Eglon and Ehud

Nevi'im Judges 3
Anyone else finds this story interesting? The Davidic dynasty comes from this Moabite king, a gentile.

I did not pick up on that. Was too busy trying to think about how our guest was rabbi trying to tell us that Eliezar wasn't a believer in the God of Abraham because of how he worded his prayers . . .

maculated wrote:

I did not pick up on that. Was too busy trying to think about how our guest was rabbi trying to tell us that Eliezar wasn't a believer in the God of Abraham because of how he worded his prayers . . .

Did he elaborate on this or was it supposed to be clear to you that if one changes the orders of the prayers they do not believe in God?

I am with Dena on this. Even if he stayed a Ger Toshav, or Ger Tzedek, he still served the same Gd. This was waaaay before Torah was written and only oral laws (Noahide) were passed down. Abraham grew up making idols, so no system of correct prayer sequence was establish. This was the man who was to inheret all that was Abrahams because at that time he had no son. Eliezer had to have been more than a bff.

Specifically he said that because it says "God of Abraham," it supposedly indicates that it is not HIS God. Then he says he switches at the end - I don't have quick access to the Chumash - and indicates he's been turned into a believer because of the camel test working.

That's a good study. But I recall prayers or scriptures that say, "Gd of my forefathers" or "in the merit of"...and since they were among so many gods, I believe he was being specific so that there would be no question of who he prayed to.

An example is Jacob, he would refer to Hashem as the "dread of my father". Later in life did Jacob establish a closer relationship with Hashem.

My thought on such things is to not look too closely at the text unless you have a scholarly background. We don't know how the exact translation works nor how it's really intended unless you know this. This isn't just Judaism but kind of all literature. Awe is also a phrase indicating fear - but we use it more in a positive light now ("awesome").

I kind of felt like that read was inaccurate to what was trying to be communicated. But again, I just don't know enough. If you're a kabbalist, there are 70 faces of Torah and you'll never really get it from a cursory knowledge. (I'm not a kabbalist, but I am a college lit professor.)

maculated wrote:

My thought on such things is to not look too closely at the text unless you have a scholarly background. We don't know how the exact translation works nor how it's really intended unless you know this. This isn't just Judaism but kind of all literature. Awe is also a phrase indicating fear - but we use it more in a positive light now ("awesome").

I kind of felt like that read was inaccurate to what was trying to be communicated. But again, I just don't know enough. If you're a kabbalist, there are 70 faces of Torah and you'll never really get it from a cursory knowledge. (I'm not a kabbalist, but I am a college lit professor.)

Mrs. Maculated...(probably in wedding bliss by now) who or what is this in reference to? I think we all got off topic and have no idea what we are talking about now or who you are talking to

as far as looking closely at text...why not? I am not going to just take a Rabbi's word on it...although many contribute with enlightenment, but I love to learn why, when, where on the texts. What was going on, who the audience is, what circumstance, and what resulted...how can I apply it to my life. Granted one needs to be able to read Hebrew text and so forth to get the full understanding. But with my handy dandy notebook, wifi, and english translated books...its fair game :-)

Wedded bliss is next week.

My point in interpreting ancient texts, whether it is the Torah or not, is that you need a special gateway of understanding that's not readily apparent by a lay reader.

Bee:

All translations by their very nature are inaccurate. If you are not fluent in more than one language, you may not realize just how true that is. Words and phrases have connotations in addition to their basic meanings. One way to overcome that somewhat is to use multiple translations. Be sure to check out the latest JPS English translations and perhaps those by Robert Alter to get good basic translations from normative Jewish perspectives. It is perhaps my own bias, but I would beware of Art Scroll translations: they often have such a strong "agenda" that their translations are very loose and really distort the plain meanings of the words. My husband once showed me an example in a shul library (we do not own an Art Scroll Tanach) and it was really shocking to me.

But it is not only the words, you need to know the context. You can get some of it from a good annotated version. Once again, it is best to have multiple versions to see different perspectives. Perhaps you would like the Hertz Chumash. Rabbi Hertz was the Chief Rabbi of the British Empire and thus the work is Orthodox, but it is quite old and thus .more moderate than some more recent Orthodox works since Orthodox as a whole has become more "right-wing". I think the English translation is based on the King James version, so some of the well-known biblical phrases will be familiar. The commentary is very interesting.

I think you need to study with a true Jewish scholar to really understand the texts. I have seen many cases where relying on a particular translation or not knowing some background information could totally mislead a person. I wish I could remember some of those examples right off hand, but none come to mind.

You don't have to necessarily agree totally with a rabbi's take on a passage, but you should be open to the fact that he is likely to have a lot more background that you do starting with understanding the original Hebrew, but also probably familiar with a lot of the commentary of sages throughout the ages on that text. Sometimes I think people new to Judaism misunderstand that the Jewish tradition of arguing over text or religious issues (which is always still grounded in text) has certain agreed upon rules and understandings. An opinion must have solid foundations to be respected.

It is important that you understand the Jewish approach to textual analysis because it informs the religion to a great extent. It is not for nothing that Jews are called "the People of the Book".

Thank you for your concern and please don't worry about me, and I truely agree that no one should study on their own. We are trying to find a community to get guidance, and you are 100% correct. But also understand where we are and how we study and my husbands dedication to the study is relentless. Anyone else I would tell them as you have and I hope you continue to tell us newbies to be cautious.
We pull from the lectures on Naaelah.com , mesora.org , torahcafe.com but not limited to it.
These our some of the books and publishers in our home library:
Artscroll, Moznaim Mishnah Torah, Feldheim Publishers Mishna Barurah, Guttnick, Stone Edition, Artscroll Tanach series, Judaica Press Tanach Series, Steinsaltz, Midrash by Sonchino, and Guide to The Perplexed. Everything we read or post on Noahide Nations website is looked by our Noahide Rabbi's, as far as Chumash we have Rashi, Ramban, Baal Haturim, and my husband double checks our Talmud and Mishnah Torah studies from his favorite website http://www.mastertorah.com/newsite/general/home.php

I am curious on your opinion of artscroll translation, I have some of my own, but you are the 2nd person to mention that.