Mi-a mai scris Florin. Curioşii să-l citească şi să-l cîntărească. Eu îl găsesc prea uşor. Aştept să termine de citit toate postările mele despre Daniel şi istoricism. Deocamdată, nu simt nevoia să-l mai pun la punct. Genialitatea mi-a confirmat-o Florin anterior. Ce altceva mi-aş mai putea dori?
PS Trebuie să-i atrag totuşi atenţia lui Florin că traducerea lui Cornilescu la Exodul 17:16 e cu totul incertă - iată nota din NET Bible: The line here is very difficult. The Hebrew text has כִּי־יָד עַל־כֵּס יָהּ (“for a hand on the throne of Yah”). If the word is “throne” (and it is not usually spelled like this), then it would mean Moses’ hand was extended to the throne of God, showing either intercession or source of power. It could not be turned to mean that the hand of Yah was taking an oath to destroy the Amalekites. The LXX took the same letters, but apparently saw the last four (כסיה) as a verbal form; it reads “with a secret hand.” Most scholars have simply assumed that the text is wrong, and כֵּס should be emended to נֵס to fit the name, for this is the pattern of naming in the OT with popular etymologies – some motif of the name must be found in the sentiment. This would then read, “My hand on the banner of Yah.” It would be an expression signifying that the banner, the staff of God, should ever be ready at hand when the Israelites fight the Amalekites again.
PPS Că Exodul 15:17 s-ar referi la "căminul ceresc" e absurd. Nici contextul, nici terminologia nu tolerează o asemenea interpretare (şi makhon, şi miqdash se referă fără probleme la templul de la Ierusalim - v. Exodul 25:8; Isaia 4:5; Ezra 2:68).
Niciun comentariu:
Comentariile noi nu sunt permise.