Genesis 3:15 in the New Testament and in the Pentateuchal Targums: Enmity as a Spiritual Conflict by Iosif J. Zhakevich

Genesis 3:15 in the New Testament and in the Pentateuchal Targums: Enmity as a Spiritual Conflict

Iosif J. Zhakevich

Iosif J. Zhakevich is Associate Professor of Old Testament

The Master’s Seminary in Los Angeles, CA

Abstract: The present paper conducts a comparative analysis of Gen 3:15 in the Pentateuchal Targums and of allusions to Gen 3:15 at Rev 12:17 (and its broader context) in order to demonstrate that the Targums and the book of Revelation both interpret the enmity announced at Gen 3:15 to be a spiritual battle, not a mere reference to the animus between humans and snakes. This view of enmity is indeed the point of departure for the broader interpretation of Gen 3:15 as a messianic text in Rev 12 and the Targums, as other scholars have shown. Moreover, to explain the congruity between the Targums and Rev 12, this study concludes, in agreement with the general view in comparative targumic and NT studies, that such an interpretation of the enmity at Gen 3:15 existed in the early Jewish community and was incorporated into the NT and into the Targums in accordance with each author’s literary purposes and theological convictions.

Key Words: Targum, New Testament, Messiah, Enmity, Genesis 3:15, Revelation 12:17

Read the full article: Genesis 3:15 in the New Testament and in the Pentateuchal Targums: Enmity as a Spiritual Conflict

Understanding the Paraclete Title: Any Help from the Targums? by John Ronning

Understanding the Paraclete Title: Any Help from the Targums?[1]

John Ronning

John Ronning, Field Service Engineer, American Electrical Testing Co.

“Helper” is one suggested meaning of the fairly rare Greek word παράκλητος, found in the NT only in John’s writings.[2] In a previous study I suggested the possibility that when Jesus promised “another Paraclete, that he may be with you forever” (John 14:16), he may have been using targumic language, since in the extant Targums the divine promise to be with his people is frequently paraphrased with the idea of the divine Word (Aramaic מֵימְרָא) being their “Helper.”[3] The present paper explores further this possibility.

The term (παράκλητος) is used of the Holy Spirit by Jesus in his upper room discourse (John 14:16-17; 15:26; 16:7).  Additionally, it is used by John (1 John 2:1) to describe Jesus after his ascension.  Implications for the doctrine of the deity of the Holy Spirit would seem to come not from the definition and possible OT background of the word, but from the fact that the same term is used for both the Son and the Spirit, who carries on the work of the Son after his ascension to the right hand of the Father. This paper suggests that the title παράκλητος should be understood as a divine title equivalent to the OT (Hebrew) depiction of God as the Helper of his people. This thesis, therefore, suggests that “Helper” is a reasonable, perhaps the best translation of the term, and does indeed support the view that the Holy Spirit is the divine Helper sent to be with the Church of Jesus after his ascension.

I have suggested, based on Targum Pseudo-Jonathan Numbers 7:89, that Jesus was identified as the divine Word, in targumic terms, at his baptism in the Jordan. Note the following:

And when Moses went into the tent of meeting to speak with him, he heard the voice speaking to him from above the mercy seat that was on the ark of the testimony, from between the two cherubim; so he spoke with him. (MT)

And when Moses went into the tent of meeting to speak with him, he heard the voice of the Spirit as he descended from the heaven of heavens over the mercy seat, which was upon the ark of testimony between the two cherubim, and from there was the Word (דבירא) speaking to him. (Tg. Ps.-J.)[4]

I have seen the Spirit descending as a dove out of heaven, and he remained upon him . . . “He upon whom you see the Spirit descending and remaining upon him, this is the one who baptizes in the Holy Spirit” (John 1:32-33)

Since (1) John begins his Gospel by identifying Jesus as the divine Word; (2) notwithstanding 100 years of scholarly resistance to the idea, the Gospel and indeed the Johannine literature as a whole support the idea that this title is best explained as being based on the concept of the divine Word in the Targums;[5] (3) Jesus in the upper room promises to the disciples “another Paraclete who will be with you” after his ascension, the “other” Paraclete being Jesus himself, based on 1 John 2:1; (4) the Targums sometimes use the concept of the divine Word in passages which, on a Christian interpretation, refer to the Holy Spirit, the question seems natural, whether the Paraclete title is based on the targumic concept of the divine Word as Helper. Such a conclusion would (1) support the translation of Paraclete as “Helper,” and (2) would support the doctrine of the distinct personality and deity of the Holy Spirit.

