1. El Olam (Hebrew)
Derek Kidner offers these comments on Genesis 21:33 (Genesis: An Introduction and Commentary):
"The tree (RV, RSV) and the divine name ’ēl ‘ôlām, the Everlasting God, have both been taken to prove that Abraham worshipped the local god in the local manner. But there is no hint that the tree was anything but commemorative; and as for the divine name, Speiser points out that it would be ‘a logical epithet of a Deity called upon to support a formal treaty … expected to be valid for all time’.4 The name is one of a series that includes El Elyon (14:18), El Roi (16:13), El Shaddai (17:1), El-elohe-Israel (33:20), El-Beth-el (35:7), each an aspect of God’s self-disclosure. See Introduction 4a, p. 36."
2. Participle (English)
From the Cambridge Greek Grammar (page 606):
"Participles are verbal adjectives:
— they are like adjectives in that they are marked for case, number and gender, and
follow the rules of agreement (—27.7);
— they are like verbs in that they are marked for tense-aspect and voice, and may be
construed with an object, complement, etc.; modified by adverbs; etc."
Examples of participles in English include walking, talking, thinking, taking, extended, and rushed. Two famous Latin participles are extensa and cogitans.
Saturday, October 01, 2022
Words of the Month (October 2022)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
34 comments:
To begin to understand the verse correctly we need to know what Abraham established. אֶ֖שֶׁל has a number of "translations". Was it a tree of a plantation, either way, of what type?
https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/22443/the-god-of-bethel
I agree that we should understand the verse correctly, but keep in mind that my post had the more modest goal of introducing the expression or reminding the blog reader about the denotation/possible sense of the expression EL Olam. It's no longer on the elementary or introductory level once you start asking those questions, which are fine in themselves, but I've just found that we sometimes need to focus on certain details at times and ignore others.
Robert Alter: "And Abraham planted a tamarisk at Beersheba, and he invoked there the name of the LORD, everlasting God."
Footnote: "The cultic tree is planted 'at' rather than 'in' Beersheba because it is evident that the site of the oath is a well in the wilderness, not a built-up town."
The NET Bible likewise translates as "tamarisk tree," but says "in" rather than "at" like Alter.
NET note: "The planting of the tamarisk tree is a sign of Abraham’s intent to stay there for a long time, not a religious act. A growing tree in the Negev would be a lasting witness to God’s provision of water."
SEe also https://go.gale.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CA359213188&sid=googleScholar&v=2.1&it=r&linkaccess=abs&issn=07923910&p=AONE&sw=w&userGroupName=anon%7Ea2cb2032
That is the "translation" that many use but with what justification?
Evidence for "Tamarisk tree" comes from where exactly?
Genesis 21
The Rashi chumash by Rabbi Shraga Silverstein -
"And he planted a fruit grove in Beersheva, and he called there in the name of the L-rd, the G-d of the world. [As a result of that fruit grove the L-rd came to be called the G-d of the whole world, Abraham charging his guests to bless the Creator of the whole world, whose fruits they had eaten."
The KJV uses grove.
Tyndale uses a wodd.
So possibly a food Forrest.
I guess we can't say with 100% certainty that it was a tamarisk tree, but see https://www.sightmagazine.com.au/lifestyle/greensight/9660-greensight-the-eshel-a-biblical-shade-tree-and-metaphor-for-israel
https://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/14223-tamarisk
"Plans are being made for the tamarisk to play a role in anti-desertification programs in China."
But if he planted a tree as opposed to a seed, how did he get it their? interesting implications.
But here is why Tamarisk seems an odd choice for a tree next to a well.
https://archive.vcstar.com/lifestyle/tamarisk-helpful-to-settlers-can-be-a-pest-in-the-long-run-ep-372977972-352431931.html/
"A single individual can consume up to 300 gallons of groundwater a day."
Plant a tree could mean that he planted a seed, but I don't think it's that specific. Anchor Bible Dictionary also has some interesting comments on tamarisk trees.
https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/abs/dictionary-of-bible-plants/tamarisk-to-tumbleweed-gundelia/CD950B59D52A1DFFEE7F70C5F08EBE61
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://wric.ucdavis.edu/information/natural%2520areas/wr_T/Tamarix.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwi3nO_P-sT6AhVGVsAKHZHXA-sQFnoECC0QAQ&usg=AOvVaw0Lm7bOLswh5BzRxlOPnyeW
https://sites.nicholas.duke.edu/avnervengosh/files/2011/08/Salinity-in-Israel.pdf
http://literacias.net/bibliodigital/download/490/Plants%20of%20the%20Bible%20-%20Michael%20Zohary.pdf
https://biblicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/irish-biblical-studies/28-1_002.pdf
I have doubts that Deuteronomy 16:21 is referring to planting a tree. Bare in mind that Jesus died on a tree, but I doubt that it was planted their.
