The Temporal Horizon of the Immanuel Oracle

[kwrandolph]

Karl,

What happens if the only example of the word בעל used to mean "fiance" is in Joel 1:8?'

If… if… if… We need to deal with evidence, not speculation.

I don't think any linguist would say based on two quotes that the word בעל was never used to mean "fiance" thousands of years ago.

You have no evidence. The lack of evidence in this case is evidence of lack, because there is evidence contrary to your speculation.

You decide the meanings of rarely used words like almah and baal as if there are many quotes with them, so you can be sure of all of their uses.

A linguist has to go on what he has, not what is speculated. When reading Tanakh, there are many words that are used only once. The lexicographer then has to go to all the clues he can find—what is the meaning of the root from which the word is derived, what are the derivation patterns in Hebrew, how is the word used in the sentence, sometimes a cognate language can give a clue but cognate languages must be treated carefully because the meaning in a cognate language can actually be opposite to how it is used in Tanakh, and sometimes just admit that we don’t know what was the word’s meaning during Biblical times.

A person could argue that Isaiah 7:14 is an example of almah used for a non-virgin because she is pregnant at the time.

How is that a sign, because non-virgins get pregnant all the time? How is that special?

There are no other examples of this rarely used word used this way, so does that mean this can't be the one and only example of the word used this way?

Speculation.

Somehow, people want at least two examples of every use of every word, but that is not realistic, if you are analyzing a bunch of ancient books. That would be like reading a long book written in English and using that book to understand all of the possible meanings of every English word, as if every word was used in all of it's possible meanings in that book more than once. I have never studied linguistics, but I would not decide word meanings with so few examples of the words used different ways.

That’s you, and you can do that for English.

Every time you speculate, you admit that you don’t have evidence.

Karl W. Randolph.

[Jason Hare]

Nonsense. אִישׁ is just as likely to be used of a woman’s husband long after marriage as is בַּ֫עַל. I know that you know this since you’ve used אִישׁ to translate “husband” in our translation exercises (as you did here and here). The word בַּ֫עַל refers to the one who owns or possesses something. Once the marriage custom has been performed, when the dowry has been paid, when the girl has transferred from being the property of her father to being that of her husband (whether they have performed the consummation or not), she is his property legally, and he is her בַּ֫עַל, “owner” of sorts. This may not be how we see it today, but it’s the general sentiment of those times.

[Kenneth Greifer]

Joel 1:8 could also just say the woman is mourning the husband who she was engaged to in a poetic way. Even if she was not technically his wife, poetically it could be described that way. Joel 2:25 calls the locusts and other bugs that ate their crops God's army. They aren't really an army.

[kwrandolph]

Nonsense. אִישׁ is just as likely to be used of a woman’s husband long after marriage as is בַּ֫עַל. I know that you know this since you’ve used אִישׁ to translate “husband” in our translation exercises (as you did here and here). The word בַּ֫עַל refers to the one who owns or possesses something. Once the marriage custom has been performed, when the dowry has been paid, when the girl has transferred from being the property of her father to being that of her husband (whether they have performed the consummation or not), she is his property legally, and he is her בַּ֫עַל, “owner” of sorts. This may not be how we see it today, but it’s the general sentiment of those times.

Do you have any evidence from Tanakh for this practice? Or is your only evidence extra-Biblical? Where in Tanakh does the woman say “my master” outside of having moved into the man’s house (or tent) and consummated the marriage? The same holds true for the man?

After all, even in English, as well as several other languages, it’s legitimate for a woman to say “my man” in reference to her husband, and a man “my woman” for his wife, but where those languages have a separate word for “husband” and “wife”, those apply only after the marriage. Where in Tanakh do we find בעל and בעולה used within the marriage context outside of actually living together having consummated the marriage?

Karl W. Randolph.

[Kenneth Greifer]

Karl,
If you have two words for husband in Biblical Hebrew, "eesh" and בעל, and you have two words for wife, "eeshah" and בעלה, you can't say that the word "eeshah" does not mean wife for an engaged woman. For example, in Deuteronomy 22:23-24, an engaged virgin is called "the neighbor's woman" or "wife." You can't say she must be called בעלה. You make up rules that languages must follow, instead of letting the language make the rules.

You want people to find words in the Hebrew Bible to prove every possible meaning, but what if the Bible does not have examples beyond that one example? How many examples do you need?