Read the full article: Understanding the Paraclete Title: Any Help from the Targums?

[1] This article is adapted from a paper by this title read at the Eastern Region meeting of the Evangelical Theological Society, Liberty University, Lynchburg, VA, April 6, 2019.

[2] See for example, NASB, ESV.

[3] John Ronning, “The Targum of Isaiah and the Johannine Literature,” Westminster Theological Journal 69, no. 2 (2007), 247–78, particularly 257. Available online: https://www.academia.edu/7847884/The_Targum_of_Isaiah_and_the_Johannine_Literature (Accessed: April 2, 2019). See also the Ronning, The Jewish Targums and John’s Logos Theology (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2010), 39n86.

[4] דבירא is used mostly in the Palestinian Targums of the Pentateuch, and functions similarly to the term מימרא, but seems to be more specifically focused on the idea of revelation. For discussion, see Ronning, Jewish Targums, 34-37. Further items of interest: (1) the site of John’s testimony, Bethany beyond the Jordan, is the area from which Israel, led by Joshua and the ark (thus also, “the Word,” in targumic thought), prepared to cross the Jordan to begin the conquest of Canaan (Josh 3:16); (2) John’s emphasis on the Spirt “descending and remaining” on Jesus answers to the dual nature of Jesus, since the Spirit was predicted to rest on the Messiah from “the stem of Jesse” (Isa 11:1–2; “descending” points to the divine Word, “remaining” points to the [human] son of David).

[5] In addition to the article and book cited above, see the author’s online paper: “When YHWH Became Flesh and Dwelt Among Us: John 1:14 as Programmatic for John’s Gospel”: https://www.academia.edu/7921022/When_YHWH_Became_Flesh_and_Dwelt_Among_Us_John_1_14_as_Programmatic_for_Johns_Gospel.

Targumic Forerunners: How Codex Colbertinus-Sarravianus (G) Demonstrates Targumic Tendencies by Matthew R. Miller

Targumic Forerunners: How Codex Colbertinus-Sarravianus (G) Demonstrates Targumic Tendencies

Matthew R. Miller

Matthew R. Miller serves as a Chaplain at Westover Air Force Base, MA

Before Targumic texts existed, the Septuagint (LXX) was translated in Alexandria. This translation of the Pentateuch from Hebrew to Greek was the first of its kind and literally the stuff of legend.[1] It is a well-known problem in Old Testament textual studies that the LXX translation does not align exactly with the Hebrew Masoretic Text (MT) standard today.[2] The differences between the LXX and MT raise several questions: 1) are the differences due to different idioms? 2) is there a theological motivation behind the differences? 3) was the LXX translated from a Hebrew Vorlage that is different from the MT?

Since most in the Early Church did not know Hebrew, they assumed the priority of the LXX over the Hebrew Scriptures, believing that God had given the LXX to the Early Church in his providence.[3] These problems were not unknown in the Early Church, however. They were not fully documented until Origen’s work on the Hexapla. Origen was distressed by the lack of agreement he noticed between the church’s Bible and the Hebrew text of his day.[4] He took it upon himself to create a columned Bible—the Hexapla—to provide the material to produce a new recension.[5] He used an asterisk (※) to mark Greek text not originally in the ecclesiastical Greek text but corresponding to the Hebrew Vorlage, and he used the obelus (÷) to mark Greek text without correspondence to the Hebrew Vorlage.[6]

The passages marked with an obelus are the present focus, since these usually note text that was added in translation. The obelized material demonstrates interpretive tendencies that are  common with the Aramaic Targums. The source for the present study is Codex Colbertinus-Sarravianus (G).[7] Documenting all of the obeli is outside the scope of the present study. I will focus on three passages that demonstrate Targumic patterns most clearly: Numbers 14, Numbers 17 (16), and Deuteronomy 15:2.

Before exploring these three passages in detail, it is necessary to show the benefits of limiting the present study to one Greek manuscript. Also, an overview of the general Targumic tendencies will help orient the reader to the patterns in the passages.

Read the full article: Targumic Forerunners: How Codex Colbertinus-Sarravianus (G) Demonstrates Targumic Tendencies

[1] For discussions of the Letter to Aristeas, see common LXX introductions such as Henry Barclay Swete, An Introduction to the Old Testament in Greek, ed. Henry St. John Thackeray (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009); Natalio Fernandez Marco, The Septuagint in Context: Introduction to the Greek Version of the Bible (Boston: Brill, 2000); Jennifer Dines, The Septuagint, Understanding the Bible in Its World (New York: T & T Clark, 2004).

