Also note the replacement of mě'azzěrê zîqôt in Isa. 50: 11 with měba'ărê zîgôt in CDC v. 13; and of nēṣer maṭṭāʿay 'shoot of my planting' in Isa. 60. 11 with ŝōreŝ šōreš maṭṭāʿat in CDC i. 7.
n. 38: On the sexual metaphor see also Gen. Rab. lxxxv. 4 and the (anti-Karaite) comment of Ibn Ezra at Exod. 34: 21.
In other cases, inner-biblical repetitions may serve to indicate the presence of an explanatory gloss. For example, the manifestly redundant phrase tiqvat ḥûṭ haŝŝānî ('strand of scarlet cord'; NEB) in Josh. 2: 18 is repeated more simply as tiqvat haŝŝānî ('strand of scarlet') in v. 21. Presumably the more common term ḥûṭ ('cord') was used in the first verse to explain the noun tiqvāh (cf. Heb. qav; Akk. qû).
The presumed piety of the patriarchs may have led some tradents to transform older citations into new theological assertions. Thus, it is arguable that in Gen. 14: 21 Abram swore by the god El Elyon, using exactly the same phrase as did Melchizedek (v. 19), but that later scribes revised this problematic formulation and prefixed the Tetragram to the divine name in the oath. In this way, 'El Elyon, creator of heaven and earth' is no independent (Canaanite) deity but merely the epithet of YHWH. This demotion of ancient gods to epithets (a shift not presumed in Exod. 6: 3) witnesses to a momentous conceptual breakthrough in ancient Israelite religious history. For a comparable phenomenon at Gen. 21: 33 see N. Sarna, 'The Authority and Interpretation of Scripture in Jewish Tradition', in C. Thoma and M. Wyschogrod (edd.), Understanding Scripture (New York: Paulist Press, 1987), 12.
For a comparable technique, see below, addendum to p. 385.
n. 20: For an example in the Qumran scrolls cf. the resumption of CDC vii. 13 at viii. 1. On different grounds, J. Murphy-O'Connor has contended that the prophetic material in vii. 13b-viii. 1a is a later interpolation. See his 'The Original Text of CD 7: 9-8: 2 = 19: 5-14', HTR 64 (1971), 379-86.
Various rules on sacrifice in the priestly and deuteronomic corpus exhibit generalizing comments preceded by the word kol. Cf. Lev. 21: 17-20, 22: 20-5; Deut. 15 21, 17: 1. Repetitions and syntactic awkwardness suggest that some of these formulations may be secondary expansions.
Questia, a part of Gale, Cengage Learning. www.questia.com
Publication information: Book title: Biblical Interpretation in Ancient Israel. Contributors: Michael Fishbane - Author. Publisher: Clarendon Press. Place of publication: Oxford. Publication year: 1988. Page number: 545.
This material is protected by copyright and, with the exception of fair use, may not be further copied, distributed or transmitted in any form or by any means.