The Bible NETWork ~ Impacting the World for Christ one post at a time!

The translation note in the NET Bible for Prov 30:28 reads:



However, in looking up the actual Targum for Prov 30:28, the Syriac word used, אקמת/’qmt, actually means lizard, not spider.

I wrote about this recently on This Lamp in a post titled "Lizards & Spiders & Targums, Oh My!" (see http://tinyurl.com/6mkvmh).

In discussions, it seems evident that the KJV translators did not rely on the Targum (which again, does in fact read "lizard") but were probably following the comments of medieval rabbi Rashi (or following Luther who followed Rashi in his translation).

Thus, while the NET Bible translation renders the verse itself accurately, it would seem that this might be an error in the actual accompanying note.

Any thoughts?

I suggest that you create a new ticket over at the NeXt bible site. Look up the verse in question, scroll to the bottom and click the "to report a problem/suggestion" link. If you would like to receive updates then make sure you put your email address in the username field on the ticket.

_________________
Jennifer Dent
Site Administrator

Forum Code of Conduct
The Bible NETWork Doctrinal Statement
The Net Bible Learning Environment
The Administrators Desk Blog

Jenn's suggestion is a good one, however, the best place to make a comment on the NET Bible translation or notes is here:

http://www.bible.org/comments/

_________________
Todd Lingren
Publishing Director

I'm not a big Targum expert but there is something you should know about them, there are two major "flavors" of Targum. And there is an official Targum for the books of Moses and for the Prophets, but there isn't an official one for the Writings which would of course cover Proverbs.

So I think the confusion here would arise in just which Targum source one uses for the Passage.

Your software would appear to use one that says lizard, but I think it's fairly evident from how the Jews treat the passage and the statement in the NET footnote that there is support for spider in the Targum.

So I think it's most likely a question of which Targum text one is using for the Writings. I suspect there is a difference between the Babylonian and Western texts. Just a guess, I don't have access to anything to check that.

_________________
Marv
Forum Code of Conduct
The Bible NETWork Doctrinal Statement
The NeXt Bible Learning Environment
The Bible NETwork Blogs

BeneSHOP: Help support Bible.org at no additional cost to you when you shop!

Yes, although I'm no expert either, I'm familiar with the facts you describe. The Targum modules in Accordance contain the Targums Onkelos, Jonathan, and the Writings; Targums Neofiti and Esther Sheni; Targum Pseudo-Jonathan; Targums of Cairo Geniza; and the fragment Targums.

And while it's true that there was not an official Targum for the Ketuvim/Writings, the text for these books included with the Targums comes from the Syriac text of the Peshitta from what I understand. As far as I know there are not two separate Targum versions for the Ketuvim/Writings as there are for the Torah.



Actually, I do not think this is fairly evident at all. In fact, as my access to the Targums seems to be fairly complete, as previously stated, I cannot find any support whatsoever for spider in any of the Targums.

As for how the Jews treat the passage, I feel it's fairly significant that lizard is used even in the JPS translation.

There may simply be another explanation, but (1) it's doubtful that the KJV translators could access the Targums (see the comments from my post at This Lamp) in order to read "spider" even if it was there (and I've yet to see any evidence that it is); and (2) it seems to be well established that the medieval rabbi Rashi (who said it was a spider) was widely read and respected by the preparers of local translations of the Old Testament.

Keep in mind that the NET Bible translation has it right. I simply come to the conclusion that the translational note is mistaken. And I say this as someone who supports the NET BIble. I just want the notes to be correct, too.

I may very well be wrong, but NO evidence has yet been brought forth to indicate otherwise.

Did they change the JPS?

Pro 30:28 JPS
(28) The spider thou canst take with the hands, yet is she in kings' palaces.

If not the Targums, what is the source of the spider? I don't know.

_________________
Marv
Forum Code of Conduct
The Bible NETWork Doctrinal Statement
The NeXt Bible Learning Environment
The Bible NETwork Blogs

BeneSHOP: Help support Bible.org at no additional cost to you when you shop!

You're quoting the older edition of the JPS, not the 1985 edition which reads:

“You can catch the lizard in your hand, Yet it is found in royal palaces.” (Prov 30:28, JPS)



Well, I believe that your question has plainly been answered. The source is not the Targums, but rather medieval rabbi Rashi. For more information about him see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rashi.

rmansfield
i entered your comment into the comments data base http://www.bible.org/comments/index.php
this is the formal place to enter comments into the data base
the easy way to get to in is
when u are in the http://www.nextbible.org site looking at the chapter in question you will find in the discovery box a link to the comments database click on Submit/read "editor comments".
http://www.bible.org/comments/comment_list.php and select the chapter and verse you want to comment on
this will go to the translators/editors for action when they get to reviewing the book

if you to to the comments db and look up your verse you will see your data and others that have submitted
to see more dont put in the verse just the book and chapter

thanks for taking the time to comment
david

_________________
David Austin (forum founder & Exec Director of bible.org): helping Christians mature in the Lord) 1 Cor 15:58
checkout the new set of study tools http://NetBible.org all free

Hold the presses.

http://www.chabad.org/library/article_c ... ter-30.htm

Reads:

It is the Judaica Press Complete Tanach.
http://www.chabad.org/library/article_c ... -Rashi.htm

_________________
Marv
Forum Code of Conduct
The Bible NETWork Doctrinal Statement
The NeXt Bible Learning Environment
The Bible NETwork Blogs

BeneSHOP: Help support Bible.org at no additional cost to you when you shop!

David, thanks for posting the comment for me. I was planning to do so, but I wanted to flesh this issue out a bit first.

Marv, thanks for confirming that the source is Rashi and (probably) not the Targums.

David, I tried to look at the comments, but I get a message saying there are no comments on that verse. Should I go ahead and leave my comment?

Also, I would suggest that the second sentence of the note is incomplete as well. It says "But almost all modern English versions and commentators, following the Greek and the Latin versions, have 'lizard.'"

But actually, they aren't just following the LXX and Vulgate; more importantly, they're following the Hebrew text itself that says שׂממית/semamit ("lizard").

I posted a comment myself, but there doesn't seem to be any confirmation or way to see if it went through. Any suggestions?

I'm not sure why but David's comment posted under 30:29 but clearly makes reference to 30:28. If when you are searching, you just enter the chapter, you will get all the comments in the database. Your's doesn't currently show, but give it a day and see. Maybe it takes awhile for the database to update.

_________________
Marv
Forum Code of Conduct
The Bible NETWork Doctrinal Statement
The NeXt Bible Learning Environment
The Bible NETwork Blogs

BeneSHOP: Help support Bible.org at no additional cost to you when you shop!