[2] The question of Old Testament textual criticism would take this article too far afield. The literature for these questions is vast. Standard introductions are Emmanuel Tov (Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible, 3rd Edition [Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2012]) and Ellis Brotzman (Old Testament Textual Criticism: A Practical Introduction [Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1994]). For a recent treatment of these questions from the LXX perspective, see Matthew Miller, “The Aristarchian Signs in Codex Colbertinus-Sarravianus” (PhD Diss., The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, 2019).

[3] Origen, Sur les Ecritures: Philocalie, 1–20 et La Lettre à Africanus, ed., trans., N. R. M. de Lange, Sources Chrétiennes 302 (Paris: Les Éditions du Cerf, 1983).

[4] Origen, Origenes Matthäuserklärung I: die griechisch erhaltenen Tomoi. Band 10 of Origenes Werke, ed., Erich Klostermannj, Die griechischen christlichen Schriftsteller der ersten drei Jahrhunderte 40 (Berlin: De Gruyter, 2015), 13.14.

[5] For a defense of this understanding of Origen’s work, see Miller, The Aristarchian Signs.

[6] Origen, Commentary on Matthew, 13.14; Origen, Sur les Ecritures, 532.

[7] Henry Omont, ed., Vetus Testamentus Graece Codicis Sarraviani-Colbertini quae supersunt in Bibliothecis Leidensi Pariesiensi Petropolitana phototypice edita (Leiden: A. W. Sijthoff, 1897); Miller, The Aristarchian Signs.

Aramaic to Greek Transliterations in Western Middle Aramaic by Andrew Messmer

Aramaic to Greek Transliterations in the Western Middle Aramaic[1]

Andrew Messmer

Andrew Messmer is the academic dean at Seminario Teológico de Sevilla in Santiponce, Spain; associate professor at the Facultad Internacional de Teología IBSTE in Castelldefels, Spain; and affiliated researcher at the Evangelical Theological Faculty in Belgium.

Introduction

For those scholars and laymen interested in the Aramaic language around the time of Jesus, there are several interesting questions to pursue, some of which are: How was Aramaic pronounced during the time of Jesus? What tools do we have to clarify ambiguities in the Aramaic language? What was the state of Aramaic–Greek bilingualism in Judea and its surrounding environs? There are various tools that researchers use to answer these questions,[2] and one of them is studying transliterations from Aramaic into Greek from the corpus of texts known as Western Middle Aramaic (hereafter WMA). Generally speaking, this division of the Aramaic language spans the time period of 200 BC–AD 200 and covers the geographical region of Judea and its surrounding environs.[3] This article tabulates the instances of WMA transliterations into Greek across four corpora in order to determine the frequency and trends regarding which Greek characters were used to transliterate Aramaic ones during this period.

Read the full article: Aramaic to Greek Transliterations in the Western Middle Aramaic

[1] This article is a reworking of part of my doctoral dissertation; “Maranatha (1 Corinthians 16:22): Linguistic, Historical, and Literary-Contextual Issues” (PhD thesis, Evangelical Theological Faculty, 2017), 58–81, 264–293. The Appendix (264–93) contains some additional information not included here, but this article has the advantage of correcting some minor mistakes, as well as presenting the transliteration data in a more user-friendly format.

[2] For examples from an Aramaic perspective, see. Jonathan Watt, “Of Gutturals and Galileans: The Two Slurs of Matthew 26:73,” in Stanley Porter (ed.), Diglossia and Other Topics in New Testament Linguistics, Journal for the Study of the New Testament Supplement Series 193; (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2000), 107–20; David Taylor, “Bilingualism and Diglossia in Late Antique Syria and Mesopotamia,” in J. N. Adams, Mark Janse, and Simon Swain (eds.), Bilingualism in Ancient Society: Language Contact and the Written Text (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002), 298–331. For examples from a Hebrew perspective, see Alexander Sperber, “Hebrew based upon Greek and Latin transliterations,” Hebrew Union College Annual 12–13 (1937–1938): 103–274. Sperber’s work covers roughly the same time period as the one under consideration here, and still has value for today, not only for its quality, but also for the wide range of topics it covers.