It is much more likely to be what we could call a carved totem pole.
As for moreh - https://quotefancy.com/quote/1541356/Bill-Mollison-If-we-lose-the-forests-we-lose-our-only-teachers
This is cultural encoding.
Hos 4:12 - see just how confused the "translations" actually are using "idol" or "piece" of wood. Neither of which are in the text and I see no necessity to imply them either.
https://biblehub.com/hosea/4-12.htm
This is not a trivial matter & זְנוּנִים֙ is only found in the later books (possibly only the twelve?) & I am convinced that it is an epithet of agriculture.
"Perhaps the most well known myth of Ishtar/Inanna tells of how she chose a young shepherd Dumuzi (later called Tammuz), as her lover; they later became joined through the ritual called “Sacred Marriage.” Shortly after, Dumuzi died. In one version, he is killed by raiders and mourned by his wife, sister, and mother. In another, Ishtar/Inanna travels to the underworld and once there must sacrifice Dumuzi, offering him as her replacement, in order to leave. For half the year, he returns to the world, while his sister takes his place in the underworld, thus becoming the dying and reborn god of agricultural fertility."
"Lions were also a symbol associated with Inanna in relation to her war aspect. Other associations include lapis lazuli, as Inanna wore a necklace made of the precious stone that identified her as a harlot in one myth."
The holy harlot is depicted riding her beasts on the Ishtar gate.
I think we had a discussion some time back about Hosea 4:12 and why translations render the verse with idol, etc.
Can't remember, sorry.
Maybe it was Hosea 13:2ff instead.
https://biblehub.com/text/hosea/4-13.htm
To me just one word changes the whole meaning. "Under" or "instead".
https://biblehub.com/hebrew/tachat_8478.htm
Also, at this time the word harlots could actually mean temple virgins.
Note also that it does not say with men in 14.
There is much to scrutinise here.
J. Andrew Dearman (The Book of Hosea):
"Forms of divining and oracle seeking (and magic?) are apparently behind the sarcasm of inquiring of and listening to a piece of wood. Hosea is at one with other prophets who make fun of idolatry, particularly the seeking of divine guidance from something made by human hands (Isa. 44:917; Jer. 10:1-16). The term for wood is a general one, but that for staff (maqqel) is used for a
piece of wood that can be carried by hand (Gen. 32:11; Exod. 12:11; Num.
22:27). The prophet Zechariah gave names to two pieces of wood and used them
as symbols of his prophetic message (11:7-14).
It is a spirit of harlotry that leads the people astray (cf. 5:4). The charge of harlotry is familiar. Perhaps its spirit is the opposite of the knowledge of God that Hosea enjoins upon Israel elsewhere. The latter indicates being rightly related to God through obedience to the ethos of the covenant. The former separates the people from being rightly related to God. In a provocative pun the prophet charges the people with playing the harlot in place of, or more literally 'from under,' God. For the meaning in place of see Gen. 30:2 and 50:19. The use of the term under in a sexual context occurs in the next verse (cf. Jer. 2:20; 3:6, 13). Verse 12, therefore, brings to the forefront religious practices that are incompatible with the worship of YHWH."
https://biblehub.com/text/hosea/5-4.htm
See also Hosea 4:17
I think it's about understanding the properties associated with Ishtar/Innana and realising that they are not random but closely related. Agriculture and war go hand in hand, as does sex and fertility for animal husbandry.
https://biblehub.com/hebrew/litshuvat_8666.htm
Could this be the time of year when crop stores are running low or out?
They did not venerate trees, they cut them down to make idols/totems.
https://www.gotquestions.org/who-Asherah.html
https://biblehub.com/hebrew/rumeh_7314.htm - I am wondering whether a better interpretation is "depth"?
That the king in fact set up a golden grove. I also see the usage of the base six dimensions, typically Babylonian.
https://bibleatlas.org/dura.htm
Earlier - https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:1412803/FULLTEXT01.pdf
https://www.routledgehandbooks.com/doi/10.4324/9780203946237.ch3
Not saying you're wrong, but why bring Ishtar into the discussion? What cues from the literary or historical setting of Hosea point in that direction? I see evidence for idolatry and harlotry in the text, but where is the evidence for Ishtar?
It is not even clear whether Bible writers ever allude to Ishtar.
