Hermann L. Strack and Paul Billerbeck on Matthew 1:11

  

1:11: From Josiah came Jeconiah and his brothers.

 

1. Josiah was perhaps, in a similar manner to Jehoshaphat and Hezekiah, expected as the Messiah from the world to come: “But he (Josiah) will receive a lasting reward, and he will be honored with the Mighty One beyond many (others) during the final time. For on his account and on account of those who are like him, the honorable glories were created and prepared, about which you were told in advance” (2 Bar. 66:6–7).

2. Jehoiakim is omitted between Josiah and Jeconiah (cf. 1 Chr 3:15–16).

3. Brothers of Jeconiah are not mentioned in the Old Testament; ἀδελφοί like אחים should therefore be understood in the broader sense as relatives. The rule of Jeconiah’s uncle (1 Chr 3:15) was interrupted by Jeconiah, as if he belonged to their generation (2 Kgs 23–24); 2 Chr 36:10 calls Zedekiah, the uncle of Jeconiah, his brother (אח).

 

Regarding this older generation, the Talmud makes the following observation. After stating that when the succession to the throne was disputed, a king who was the son of a king would be anointed with holy anointing oil, the Talmud also refers to Jehoahaz, who was anointed (2 Kgs 23:30), because his brother Jehoiakim (cf. 2 Kgs 23:35–36) was older than he was. Jerusalem Talmud Soṭah 8.3 (22C.39) continues as follows: R. Yohanan († 279) has said, “Yohanan (2 Chr 3:15) and Jehoahaz (2 Kgs 23:30) are identical. But it is written (cf. 2 Chr 3:15), ‘The firstborn Yohanan!’ (If he were identical with Jehoahaz, he could not be called the firstborn, because he is two years younger than the second born Jehoiakim according to 2 Kgs 23:31, 36). This text wants to say, ‘The firstborn according to rule (not according to birth).’ ” R. Yohanan has said, “Shallum and Zedekiah (1 Chr 3:15) are identical. But it is written, ‘The third Zedekiah, the fourth Shallum!’ (cf. 1 Chr 3:15). This means that Zedekiah was third according to birth and the fourth according to rule (Jehoahaz ruled first [2 Kgs 23:30], then Jehoiakim [2 Kgs 23:36], followed by Jeconiah = Jehoiachin [2 Kgs 24:6] and then Zedekiah = Mattaniah, Jeconiah’s uncle [2 Kgs 24:17–18]). He was called Zedekiah because he recognized that the divine punishment that befell him was just (cf. Ezek 17:13–24; 2 Chr 36:13). Shallum was his name because in his days the rule of the house of David was finished (= the end of שלם, a wordplay with שלום). But his real name was neither Shallum nor Zedekiah, but Mattaniah (2 Kgs 24:17).” For parallel passages, see y. Šeqal. 6.1 (49D.5); b. Hor. 11B; b. Ker. 77B (other issues in 5B). In the Babylonian Talmud the last movement, which in the Jerusalem Talmud is part of R. Yohanan’s speech, is explained by means of a baraita as follows: Shallum and Zedekiah are identical. Why is his name Shallum? Because he was perfect in his works. Another explanation is as follows: His name is Shallum, because the rule of the house of David was completed since his days. And what was his name? Mattaniah was his name (2 Kgs 24:17): “And he made Mattaniah, his uncle, king in his stead, and changed his name to Zedekiah,” for he said to him, “Yahweh will bring a just judgment on you if you are angry with me’ ” (2 Kgs 25:7; 2 Chr 36:13). (Hermann L. Strack and Paul Billerbeck, A Commentary on the New Testament from the Talmud and Midrash, ed. Jacob N. Cerone, 4 vols. [trans. Andrew Bowden and Joseph Longarino; Bellingham, Wash.: Lexham Press, 2022], 1:36-37)

 

Donald Slager on 1 Kings 9:26 and the Red vs. Reed Sea Debate

  