[3] WMA comprises the following dialects and texts: Nabatean, Qumran, Murabba’at, inscriptions on Palestinian ossuaries and tombstones, Aramaic words from the NT, and some texts from early Palestinian rabbinic literature (see Joseph Fitzmyer, A Wandering Aramean: Collected Aramaic Essays [Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1979], 57–84, especially 61–62). A still-helpful collection of WMA texts with accompanying English translation may be found in Joseph Fitzmyer, A Manual of Palestinian Aramaic Texts (Second Century B. C.—Second Century A. D.) (Rome: Biblical Institute Press, 1978).

How Targum Onqelos Can Help Discern Between the Biblical Hebrew Frequentative and Preterital Imperfects by Richard McDonald

How Targum Onqelos Can Help Discern Between the Biblical Hebrew Frequentative and Preterital Imperfects

Richard McDonald

Richard C. McDonald is an Instructor at Whitefield Academy and Adjunct Instructor of Old Testament Interpretation at Boyce College in Louisville, KY

Abstract: The biblical Hebrew past Imperfect can be a difficult verb form to translate. The Hebrew grammars available to the reader do not provide many tips to determine whether a particular BH past Imperfect is functioning as a frequentative or a preterital. In fact, one grammarian contends that it is often left up to the intellect of the reader. However, the reader has another tool—not simply his or her intellect—to utilize in order to understand the BH past Imperfect. This paper argues that Targum Onqelos of the Pentateuch serves as a reliable guide in discerning the function of the BH frequentative and preterital Imperfects in the books of Genesis through Deuteronomy. The Hebrew and the Aramaic texts of Numbers 9:15-23 and Exodus 15:1-18 are analyzed to demonstrate that Onqelos consistently renders the BH frequentative with a Participle, and the BH preterital Imperfect with a Perfect. The concepts gleaned from Numbers 9:15-23 and Exodus 15:1-18 are then applied to other passages in the Pentateuch confirming that the targumist is consistent in rendering the various functions of the BH Imperfect.

Key Words: Targum Onqelos, frequentative Imperfect, preterital Imperfect, vav-consecutive Perfect, Participle, Perfect

Read the full article: How Targum Onqelos Can Help Discern Between the Biblical Hebrew Frequentative and Preterital Imperfects

“All Manner of Music:” The Author of Daniel 3 as Master Storyteller by H. A. Hopgood

“All Manner of Music:” The Author of Daniel 3 as Master Storyteller

H. A. Hopgood

H. A. Hopgood is a scholar of the biblical languages and a Professor of Greek and New Testament Theology at Andersonville Theological Seminary in Camilla, GA

Abstract: Amidst the exciting narratives of the book of Daniel, chapter 3 contains extra elements of drama, displaying the best in historic narratives. The author’s techniques are some of the most basic among a storyteller’s methods: a well-structured plot, good form, poetic expression, and memorable characters. His use of these simple (though not necessarily easy) methods to craft the narrative of this event distinguishes him as a great teacher and a master of literary art. By creating a compelling account from the perspective of a chronicler, the author achieved a two-fold end: 1) to preserve the history of those Jewish leaders that remained faithful to their God during the Babylonian captivity and 2) to reveal to Jew and Gentile alike the nature of God and his care for his faithful servants.^[1]

Keywords: Daniel, three Hebrew children, fiery furnace, Nebuchadnezzar, storytelling

Read the full article: “All Manner of Music:” The Author of Daniel 3 as Master Storyteller

[1] Martin Luther, “Preface to Daniel,” in Interpretation of Scripture, ed. Euan K. Cameron (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2017), 386; also J. N. Schofield, Law, Prophets, and Writings: The Religion of the Books of the Old Testament (London: SPCK, 1969), 341–42.

The Value of Egyptian Aramaic for Biblical Studies by Collin Cornell

The Value of Egyptian Aramaic for Biblical Studies

Collin Cornell

Collin Cornell is Visiting Assistant Professor of Biblical Studies for the School of Theology at the University of the South in Sewanee, TN.

Abstract: Biblical Aramaic accounts for a small fraction within the two-testament Christian Bible. Studying it would seem therefore to present a modest value for biblical studies, and Egyptian Aramaic, a nonbiblical counterpart from the same historical era, even more so. The present article argues, however, that comparing Egyptian Aramaic with biblical texts sharpens understanding of the Bible’s distinctive theological profile. It demonstrates the value of Egyptian Aramaic through two comparative case studies: the first is lexically-focused and traces the contrast between “former” (as in, “former times”; Hebrew ראשון//Aramaic √קדם) and “latter” in Haggai and in several Aramaic letters from the Egyptian island of Elephantine.  The second is more genre-focused and engages with the transmission of royal traditions, especially promissory oracles to the king, in post-monarchic texts: namely, biblical royal psalms and the Egyptian Aramaic Papyrus Amherst 63.

