Kroonstad, South Africa – lectures

BySkip Moen, Ph.D.

Here are the recordings of the lectures I gave in Kroonstad, South Africa in May on the topic of the ezer kenegdo. Unfortunately, the microphone didn’t pick up very well so the volume on these is pretty low. I needed Patrick on this trip.

Part 1

Play

Download Lecture 1

Part 2

Play

Download Lecture 2

Subscribe
Notify of
12 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Gayle Johnson

Part 1 will play from this page, but I cannot right-click and “Save as”, to listen later. Part 2 works fine.

These teachings are always so interesting. Thanks for sharing them with us!

Rodney

Patrick,

Clicking on the link to save part 1 brings up the following xml file…

NoSuchKey
The specified key does not exist.
audio/ezer-1-kroonstad.mp3
983889499F34C736
rHwkOJKGFzBQaqhC4oc5GKYcwsMVbjRkbY4zJK220X5edIhFsxSGfJxiA6N006ti

Rodney

Hmmm…didn’t think that would work…the xml tags got stripped…

Annamarie

How is it possible for Adam to name his wife “Hav-vah” in a language (Siriac) that doesn’t even exist yet??? So, doesn’t the Hebrew meaning of “Hav-hav” (i.e. “mother of all living”) have to be considered true since that’s the only language at that time??? instead of the Siriac meaning of “snake”???

Rodney

Annamarie,
If I may offer this response; we have to remember that the account that we are reading was not written “in the garden”. It was written some time after the actual events took place (most will say by Moses on Mt Sinai, under the inspiration of YHVH). It was also written to a specific audience for a specific purpose. The author chose which word to use to explain Adam’s naming Havvah, which therefore does not preclude the use of a Syriac word rather than a native Hebrew word.

It would be worthwhile having a listen to Skip’s 12-part series on Genesis, where he spends considerable time studying and expounding the first four chapters of Genesis verse-by-verse. That may answer some of your questions. Of course, it may also generate a few (or a lot) more, but there is nothing wrong with that. 🙂

Annamarie

Rodney,

My point is the same… if Moses specifically chose a Syriac word in order to explain Adam’s actions and heart toward his wife at that time, why wouldn’t he define “Hav-vah” as “snake” instead of “mother of all living” which is the Hebrew definition which doesn’t actually imply contempt for her at all???

Actually… I have listened to Skip’s 12-part series on this subject… thanks for your reply.

Annamarie

Rodney

The NET translation notes on verses 4 & 5 offer an alternative perspective that is interesting:

4 tn Here is another sound play (paronomasia) on a name. The sound of the verb קָנִיתִי (qaniti, “I have created”) reflects the sound of the name Cain in Hebrew (קַיִן, qayin) and gives meaning to it. The saying uses the Qal perfect of קָנָה (qanah). There are two homonymic verbs with this spelling, one meaning “obtain, acquire” and the other meaning “create” (see Gen_14:19; Gen_14:22; Deu_32:6; Psa_139:13; Pro_8:22). The latter fits this context very well. Eve has created a man.

5 tn Heb “with the LORD.” The particle אֶת־ (‘et) is not the accusative/object sign, but the preposition “with” as the ancient versions attest. Some take the preposition in the sense of “with the help of” (see BDB 85 s.v. אֵת; cf. NEB, NIV, NRSV), while others prefer “along with” in the sense of “like, equally with, in common with” (see Lev_26:39; Isa_45:9; Jer_23:28). Either works well in this context; the latter is reflected in the present translation. Some understand אֶת־ as the accusative/object sign and translate, “I have acquired a man — the LORD.” They suggest that the woman thought (mistakenly) that she had given birth to the incarnate LORD, the Messiah who would bruise the Serpent’s head. This fanciful suggestion is based on a questionable allegorical interpretation of Gen_3:15 (see the note there on the word “heel”).

Rodney

Further to that, the NET translation is rather interesting, too. It says the following:

Now the man had marital relations with his wife Eve, and she became pregnant and gave birth to Cain. Then she said, “I have created a man just as the LORD did!”

This seems to suggest another aspect of becoming “like God”. The power to create. Of course, Adam and Chavvah already had the power to create, having been given the instruction to “multiply and fill the earth”, but now it seems Chavvah sees this as a direct result of eating the fruit of the tree (and thus something that she has acquired through her own actions) rather than something given of God.

As interesting as this interpretation is, I’m not sure that I can see how “just as the LORD did” is a valid translation of “et YHVH” rather than “with YHVH” or simply with YHVH being the direct object of Chavvah’s “acquiring” or bartering. Perhaps this is an attempt at “dynamic equivalence” rather than literal translation, but I’m still not sure that it is right. I’d be interested in your thoughts, Skip.

On a slightly related note, I was watching Nehemia Gordon at a conference at Shavuot (Pentecost) last week and he made an interesting comment re translation. To paraphrase, translation always involves a choice: you either translate an expression literally (or as close as possible) and do a dis-service to the target language, or you translate the idiom as best you can into the target language (I guess this is the dynamic equivalence approach) and do a dis-service to the source language by losing part of the beauty or meaning of the original.

brenda snyder

Hi Skip:
I was born in Kroonstad, South Africa, gives me joy to know you were there.
Let me know when you’re going to SA again as I still have lots of family there.

Blessings
Brenda

Skip Moen, Ph.D.

January 26 – Feb 13, 2012. TIcket is booked.

brenda snyder

where will you be speaking in Kroonstad, and are you going to Johannesburg too?

Skip Moen, Ph.D.

I don’t know the full schedule yet, but I will be back to Kroonstad and Jo’berg. I will post the dates and times as soon as the schedule is set. The trip is Jan 26-Feb 13.