 |
| Author | Post |
|---|
JillD
Member
| Joined: | Fri Sep 29th, 2006 |
| Location: | Visalia, California USA |
| Posts: | 786 |
| First Name: | Jill | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | heathen, EvFree, Messianic, LC-MS, Catholic 2007 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Apr 16th, 2008 06:40 pm |
|
1. In 1 Kings 15:10 in my RSV it says "mother" and in other versions, it's "grandmother." Can anyone explain that?
2. In 1 Kings 6:7 it explains that the stones for the temple were chiseled at the quarry before being moved to the site of the Temple. Besides the quiet, is there another reason for this? I'm thinking that Henry might know....
Thank you!
Jill
____________________
"I praise you, for I am wondrously made. Wonderful are our works! My frame was not hidden from you, when I was being made in secret." Ps 139
"Guard me, O Lord, from the hands of the wicked; preserve me from violent men." Ps 140
|
|
|
David W. Emery
Network Helper
| Joined: | Fri Sep 29th, 2006 |
| Location: | Brownsville, Texas USA |
| Posts: | 2109 |
| First Name: | David | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Catholic |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Apr 16th, 2008 07:32 pm |
|
1 Kings 15:10 — “mother” or “grandmother”? Jill, this seems to be a textual problem. Here is what the Navarre Bible Commentary says:
In v. 10 the Hebrew text reads “mother” not “grandmother.” But, given that her name is the same as that of Jeroboam’s father’s mother (cf. v. 2), and the poverty of Hebrew vocabulary when it comes to expressing relation of kinship, we think that “mother” here should read “grandmother” (v. 13). Thus, the mother of King Abijam (the wife of Rehoboam) would have continued to have the honour of being “queen mother” when her grandson Asa began to reign at a very young age. However, 2 Chronicles 13:3, in parallel to 1 Kings 15:2, has another name for Abram’s mother (Micaiah, daughter of Uriel of Gibe-ah), contradicting what was said earlier in the same book (cf. 2 Chron. 11:21–22), where she is called Maacah, daughter of Absalom (sic). Also, in 2 Chronicles 13:1–2 Abijam is called Abijah.
The commentary gives no specific information on 1 Kings 6:7. I do recall that special precautions were made at the time of the construction to preserve the site in a “holy state.” Perhaps this will give us a clue for the preparation of the stone blocks being done off-site. There would be no huge mess to clean up, that’s for sure. And also, being chiseled to size, they were smaller, smoothed and weighed less and so were easier to transport. But these are practical concerns, and I think here we are dealing with piety more than pragmatism. Let’s see what Henry can provide.
David
|
|
|
hpj0828
Member
| Joined: | Sun Apr 1st, 2007 |
| Location: | USA |
| Posts: | 144 |
| First Name: | Henry | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Messianic Jewish believer, Hebrew Catholic |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Apr 17th, 2008 01:59 am |
|
Dear Jill,
Excellent question on I Kings 6:7. Consider Ex 20:25 (20:22 acc to the Hebrew Bible):
25 (20-22) And if thou make Me an altar of stone, thou shalt not build it of hewn stones; for if thou lift up thy tool upon it, thou hast profaned it. JPS 1917
In the Torah, the manifest Presence of the Lord is present in the Tabernacle which is a portable tent of meeting. The Torah does not envision God's Presence as being in a permanent building such as Solomon's Temple.
So, when Solomon's Temple was constructed, Torah law was interpreted and applied to the construction process. Ex. 20:25 prohibits the use of a tool (Hebrew chereb--usually means a sword. Here it means a tool for cutting stone) in the construction of a stone altar. This law was interpreted and extended to the stone used in Solomon's temple. As a result, no use of tools was permitted on the Temple Mount itself.
Since stone had to be cut for the Temple, which is not an impromptu pile of stones like the Ex. 25:20 altar, such stonecutting had to be done in the quarry.
Later, the Talmudic rabbis speculated on the tool used to cut stone in I Kings 6:7, which they called a "shamir". This shamir was variously interpreted as merely a "sharp stone" or as a legendary "worm" -- a magical living creature that could cut the stone so that tools of any kind were not necessary. cf. Pes. 54a, Git 68b
After the destruction of the Second Temple, this shamir was lost.
Hope this helps!
Henry
____________________
HPJ
|
|
|
JillD
Member
| Joined: | Fri Sep 29th, 2006 |
| Location: | Visalia, California USA |
| Posts: | 786 |
| First Name: | Jill | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | heathen, EvFree, Messianic, LC-MS, Catholic 2007 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Apr 17th, 2008 04:32 am |
|
Ah, Henry... I knew you'd know!
And David, thank you for the explanation from Navarre. It's a tad confusing, but at least I have the info to work through, if I want to.
These are questions that came up in our Bible study in which we are using Steve Ray's "Footprints of God." It's been a wonderful study!
Jill
____________________
"I praise you, for I am wondrously made. Wonderful are our works! My frame was not hidden from you, when I was being made in secret." Ps 139
"Guard me, O Lord, from the hands of the wicked; preserve me from violent men." Ps 140
|
|
|
Robert
Member
| Joined: | Mon Nov 12th, 2007 |
| Location: | Germany |
| Posts: | 124 |
| First Name: | Robert | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | The whole spectrum from black to white, now 100% Catholic! |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Apr 17th, 2008 07:42 am |
|
There was also a very practical side to the method of cutting / dressing of the stone in the quarry. It reduced total transport weights and allowed for immediate use at the site. The Egyptians finished the stone for the Pyramids in the quarry. This may have been adopted by the Hebrews.
____________________
Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect (1 Peter 3:15)
|
|
|
Current time is 10:03 am | |
|
|
|
|
|
