 7: 1; cf. 1 Chr 21 :26; 1 Kgs 18:38).
G.J. Wenham (Book of Leviticus): "The glory of the Lord is God's visible presence among his people. It is described in Exod. 24:16-17: 'The glory of the Lord settled on Mount Sinai and the cloud covered it six days. ... Now the appearance of the glory of the Lord was like a devouring fire on the top of the mountain.' 'The glory of the Lord' seems to be an alternative way of describing the pillar of cloud and fire that regularly accompanied Israel through her pilgrimage in the wilderness (Num. 14:l0ff.). It appeared on Mount Sinai, at the completion of the tabernacle, and at other great historic occasions. But God's glory was not always present in the tabernacle, absenting itself from time to time (Exod. 40:34ff.). The return of God in his glory was always something to be looked for. There was a recognition that if God was not present in the tabernacle then all worship there was meaningless. These sacrifices are designed to make fellowship between God and man possible again."
More than one commentator has pointed out the similar statements contained in Leviticus 9:24 and 10:2 with the former being beneficial and holy but the second mention of fire being harmful/destructive and serving as a response to irreverence. The first has equally been connected with Jehovah's glory and his being a "devouring fire." Of course, another nexus is the Shekinah light, shining above the sacred Ark of the covenant.
Out of the many sources I consulted, one of the most helpful works is by Mark Rooker: his Leviticus commentary in the NAC series but I'm still digging into this issue.
Sources for This Entry:
John E. Hartley. Leviticus. Word Biblical Commentary 4 (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, 1992).
Gordon J. Wenham. The Book of Leviticus. (Grand Rapids, MI: W. B. Eerdmans,
1979).
46 comments:
https://biblehub.com/hebrew/al_5921.htm
Compare Genesis 14.6.
https://biblehub.com/hebrew/5921.htm
Looks like one definition is missing.
One downside of biblehub is that it has dated sources and it's really not for serious study, but I still find it helpful for some things. See https://www.sefaria.org/Klein_Dictionary%2C_%D7%90%D6%B6%D7%9C?lang=bi for more extensive and updated info.
Compare ESV and NET.
"out from the presence" or "before" ?
https://biblehub.com/hebrew/millifnei_6440.htm
Compare with Leviticus 10:1-2 and Numbers 16:7.
https://biblehub.com/text/genesis/23-17.htm
https://biblehub.com/text/numbers/16-7.htm
"Before" and legal cases?
I don't know enough about the preposition to say it's limited to legal cases, but Numbers 16:7 and Lev. 10:1-2 makes me think otherwise.
I suppose it is how one interprets "the man whom Jehovah will choose" & "which he had not commanded them to do."
A little more study has convinced me that "before" is not limited to legal cases. For instance, Genesis 18:22; Exodus 34:23; 2 Samuel 2:14; Exod 29:10.
Genesis 18:22 is the most prominent legal case example.
Is Deuteronomy 16:18-20 independent of that which precedes it?
I will drill into the other examples tomorrow.
Genesis 18:22 is not a human legal case and I'm not sure that most scholars would consider it to be an example of a legal case between man and God. Maybe they would. In terms of scriptural genres, Genesis is usually categorized as Yahwist, Elohist or Priestly material.
Regardless of the answer to these questions, I would argue that the other passages are not legal but more priestly, etc. But I think 2 Sam. 2:14 clearly shows that "before" is not limited to legal cases and that is what the Hebrew dictionaries suggest.
Thinking a little more about Genesis 18, it does mention the judge of all the earth. Still, I think that has little to do with "before."
Here is something to ponder--Maimonides' take on panim. He write a bit on the word, but I want to dwell on two aspects from his Guide for the Perplexed:
The word panim is also used in Hebrew as an adverb of place, in the sense of “before,” or “between the hands.” In this sense it is frequently employed in reference to God; so also in the passage, “And my face (panai) shall not be seen,” according to Onkelos, who renders it, “And those before me shall not be seen.” He finds here an allusion to the fact, that there are also higher created beings of such superiority that their true nature cannot be perceived by man; viz., the ideals, separate intellects, which in their relation to God are described as being constantly before Him, or between His hands, i.e., as enjoying uninterruptedly the closest attention of Divine Providence. He, i.e., Onkelos, considers that the things which are described as completely perceptible are those beings which, as regards existence, are inferior to the ideals, viz., substance and form; in reference to which we are told, “And thou shalt see that which is behind me” (ibid.), i.e., beings, from which, as it were, I turn away, and which I leave behind me. This figure is to represent the utter remoteness of such beings from the Deity. You shall later on (chap. liv.) hear my explanation of what Moses, our teacher, asked for.
