Puzzled why the ESV & NASB translators , translate the text "contribution" Darby and KJV use heave offerings , as do most others. Loses the idea of Godward offering, the idea of vertical worship.
The NET bible has this commentary
tn The “offering” (תְּרוּמָה, tÿrumah) is perhaps better understood as a contribution since it was a freewill offering. There is some question about the etymology of the word. The traditional meaning of “heave-offering” derives from the idea of “elevation,” a root meaning “to be high” lying behind the word. B. Jacob says it is something sorted out of a mass of material and designated for a higher purpose (Exodus, 765). S. R. Driver (Exodus, 263) corrects the idea of “heave-offering” by relating the root to the Hiphil form of that root, herim, “to lift” or “take off.” He suggests the noun means “what is taken off” from a larger mass and so designated for sacred purposes. The LXX has “something taken off.”
<>
Or trumah (Deut 12:11) {ter-oo-maw'}; from ruwm; a present (as offered up), especially in sacrifice or as tribute -- gift, heave offering ((shoulder)), oblation, offered(-ing).
see HEBREW ruwm
http://strongsnumbers.com/hebrew/8641.htm
biblos.com
2 comments:
Interesting post, Don. Just based on what you've quoted here, (no research of my own) this seems like an interesting case of how to determine the meaning of a word. There is a whole morass of exegetical fallacies that are based on etymology.
The bottom line is, what did the writer mean when he used that word. If he meant that it was a freewill contribution that was seperated off from the larger whole, then that's what the passage means. If he didn't mean to refer to the lifting of the offering heavenward, then it doesn't mean that, even if at some time in the history of that word it could be applied to heaving something heavenward. The author's intent, and the common usage at the time of writing determine the meaning.
"Huperetes" for instance, has nothing to do with "under rower" - by the time Luke used it in Acts it meant "servant" or "serve." So David "served" in his generation, he didn't "under row." That kind of exegesis makes for cute sermon points, but doesn't actually get at the meaning of the passage.
John B.
Appreciate your input. i think part of the question for me is what is the meaning @ the time of writing and is the context something that is discriptive of the act that the priest was doing, as well as the free will offering, or is that Vertical thought implied from that idea. Wrestling with this @ this time. My education, leaves me without other than , "lay" standard reference materials.
Post a Comment