The Masoretic version of Isa 28:1,3 speaks of the “drunkards of Ephraim”, while the Septuagint version mentions the “hirelings of Ephraim”. On the one hand, the difference can be easily explained: unvocalized שכרי אפרים enables a reading here of a word related to שׁכר (to be drunk) as well as to שׂכר (to hire). On the other hand, the scholarly discussion seems to ignore a quite surprising fact that the Greek translator decided to choose the less fitting interpretation of שכרי, considering the context of chap. 28. The paper attemps to ponder over possible reasons.
The focus of this study is the biblical Dead Sea Scrolls, 65 years after their discovery near the Dead Sea, with the purpose of improving our understanding of the text of Hebrew Scripture. The Qumran finds (more than 200 fragmentary scrolls) reflect textual plurality, and all the biblical texts were probably considered authoritative. At the same time, the 25 Scripture scrolls from sites in the Judean Desert outside Qumran are virtually identical to the medieval MT.
The paper explains the approach applied for the edition of Biblia Hebraica Quinta (BHQ) in the context of previous critical editions of the Hebrew Bible. A concise historical survey presents the progress of the Biblical scholarship especially in the Hebrew language. It devotes more attention to the comparison of critical editions of the Hebrew Bible, in particular of Kittel’s work in the Biblia Hebraica and in the succeeding Biblia Stuttgartensia (BHS). The author justifies the adoption of the text of the Codex Leningradensis and clarifies the wider usage of sources in the critical apparatus, which differs in this way from the previous critical editions of the Hebrew Bible.
For many years, Karaite exegesis was relatively unknown to numerous Biblical scholars. This situation has been changing with an increasing access to source materials. As a result, more and more Karaite exegetical treasures representing the trends of Karaite Judaism have come to the fore. Among them, there is the Commentary on the Book of Hosea by Yefet ben Eli, one of the most significant representatives of Karaism in the tenth century. Yefet ben Eli exhibits a remarkable knowledge of Hebrew etymology, which enables him to provide unique answers to the interpretative problems in the Masoretic Text. His apologetic concern for prospective Muslim readers of his commentary is also noteworthy. Although, in general, Karaism sought to concentrate on the literal sense of the Scripture, Yefet ben Eli does not shy away from recourses to rabbinic oral tradition. Nevertheless, his exegetical contribution remains unique, as clearly demonstrated by the selected examples from his Commentary.
For many years, Karaite exegesis had been relatively unknown to numerousBiblical scholars. This situation has been changing with an increasingaccess to source materials. As a result, more and more Karaite exegeticaltreasures representing the trends of Karaite Judaism have come to the fore.One of them is the Commentary to the Book of Hosea by Yefet ben Eli, oneof Karaism’s tenth century most significant representatives. Yefet ben Eliexhibits a remarkable knowledge of Hebrew etymology which enables himto provide unique answers to interpretative problems in the Masoretic Text.His apologetic concern for prospective Muslim readers of his commentary is also noteworthy. Although, in general, Karaism sought to concentrate onthe literal sense of Scripture, Yefet ben Eli does not shy away from recourseto rabbinic oral tradition. Still, his exegetical contribution remains unique,as selected examples from his Commentary clearly show.
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.