The word is also used as an adverb of time, meaning “before.” Comp. “In former time (le-phanim) in Israel” (Ruth iv. 7); “Of old (le-phanim) hast Thou laid the foundation of the earth” (Ps. cii. 25).
See the entries in both BDB and Gesenius: https://www.blueletterbible.org/lexicon/h6440/kjv/wlc/0-1/
Thinking in the broad sense of the word "law," I guess one could say that many contexts are legal in one way or another and I certainly agree that Jehovah works in a legal fashion according to a number of Bible texts. Aquinas distinguished between four senses/uses of the word "law," such as divine law, eternal law, natural law, and positive law. Scholars debate just what genres are contained in Genesis.
I think I would have to argue that in Hebrew, that which is temporally before is the past and that which is behind is the future.
I think it is worth looking at 2 Samuel 2:13 with those on either side of the pool.
In the cases we're discussing, panim is functioning as an adverb of place rather than time. Before refers to place or time, like before the throne, which is descriptive of place in Revelation 7.
The point I was making is not relevant to Greek.
Biblical Hebrew, the word for "yesterday" (the past) is תמול (temol), which comes from the root מול (mul) meaning "in front." The Biblical Hebrew word for "tomorrow" (the future) is מחר (mahher), which comes from the root אחר (ahher) meaning "in back."
Deuteronomy 19:17 gives a rounded sense. It demonstrates the legal case hierarchy.
Just to be clear, when I mentioned Revelation 7, my point wasn't about Greek either, but concerned adverbs of place and time. Yes, adverbs function differently across languages but the points stands that an adverb can be used for time or place: before can be understood in a spatial or temporal sense whether in Hebrew, Greek or in English, etc.
Well, it's one of the reasons I have reservations about 1 Kings 3:16-28 being an authentic account.
First regarding Deut. 19:17, the fact that it's a legal case seems incidental to the occurrence of "before." The fact is that this usage clearly occurs in non-legal contexts and debatably is used that way in Lev. 9:23-24; 10:1-2 and compare Lev. 9:4-6. I cited other examples where "before" occurs in non-legal settings.
Deuteronomy 19:17 - https://biblehub.com/text/deuteronomy/19-17.htm.
So who are the two men physically standing before?
In response to what you write concerning the past/future, I'm leery because etymology can deceive us at times. One source reports that temol is of uncertain derivation.
As for makher, the Klein Dictionary says:
1 tomorrow. 2 in time to come. 3 the morrow. [Related to Aram.-Syr. מְחַר (= tomorrow). Contraction of מְאָחָר, Pu. part. of אחר (= to be behind, be late). cp. מְאֻחָר. מָחָר stands for ma’ḥār and derives from base אחר. According to some scholars מחר properly means ‘time in front’, and is related to Akka. maḫru (= front), but this etymology loses in probability if we consider that Akka. maḫru with reference to time always means ‘the former’. Other scholars see in מָחָר a contraction of יוֹם אַחֵר (= the other day).] Derivative: מָחֳרָת.
James Barr might also caution us about extracting too much theologically/philosophically from diachronic derivations.
http://neft.dk/ivrittu.pdf Pg 705 has no comment. I will investigate this further.
Well, it's probably beyond my ken and would exhaust my temporal/mental resources to prove the Solomonic account is genuine, but see Philippians 3:15. :-)
They stand before YHWH although he's not physical, the priests, and the judges. Am I missing something in the Hebrew?
K-D write: The two men between whom the dispute lay, the accused and the witness, were to come before Jehovah, viz., before the priests and judges who should be in those days - namely, at the place of the sanctuary, where Jehovah dwelt among His people (cf. Deuteronomy 17:9), and not before the local courts, as Knobel supposes.