If someone cuts down a tree to make an idol or totem, then he/she venerates trees by default. See https://www.jhom.com/topics/trees/worship.htm
So did the Romans venerate bronze because they made statues (idols) out of it?
Ishtar was everywhere, throughout many cultures.
https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/people-cultures-in-the-bible/people-in-the-bible/how-bad-was-jezebel/
The Phoenicians worshiped a swarm of gods and goddesses, chief among them Baal, the general term for “lord” given to the head fertility and agricultural god of the Canaanites.
Ethbaal served as a priest of Astarte, the primary Phoenician goddess. Jezebel, as the king’s daughter, may have served as a priestess as she was growing up.
The Bible occasionally connects harlotry and idol worship, as in Hosea 1:3, where the prophet is told to marry a “wife of whoredom,” who symbolically represents the people who “stray from following the Lord” (Hosea 1:3).
Yet throughout the millennia, Jezebel’s harlotry has not been identified as mere dolatry. Rather, she has been considered the slut of Samaria, the lecherous wife of a pouting potentate. The 1938 film Jezebel, starring Bette Davis as the destructive temptress who leads a man to his death, is evidence that this ancient judgment against Jezebel has been transmitted to this century. Nevertheless, the Bible never offers evidence that Jezebel is unfaithful to her husband while he is alive or loose in her morals after his death. In fact, she is always shown to be a loyal and helpful spouse, though her brand of assistance is deplored by the Deuteronomist. Jehu’s charge of harlotry is unsubstantiated, but it has stuck anyway and her reputation has been egregiously damaged by the allegation.
End
The connection to Ishtar is more than occasional. We do not even know the status of the woman in Jericho but we do know one reason for destroying cities to not be re-inhabited.
https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/people-cultures-in-the-bible/people-in-the-bible/rahab-the-harlot/
The planting of a tree is nothing like the planting of a totem. To carve a living tree is not the same as carving a dead one.
An ashera is not a living tree and the article you posted seems very confused.
I realize what you're saying about trees is correct, but my comments strictly pertained to those who make idols/totems out of trees. It is a form of idolatry or worshiping the tree.
The main reason I suggested the article was because it discussed tree worship.
Did the Romans venerate bronze when they made idols out of it? See Revelation 9:20.
I need to check out more info for myself before signing off on an Ishtar/Hosea connection
Just to clarify my points.
1) Abraham planted a tree/plantation but we cannot be sure of which type & I agree that it was not for the purposes of worship.
2) Revelation 9:20 just gives a list of materials to which I would include wood, but no one worships a block of metal or a trunk of wood, it is usually fashioned to depict something else which is the focus of worship/idolatry. That's why idolatry can still be a thing without a specific object.
3) Now this is my opinion but I do have good reason to think it, especially now that we have established the correct understanding of ecology. The ancients would have recognized the productivity of a grove or wood & more prominently in the the case of the single acacia, which has more life systems dependent on it than any other tree in the region (that is probably why it was specifically chosen for the tabernacle items, that would also have protected its use from other things, being a sacred tree), and some probably thought that the productive power could be combined with their idols to improve crop yields. I say this because we already have examples of images of things and how they were used, "piles" being a memorable example. It really is a pity, if they had just planted trees in their field they would automatically have become more productive but instead they cut down existing trees and just planted the trunk thinking it would do the same (a human simplistic solution to a complex problem). Leaf fall alone would have improved the crop but also many other interactions. The best fields have always been clearings in deciduous trees. I really have respect for Abraham and his love for trees, without worship.
My time is extremely tight now, so I'm going to be real brief.
We agree on number 1).
As for Rev. 9:20, I'm not saying that people necessarily worship blocks of wood or chunks of bronze per se. But Isa. 44 indicates that anyone cutting down a tree to make an idol is basically worshiping a tree, even if they don't do it directly.
The point I was making from Rev. 9:20 is that if someone makes an idol out of bronze, then that person is indirectly worshiping bronze. For why would the scripture condemn the idolizing of materials if venerating the idol made out of the material was not like worshiping the material, be it bronze, wood or gold?
https://biblehub.com/text/isaiah/44-4.htm
Isaiah 41:19
Isaiah 55:12
Isaiah 61:3
Trees are a theme.
https://biblehub.com/isaiah/55-13.htm
This one speaks to the natural progression from the thorny nursery in which saplings grow to the overstory of trees that shade out the thorny bushes.
This is the observations of someone who understands trees.
27:6 - the Asherah poles and sun images shall not stand up.
Not convinced about translating to incense.
What is here is the same as Daniel. The golden image, the grove.
https://biblehub.com/commentaries/1_kings/6-29.htm
Post a Comment