[Jason Hare]

Nonsense. אִישׁ is just as likely to be used of a woman’s husband long after marriage as is בַּ֫עַל. I know that you know this since you’ve used אִישׁ to translate “husband” in our translation exercises (as you did here and here). The word בַּ֫עַל refers to the one who owns or possesses something. Once the marriage custom has been performed, when the dowry has been paid, when the girl has transferred from being the property of her father to being that of her husband (whether they have performed the consummation or not), she is his property legally, and he is her בַּ֫עַל, “owner” of sorts. This may not be how we see it today, but it’s the general sentiment of those times.

Do you have any evidence from Tanakh for this practice? Or is your only evidence extra-Biblical? Where in Tanakh does the woman say “my master” outside of having moved into the man’s house (or tent) and consummated the marriage? The same holds true for the man?

Are you asking for evidence of people using the term בַּ֫עַל when the man and wife have not yet come together sexually? How about Mary and Joseph, who had married without having consummation, and they were still called man and wife in the NT.

Matthew 1:24–25
(NIV) When Joseph woke up, he did what the angel of the Lord had commanded him and took Mary home as his wife. But he did not consummate their marriage until she gave birth to a son. And he gave him the name Jesus.
(SBLGNT) ἐγερθεὶς δὲ ὁ Ἰωσὴφ ἀπὸ τοῦ ὕπνου ἐποίησεν ὡς προσέταξεν αὐτῷ ὁ ἄγγελος κυρίου καὶ παρέλαβεν τὴν γυναῖκα αὐτοῦ· καὶ οὐκ ἐγίνωσκεν αὐτὴν ἕως οὗ ἔτεκεν υἱόν· καὶ ἐκάλεσεν τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ Ἰησοῦν.
(Delitzsch) וַיִּיקַץ יוֹסֵף מִשְׁנָתוֹ וַיַּ֫עַשׂ כַּאֲשֶׁר צִוָּ֫הוּ מַלְאַךְ יְהוָֹה וַיֶּאֱסֹף אֶת־אִשְׁתּוֹ אֶל בֵּיתוֹ׃ וְלֹא יְדָעָהּ עַד כִּי־יָֽלְדָה בֵּן (אֶת־בְּכוֹרָהּ) וַיִּקְרָא אֶת־שְׁמוֹ יֵשׁוּעַ׃

Nothing prevents a couple from becoming husband and wife without yet having consummated their marriage. According to Jewish tradition, a marriage may be sealed in three ways: (1) money [כֶּ֫סֶף]‎, (2) contract [שְׁטָר]‎, and (3) sexual consummation [בִּיאָה].

After all, even in English, as well as several other languages, it’s legitimate for a woman to say “my man” in reference to her husband, and a man “my woman” for his wife, but where those languages have a separate word for “husband” and “wife”, those apply only after the marriage. Where in Tanakh do we find בעל and בעולה used within the marriage context outside of actually living together having consummated the marriage?

Do you really contend that people say “my man” and “my woman” only after marriage? That contradicts my real-life experience having grown up in Missouri, where loads of people are “couples” that live together, are not legally married, and freely use these terms in reference to one another.

[Kenneth Greifer]

Eesha is wife around 280 times and beulah (?) is wife 5 to 10 times. I am not sure about these numbers. Eesh is husband around 70 times, and baal is husband around 10-15 times. You can't expect to find these words used in every possible meaning.

[Kenneth Greifer]

Eesha is wife around 280 times and beulah (?) is wife 5 to 10 times. I am not sure about these numbers. Eesh is husband around 70 times, and baal is husband around 10-15 times. You can't expect to find these words used in every possible meaning.

Actually, there are 14 quotes with baal as husband and 3 quotes with beulah as wife that I could find. That is not a lot compared to eesh husband and eesha wife.

[Kenneth Greifer]

Eesha is wife around 280 times and beulah (?) is wife 5 to 10 times. I am not sure about these numbers. Eesh is husband around 70 times, and baal is husband around 10-15 times. You can't expect to find these words used in every possible meaning.

Actually, there are 14 quotes with baal as husband and 3 quotes with beulah as wife that I could find. That is not a lot compared to eesh husband and eesha wife.

I just noticed that there are only 5 or 6 quotes in the Hebrew Bible about betrothed (engaged) women, so there isn't a lot of evidence about what words should be used.

I think eesha is used as wife around 400 times, not 280 times.

[Jason Hare]

I just noticed that there are only 5 or 6 quotes in the Hebrew Bible about betrothed (engaged) women, so there isn't a lot of evidence about what words should be used.

It really is a small data set.