New Post
Search
Help
ArchivesRe: Hebrew Phrase...? (yasha` na')
in reply to a message by Sabertooth
Technically, I think the passage reads “לאֹ שָׁנִיתִי” – perfect singular, but I see your point. Also, it’s not possible for G-d to actually return, for G-d is never away, i.e. G-d is omnipresent. In the Christian view, where G-d finds anthropomorphic expression in Jesus, however, it could still be a valid interpretation.
There is often a certain amount of reading between the lines when it comes to adapted names. It’s not an exact science.
Shanah can mean year, or cycle, or turn, or return, or change... with its best fit relying on the context in which it is found.
Though Shiloh is more descriptive of a place or a state of being than a person, I suppose that if one grants the concept of a personified form of G-d, then one could easily accommodate the personification of a place or state, especially in the same context.
In the Bible, the names of people are sometimes changed during the course of their experiences, as was the case with Joshua (Yehoshua), whose original name was Hosheah. That’s a relatively small change. More drastically, Jacob (Yaacov) was famously accorded the name Israel (Yisrael), which is a completely new name. Most of us don’t get to choose our own names, but we are often expected to live up to them nonetheless. Sometimes, we earn a name for ourselves and sometimes we bring honour or shame to a name we already possess.
In the end, how one conducts oneself is more important than what one is called, and very much more important than what one calls oneself.
There is often a certain amount of reading between the lines when it comes to adapted names. It’s not an exact science.
Shanah can mean year, or cycle, or turn, or return, or change... with its best fit relying on the context in which it is found.
Though Shiloh is more descriptive of a place or a state of being than a person, I suppose that if one grants the concept of a personified form of G-d, then one could easily accommodate the personification of a place or state, especially in the same context.
In the Bible, the names of people are sometimes changed during the course of their experiences, as was the case with Joshua (Yehoshua), whose original name was Hosheah. That’s a relatively small change. More drastically, Jacob (Yaacov) was famously accorded the name Israel (Yisrael), which is a completely new name. Most of us don’t get to choose our own names, but we are often expected to live up to them nonetheless. Sometimes, we earn a name for ourselves and sometimes we bring honour or shame to a name we already possess.
In the end, how one conducts oneself is more important than what one is called, and very much more important than what one calls oneself.
1
Replies
So, Jewish tradition doesn't consider the Shiloh of Genesis 49:10 to be the proper name of a prophesied person...?
Very true, but this site is devoted to name linguistics.
This message was edited 9/13/2015, 1:47 AM
1
I think it’s open to interpretation. Indeed, Shiloh is personified in several expositions of the text. I believe the confusion stems from the way in which the passage is constructed. In the following translation, the ambiguity becomes more apparent…
10 The sceptre shall not depart from Judah, nor the ruler's staff from between his feet, as long as men come to Shiloh; and unto him shall the obedience of the peoples be.
Because the phrase “and unto him…” follows immediately after the name Shiloh, it’s natural for some to interpret the name as belonging to a person. The Christian belief system commonly views people as coming to Jesus, so this would naturally tend to reinforce that interpretation. On the other hand, the phrase “…as long as men come to Shiloh” leads one initially to think of the location known by that name – in which case, “him” would refer to Judah, the tribe that is the subject of this portion of the text.
Another way to look at the word in this context is that it may not relate to a proper name at all, whether that of a person or of a place, but that it speaks to a state of being related in some way to peace.
This is likely my last posting on this topic. I will not be able to access this site for a while.
Be well.
10 The sceptre shall not depart from Judah, nor the ruler's staff from between his feet, as long as men come to Shiloh; and unto him shall the obedience of the peoples be.
Because the phrase “and unto him…” follows immediately after the name Shiloh, it’s natural for some to interpret the name as belonging to a person. The Christian belief system commonly views people as coming to Jesus, so this would naturally tend to reinforce that interpretation. On the other hand, the phrase “…as long as men come to Shiloh” leads one initially to think of the location known by that name – in which case, “him” would refer to Judah, the tribe that is the subject of this portion of the text.
Another way to look at the word in this context is that it may not relate to a proper name at all, whether that of a person or of a place, but that it speaks to a state of being related in some way to peace.
This is likely my last posting on this topic. I will not be able to access this site for a while.
Be well.
1
Again, thanks for your insight.
1