Red Sea is the traditional rendering of the Hebrew name here. Some modern translations give the alternate translation “Sea of Reeds” in a footnote (nrsv, reb), while others have “Sea of Reeds” in the text (njpsv, frcl, pv). gnt says “Gulf of Aqaba” and gives the following Word List entry for Red Sea: “Evidently referred originally to (1) a series of lakes and marshes between the head of the Gulf of Suez and the Mediterranean, the region generally regarded as the site of the events described in Exodus 13, and was also used to designate (2) the Gulf of Suez, (3) the Gulf of Aqaba.” Whether translators decide to say “Red Sea,” “Sea of Reeds” or “Gulf of Aqaba,” a glossary explanation will be essential. (Donald Slager, A Handbook on 1 & 2 Kings, 2 vols. [United Bible Societies’ Handbooks; New York: United Bible Societies, 2008], 1:322-23)

 

Mordechai Cogan on 1 Kings 9:26

  

which is near Eloth on the shore of the Red Sea. Hebrew ʾet, with the meaning “near”; cf. 2 Kgs 9:27; Judg 3:19; 4:11.

 

Eloth. Otherwise, Elath; cf. 2 Kgs 16:6. It is generally agreed that the Iron Age ruins, if any survived the harsh conditions of desert flooding, may lie buried beneath the modern city of Aqabah.

 

Red Sea. Literally, “the Sea of Reeds” (Heb yam sûp); also Num 21:4, not to be confused with the Sea of Reeds in the Exodus account, Exod 13:18; 14:2, which was not far from Goshen in the area of the Nile Delta. (Mordechai Cogan, 1 Kings: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary [AYB 10; New Haven: Yale University Press, 2008], 306)

 

Robert Alter on the "Reed" vs. "Red" Sea Issue

 Exo 13:18:

 

the Sea of Reeds. This is not the Red Sea, as older translations have it, but most likely a marshland in the northeastern part of Egypt. (Marshes might provide some realistic kernel for the tale of a waterway that is at one moment passable and in the next flooded.) But it must be conceded that elsewhere yam suf refers to the Red Sea, and some scholars have recently argued that the story means to heighten the miraculous character of the event through the parting of a real sea. Even if the setting is a marsh, the event is reported in strongly supernatural terms. (Robert Alter, The Hebrew Bible, 3 vols. [New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2019], 1:268, emphasis in bold added)

 

 

Translation of 1 Kgs 9:26:

 

And a fleet did Solomon make in Ezion-Geber, which is by Eloth on the shore of the Red Sea in the land of Edom. (Robert Alter, The Hebrew Bible, 3 vols. [New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2019], 2:474, emphasis added)

 

Further Reading:

M.H. Woudstra on "Red Sea" as a Correct Translation of yām sûp

Michael D. Oblath on the Sea of Reeds (Yam Sûp) being on the Coast of Elath (cf. 1 Kings 9:26)

Robert J. Alter on “Remembrance” (Hebrew: זכר; LXX: μνημόσυνον) in Exodus 13:3, 9

 Exo 13:3:

 

Remember this day. The Hebrew Zakhar suggests both the cognitive act of remembrance and the ritual act of commemoration. This entire projection into the future in the promised land of the Passover observance clearly duplicates some of the material in 12:14-28, though it stresses even more centrally the function of memory/commemoration. (Robert Alter, The Hebrew Bible, 3 vols. [New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2019], 1:265)

 

 

Exo 13:9:

 

a sign for you on your hand and a remembrance between your eyes. The concrete reference of these famous words remains in doubt. The original intention could conceivably be metaphorical: the story of the Exodus is to be forever present on the hand (or arm), the idiomatic agent of power and action, and between the eyes, the place of perception and observation. Here the key word for our passage, “remembrance” (zikaron), is used for what should be between the eyes. In verse 16 the term used is totafot, “circlets” or “frontlets,” a word of obscure origin and not entirely certain meaning: many imagine it as a headband, although a headband would be worn above, not between, the eyes, whereas there are Egyptian ornaments, as some scholars have noted, that were worn between the eyes. Subsequent Jewish tradition construed this phrase to enjoin the wearing of small leather boxes containing scriptural passages written on parchment (tefillin, conventionally translated as “phylacteries”). (Robert Alter, The Hebrew Bible, 3 vols. [New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2019], 1:266)