Keywords: Egyptian Aramaic; early Judaism; Persian Period; Achaemenid; Elephantine; Haggai; royal psalms; Papyrus Amherst 63

Read the full article: The Value of Egyptian Aramaic for Biblical Studies

Introduction to Aramaic and the Bible by Adam J. Howell

Introduction to Aramaic and the Bible

Adam J. Howell

Adam J. Howell is Assistant Professor of Old Testament Interpretation at Boyce College & Southern Seminary in Louisville, KY.

While the Aramaic portions of Scripture may be minimal, Aramaic studies proves to be fertile ground for understanding biblical linguistics, history, and interpretation. With only 269 verses (Gen 31:47 [partially], Jer 10:11; Dan 2:4b–7:28; Ezra 4:8–6:18; 7:12–26) of the Tanakh written in Aramaic, one may question the attention given here to the topic of “Aramaic and the Bible.” However, as with any topic in biblical studies, deeper investigation into these matters will reveal more and more context into which we place the biblical narratives.

Aramaic particularly becomes helpful in this regard due to its long history as a written and spoken language in the ancient Near East. According to Franz Rosenthal, the earliest Aramaic inscriptions date to the ninth century bc.[1] Beginning as the spoken language of Aramean tribes, the language moved into Assyria and Babylon, eventually supplanting Akkadian as the lingua franca of the region.[2] By the time of King Hezekiah in Judah (2 Kgs 18:26), Aramaic was apparently an international language and continued to be so into the Persian period. Aramaic developed into several dialects both in Palestine and in Mesopotamia. Some of the most notable are Palestinian Jewish Aramaic (Targumic) in the West and Syriac in the East.

This long-standing history of the Aramaic language demonstrates that biblical scholars have much to glean from these topics. Whether one is interested in linguistic development among the Semitic languages or the translation techniques of first century targumists in the ancient synagogue, Aramaic studies, at least in some respect, set the stage for understanding both the Old and New Testaments.

In this journal issue, the reader will find articles that span this history of the Aramaic language. These few articles are by no means exhaustive of the areas of Aramaic study, but I hope that they will prove helpful to those interested in the topic(s). Articles include topics on transliteration and translation technique of the Aramaic Targums, interpretations and readings of the Aramaic portions of Daniel, Egyptian Aramaic, and also more theologically informed studies on how Aramaic informs John’s paraclete title and how the Pentateuchal Targums of Genesis 3:15 are possibly picked up in the New Testament. These articles represent excellent scholarship in these areas of Aramaic studies, and they all can help to shape our understanding of the biblical landscape in the areas of linguistics and historical studies.

It is with great pleasure that I have been able to work with such capable authors on this project and to collaborate on such a wonderful journal topic. Just because a particular topic is small in the larger world of biblical studies does not mean it is insignificant. Since Aramaic is an often-neglected area of study in relation to the Bible, it is nigh time that we invest our time and attention to these matters. I pray that these articles and topics will prove helpful as we seek to understand God’s revelation in Scripture at a deeper level.

[1] Franz Rosenthal, A Grammar of Biblical Aramaic, 7^th rev. ed. (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag, 2006), 9.

[2] Alger F. Johns, A Short Grammar of Biblical Aramaic (Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press, 1972), 1.

JBTS 7.1 Full Issue

JBTS 7.1

Aramaic and the Bible

• Introduction to Aramaic and the Bible by Adam J. Howell
• The Value of Egyptian Aramaic for Biblical Studies by Collin Cornell
• “All Manner of Music:” The Author of Daniel 3 as Master Storyteller by H. A. Hopgood
• How Targum Onqelos Can Help Discern Between the Biblical Hebrew Frequentative and Preterital Imperfects by Richard McDonald
• Aramaic to Greek Transliterations in the Western Middle Aramaic by Andrew Messmer
• Targumic Forerunners: How Codex Colbertinus-Sarravianus (G) Demonstrates Targumic Tendencies by Matthew R. Miller
• Understanding the Paraclete Title: Any Help from the Targums? by John Ronning
• Genesis 3:15 in the New Testament and in the Pentateuchal Targums: Enmity as a Spiritual Conflict by Iosif J. Zhakevich
• Book Reviews