Comments on: Playing Fast and Loose?

By: Critique of a uniquely Mormon argument against same-sex marriage « Irresistible (Dis)Grace

Fri, 17 Apr 2009 05:58:49 +0000

[...] …If only it weren’t WROOOOOOOOOONG, as Nitsav elaborates. [...]

By: John C.

John C. — Fri, 17 Apr 2009 01:39:14 +0000

V Hudson,
If you polled 100 Hebrew scholars, you would find probably 100 who understand Dr. Parry’s reasons and 100 who would disagree with them. It really is an atypical reading.

By: V Hudson

V Hudson — Wed, 15 Apr 2009 21:10:43 +0000

Hi, Nitsav, Elder Bruce C. Hafen obtained his translation from Professor Don Parry of BYU, renowned Hebrew scholar who is working on the Dead Sea Scroll translation. His email is donald_parry@byu.edu . I have a feeling he has very good reasons for his translation.

By: Nitsav

Nitsav — Tue, 23 Dec 2008 23:48:09 +0000

I’ve just spent some time going through Lane’s lexicon of Arabic, lengthy and detailed. I did not find reference to a form idhra meaning “young woman.” I did find a form close to that with technical biological meaning, referring to female (but sometimes male) sexual organs. Either Lane doesn’t contain the reference, it’s been garbled in transmission from the prof’s mouth to Jupiter’s notes to the web, I missed it in my search, or it’s a lexical reach on the professor’s part. If the latter, I consider it a very weak argument.

By: greg

greg — Sat, 15 Sep 2007 18:08:43 +0000

I think he, Satterfield was probably discussing a very narrow point, I have heard him discuss the term much more broadly in the “equal but oposite” realm.
I have heard scholarly discussion on the animals parding before adam as in, they were there for him to name them, and language itself is the thing that makes man “not alone”

By: jupiterschild

jupiterschild — Fri, 10 Aug 2007 19:43:57 +0000

Nitsav,

The prof’s theory is that they are non-homonymic homographs, probably as a result of arcane usage and perhaps erroneous transmission.

Julie,

The animal procession, in my view, is a didactic way of making the point that there was currently no “‘zr knegdo” for the adam. The act of naming them further highlights this. When the end of the animals is reached, there was still no “‘zr knegdo”, and so one had to be made from the human’s own substance. It’s not that none of the beasts was an unsuitable “helper”. It’s that none of the animals was of the adam’s same species.

Bradley,

Thanks for the quote. The objection I would make to Satterfield’s Hebrew is that, as Nitsav mentioned, “helper” is not at all the sense of the Hebrew. When it’s translated like this, it’s easy to see where the misogynistic interpretations come from. As N. said, besides Eve the only one ever to be called a “help” is God. And, as I suggested, it might not originally have ever been the word “ezer” in the first place.

By: Matt W.

Matt W. — Fri, 10 Aug 2007 18:03:50 +0000

Nitsav, tried to answer my own question here

By: Bradley Ross

Bradley Ross — Fri, 10 Aug 2007 01:37:23 +0000

Bruce Satterfield has a parsing of this phrase that I like. The following is quoted from a paper on his BYU-I web site:

Before Eve was created, the account reads: “And I, the Lord God, said unto mine Only Begotten, that it was not good that the man should be alone; wherefore, I will make an help meet for him.” (Moses 3:18; see also Gen. 2:18). The phrase “help meet for him” translates the Hebrew words ezer kenegdo. These words are a little difficult for me to translate. Ezer literally means, “help” and is similar in meaning to the English word ‘help.’ However, kenegdo, translated ‘meet for him’, is more difficult to translate. The root word, neged(21), literally means ‘opposite’, ‘in the presence of’, ‘over against’, ‘in front of’, ‘corresponding to’, or ‘aside’.(22) Literally, kenegdo means, ‘opposite as to him’ or ‘corresponding as to him’.

The sense of the phrase ezer kenegdo is ‘an equal but opposite helper to him’. For example, my left hand is the ezer kenegdo to my right hand; both hands look alike except they are exactly opposite. Both hands are equal but opposite. This is so that they might work better together. Imagine trying to pick up a shovel with two hands that are positioned the same! Again, the ezer kenegdo of the right wing of an airplane is the left wing; they look exactly the same except they are opposite each other. Both wings are equal but opposite. This is so that the airplane can fly. One wing is no more important than the other. The same is true with man and woman. Man’s ezer kenegdo is woman. Both are equal but opposite. It requires both to fulfill the role of parenthood!

By: Nitsav

Nitsav — Thu, 09 Aug 2007 17:25:48 +0000

Jupiter: I have no philological objections, though I’d want to see the Arabic data. (D-underline did merge with z in Hebrew, so that’s no problem.)

Your professor, then, posits that this and the ezer meaning “help” (well attested as a verb) are non-homonymic homoographs, and that only the two Genesis occurrences exist?

It’s an interesting idea.

Matt: I seem to recall a comment on that from another poster, on another blog. I’ll see if I can find it before I make my own.

By: Matt W.

Matt W. — Thu, 09 Aug 2007 17:21:59 +0000

Nitsav: thanks for the info. Any thoughts on the purpose of the parallel language of gen 3:16 and gen 4:7?

Does this parallel contribute anything or is it just coincidence?