The following is taken from:
Jonathan D. H. Norton, Contours in the Text: Textual Variation in the Writings of Paul, Josephus and the Yaḥad (Library of New Testament Studies 430; London: T & T Clark, 2011), 88-91, emphasis in bold added
The exegetical and textual
similarities between the respective reproductions of Amos 9.11 in 4Q174 and in
CDA 7.16 (והקימותי את סוכת דוד הנפלת; compare ανοικοδομησω of
Acts 15.16; contrast אׇקִים of 𝔐, αναστησοω of OG)
support the antiquity of the text of CDA.
Composite translation:
. . . as He said: (Amos 5:26-27) I shall exile
Sakkuth/Sikkuth, your king, and Kaiwan, your images, from my tent (to) Damascus.
The books of Torah: these are the sukkath of the king, about whom He
said: (Amos 9.11) I will establish that tottering sukkath of David. The king
he is the assembly. And the bases of the images: these are the books of the
prophets whose words Israel despised. . . .
The consonantal text cited in CDA 7.14 סכות matches 𝔐’s מַהָלְאָה. The citation in CDA modifies the traditional Hמַהָלְאָה, ‘from beyond’, to אהל (‘tent’), matching OG’s σκηνη for סִכּוּת. The interpretation that follows in D refers to the ‘tabernacle of the king’ (סוכת כמלך). This citation and interpretation exhibit an exegetical use of textual plurality.
In Amos 5.26𝔐 סכות
(סִכּוּת) and כוין (כִּיוּן) are proper names for foreign Gods. This is clear
from the context of the passage: iIkkuth and Kaiwan are
synonymous with ‘your images’; the final cause of v. 26 reads אֲשֶׁ֥ר עֲשִׂיתֶ֖ם
לָכֶֽם (‘that you made for yourselves’). Although both the OG and CD 7 interpret
the proper name Sikkuth in terms of the construct form סֻכׇּה(that is, סֻכֵּן),
neither identifies the proper name as the noun ‘tabernacle’. First of all, the
respective plene forms of the proper name and construct noun (סכות and סוכת)
are morphologically distinct and cannot be confused. This is evident in CDA
7.14-15 and will have been the case in the Hebrew source presupposed by God. Similarly,
CDA 7.15 cites כוין and then interprets it as the plural of כֵּן (masculine
noun, ‘base’ or ‘pedestal’) in CDA 7.17 (= 4Q266 3iii 18). While the
OG exegetically renders the proper name סכות with σκηνη, by rendering מלככם (‘of your king’)
with Μολοχ, the translator
shows that the verse is referring to the proper name of a God.
Amos 5.26-27 contains a
polemic against Babylonian deities. In 𝔐 the
names סכות and סוכת are both pointed as in שִׁקּוּץ (‘abomination’). Such a
polemical vocalization was apparently current in the late Hellenistic period—Daniel
similarly uses שִׁקּוּץ polemically against Zeus Olympus. OG and CD are both
aware that foreign gods are the prophet’s subject in these verses.
CD and OG contains a common
interpretation of סכות as סוכת. OG achieves a double reading of the semantic unit
סכות by rendering σκηνη
directly,
while maintaining a proper name for a foreign deity. This double reading
configures two sense contours from the single semantic unit. CD configures the
same two sense contours, but manipulates the passage differently. CD maintains סכות
in the citation (introducing the term סוכת, ‘tabernacle of’, in the following
interpretation as a means of linking Amos 5.26 with 9.11), but simultaneously introduces
אהל (‘tent’) by
rearranging the letters of הלאה (‘beyond)’ of Amos 5.27. The exegete can
thereby interpret at סכות as ‘my (God’s) tent’ in line with the positive
interpretation of other parts of the prophecy (The Torah, the Royal Messiah,
the Doresh ha-Torah and the Books of the Prophets) while opening the way
to introduce Amos 9.11 shortly afterwards.
Further Reading:
To Support this Blog:
Email for Amazon Gift card: ScripturalMormonism@gmail.com
