by _Atlas 4 Replies latest watchtower bible
Question about Hebrew:
Serendipity led me towards Lamentations 3:38
The NWT renders this passage as follows:
’38 From the mouth of the most high bad things and what is good do not go forth.’
Most others translations render this as what it seems like a rhetoric question… along with verse 37 & 39…
Since this alters the understanding of the passage, When does the use of question marks is warranted in Hebrew?
I would hazard a guess and say it's at the discretion of the translator. Vs 33 in the NJB says "for it is not for his own pleasure that he torments and grieves the human race." That's fine and dandy but I can't see giving reverance to a god like that if he's capable of killing 186,000 Assyrian warmen in one night so his people can get away.
Remember the text in Isaiah I believe that attributes both good and evil to Yahweh. Then there is this threat:
***
Rbi8 Joshua 23:15 ***And it must occur that, just as all the good word that Jehovah YOUR God has spoken to YOU has come upon YOU, so Jehovah will bring upon YOU all the evil word until he has annihilated YOU from off this good ground that Jehovah YOUR God has given YOU
Watchtowerism has Jehovah holding all the cards. he is the Universal Sovereign and there is no need for rhetorical questions. I guess that's the best I can come up with right now. Leolaia?
It is formally possible to translate both ways: there are no question marks in ancient Hebrew. V. 37 and 39 have to be questions as they start with interrogative pronouns (respectively mi, "who?" and mah, "what?"). This is not the case of v. 38, so only the meaning and context can tell. I think a rhetorical question makes better sense in continuation of the rhetorical question in v. 37:
Who can command and have it done, if the Lord has not ordained it? (implied answer: no one, whatever happens God has decided)
Is it not from the mouth of the Most High that good and bad come? (implied answer: yes it is)
Why should any who draw breath complain about the punishment of their sins?
Let it be added that the thought implied by the rhetorical question is by no means isolated: cf. Isaiah 45:7; Job 2:10; Ecclesiastes 7:14 for instance.
Aside from the dreadful phrasing of the NWT version, it also problematically asserts that "good things" do not go forth from Jehovah as well. It is actually worse....BOTH "bad things" and "what is good" do not proceed from him, so in effect NOTHING proceeds from him. Instead, the context mentions actual examples of "bad things" that Jehovah has caused: Jehovah has "torn down the fortified places" (2:2), devours like a flame all those in Jacob (2:3), "become like an enemy" (2:5), "treats his booth violently" (2:6), "cast off his altar" (2:7), "causes the rampart and wall to go mourning" (2:8), "done what he had in mind" (2:17), "causes the enemy to rejoice" (2:17), "killed in the day of your anger" (2:21), "slaughtered without compassion" (2:21), "worn away my skin and broken my bones" (3:4), "hampers my prayer" (3:8), "is like a bear lying in wait" (3:10), "shot arrows into my kidneys" (3:13), "saturated me with wormwood" (3:15), etc. Then the author meditates on God's kindness and forgiveness and lists examples of "good things" that Jehovah brings: "acts of loving-kindness" (3:22), "mercies" (3:22), "good to the one hoping in him" (3:25), "good to the one waiting silently" (3:26), "not keep casting off forever" (3:21), "abundance of his loving-kindness" (3:32), "not approved subverting a man's cause" (3:36), etc. So it is clear in the overall context that the author means that Jehovah brings both "good" and "bad" things, or calamities.
The immediately preceding verse is also crucial: "Who is able to say ('mr) a thing, and have it come to pass, if it has not been commanded (tswh) by the Lord?" (3:37). The next verse then mentions both bad and good things going forth from "the mouth (mpy) of the Most High". The NWT rendering makes no sense in light of the preceding verse: v. 37 claims rhetorically that the only things that "come to pass" are those commanded by Jehovah, and v. 38 would then contradict this by saying that in fact good and bad things DO NOT proceed as utterances from his mouth. Instead, v. 38 would continue the thought in v. 37, that good and bad things DO proceed as utterances from his mouth, because things that "come to pass" have been "commanded by the Lord". So, this shows the importance of context!
Finally, there is the symmetry in that all three of the verses under Mem (in the acrostic) would posit rhetorical questions on the same theme.
On edit: See also Amos 3:6 which is quite appropriate to the theme of Lamentations (Jerusalem's destruction): "Does disaster befall a city, unless Yahweh has done it?"
it also problematically asserts that "good things" do not go forth from Jehovah as well. It is actually worse....BOTH "bad things" and "what is good" do not proceed from him, so in effect NOTHING proceeds from him.
To be fair, I don't think it is the intent of the NWT phrasing (dreadful as it is):
From the mouth of the Most High bad things and what is good do not go forth
What they mean, I feel, is "God cannot do both good and bad" => "he does either good or bad" => "he does only good" => "the apparent bad is a deserved (= good) punishment" (cf. v. 38). The NWT cross-reference is James 3:11 (a rhetorical question opposed to the better rendering of Lamentations 3:37).