Might be helpful: https://www.jstor.org/stable/23503644
Also see https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=GfITLEZBQvsC&oi=fnd&pg=PA7&dq=etymological+derivation+yesterday+in+hebrew&ots=TXE7ZdzAI2&sig=Zds9ip--iETQrmnD5Wubl3AAcbs#v=onepage&q&f=false
Physically before the priests and the judges. I don't think this is complicated. None of these are standing physically before Jehovah. But they are both stood before in the legal case. This also has bearing on Genesis 18.
Have you looked at all the antient texts regarding Solomon?
David prays for a son.
The birth of Solomon.
Solomon's ring.
Solomon's temple.
Solomon and the ants.
Solomon's carpet.
Sheba.
The loss of the ring.
The death of Solomon.
Unfortunately the Jstor article has its own problems regarding the merging of ancient vowels. So his interpretation (substitution) in Micah may be viable for Micah but does not automatically follow for the older texts.
The layers of complication are significant.
Isaiah 30:20,21.
A voice from "behind" but you will see your teacher?
Or, a voice temporally in front of you.
I have no doubt that "before" is used in a legal context, but that's different from saying the legal context gives the word it's meaning. We use the expression "come before the judge," but that does not mean before gets its meaning from such contexts.
I've read a bit about Solomon from different sources.
In Isaiah, the teacher is Jehovah. Therefore, see in what sense? Job said, my eyes have seen you.
I'm still not comfortable putting much trust in unsure derivations. James Barr might deal with the matter n his book about the bible and time
From Theological Lexicon of the Old Testament (Jenni and Westermann):
(3) ^ñuköi y]d´aπn “some other time” (2 Sam 18:20); ^]uuköi d]πy]d´aπn “on the following day” (2 Kgs 6:29); uköi w]d´ünköj “a future day” (Isa 30:8; Prov 31:25); uköi i]πd´]πn “tomorrow” (Gen 30:33 in the meaning “future”; Isa 56:12), “tomorrow” (Prov 27:1); cf. uköi d]iikd´ón]p (Num 11:32) and ikd´ón]p d]uuköi (1 Chron 29:21) “following day”; uköi yapiköh “yesterday” (Psa 90:4);
, תְּמֹל adv. yesterday. [Related to Aram. תְּמָלֵי, אִתֽמָלֵי, Syr. תְּמָל, אֶתְמָלָא, Ethiop. temālem, Akka. timāli, itimāli, ina timāli (= yesterday). cp. אֶתְמוֹל.]
From Klein Dictionary.
To see this teacher is in line with אֶהְיֶה אֲשֶׁר אֶהְיֶה - what is to come will teach.
https://saintebible.com/hebrew/haacher_312.htm
Another thing about seeing the teacher (YHWH/Jehovah) is to consider the historical context of the utterance. How would Israel as a nation see its teacher? And when?
The future event of the messiah speaking the words of the father. Mat 22:33.
https://biblehub.com/text/deuteronomy/6-8.htm in front between the eyes - see them.
I still like the ancient idea that Bible verses have numerous senses/applications; ergo, ancient Israel had certain passages fulfilled when they went into exile, then were released. They saw their teacher post 539 CE upon coming out of Babylon. But I would concede that Isa. 30:21 likely had an application to the Messiah, God's Son and I believe it's being fulfilled today.
I like the connection between Deut. 6:8 and Isa. 30:21: that makes sense to me. I appreciate you pointing it out. The only thing I would say is that the verse appears to be a simile wherein it teaches that God's words are to be treated "as" a sign and "as" frontlets between the eyes. Moreover, we're talking about God's words that are before our eyes: that cannot literally be true unless they're written, yet surely the words spoken about in this account are not restricted to written words. Otherwise, brilliant application :)
Yes, not just written words. https://biblehub.com/text/exodus/13-9.htm
When doing a quick Google search, I came upon more than one occurrence of these sentiments: "It is worth noting that in his commentary on Exodus 13:9 Rashbam too expresses the idea that this verse must be understood by way of metaphor"
Some people have interpreted such verses matter of factly, but I said earlier, they're similes. Rashbam identifies them as metaphors, I guess.
As the text also states, have these words in your mouth. Good point.
Post a Comment