Lecture 2: Biblical Hebrew Exegesis I - Dr. Bill Barrick

[@cornopeanus]

3:26 Books on translating 8:05 What is a translation 28:15 Risks & Revelations 35:15 Translation principles

[@joshyam4026]

I have never expected Rolf Furuli's work could be mentioned as an interesting book!

[@cornopeanus]

Question about our instructor's comments at 44:12. He asserts that βαπτιζω always means dunking and never pouring or sprinkling. But the OT washings, none of which involved dunking, are called βαπτισμοῖς in Hebrews 9:10. Is this not a clear instance of βαπτιζω meaning sprinkling?

[@dralgarza]

Another question, the Hebrew of Gen.19:24, you say points to two YHWHs but in verse 19 of that same chapter, Lot calls the two messengers, "them" in Hebrew, YHWH when he says to THEM, "No YHWH, please...". So verse 24 would point to all three men/messengers being YHWH. Comment, please?

[@sethjohnson6539]

But Dr barrick.i believe God oversees it.thats why He Has many people like you working for Him.example Moses just raised the staff.God parted the sea. ( Love you and your classes)

[@dralgarza]

Question, we have no Rabbinic parables in any language other than Hebrew. So how could Yeshua teach in Aramaic?

[@Subuzgreatest]

Rabbinic Judaism only started after the Temple was destroyed. Besides, Daniel's last chapter 6-7 is in Aramaic. So it's not only Yeshua.

[@dralgarza]

@@Subuzgreatest So Jesus and John were not Rabbis according to the NT?

[@dralgarza]

@@Subuzgreatest And Daniel was in Hebrew with Aramaic does not prove the point when the rest of the OT is in Hebrew.

[@Subuzgreatest]

@@dralgarza John was a prophet, not a rabbi.

[@Subuzgreatest]

@@dralgarza You said there was no rabbinic parables other than in Hebrew. That's why I brought up Daniel, to show that there were.

[@thepfusielievirie8630]

The earth is subject to change and so does matter. When the verb haya is used, it's subject is always liable to change therefore it is never used for God because God cannot change. If haya in the perfect tense always shows a static position then how do you understand the text in Genesis 3 when it says "now the serpent was (perfect)..."? Does the text then mean that the serpent came in the form but did not experience any change? What about Genesis 3:5, "... You shall be (perfect) like God" does it still imply a static condition in the perfect tense? What about Genesis 1:15" and let them (luminaries) be (perfect)..."? Haya in the perfect tense can show a dynamic condition too. If we only look at Genesis 1:2 then the theory that haya in the perfect tense always imply a static condition can be convincing.

[@sethjohnson6539]

I want my mommy!