Hebrew Thought Compared with Greek has 38 ratings and 4 reviews. Jared said: Another half-completed book. I look forward to coming back to it someday. It. The clue to the impact made by this volume of the Norwegian Thorleif Boman is the number of editions, — three German and two Japanese, which have. Thorleif Boman. Hebrew Thought Compared with Greek. Trans. Jules L. Moreau. New York: Norton, Thorleif Boman’s Hebrew Thought.
|Published (Last):||27 May 2014|
|PDF File Size:||1.30 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||4.48 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Hebrew Thought Compared with Greek. Lots of thoughts were running through my mind after reading it. This is odd in a way—the analysis of real oral tradition was done thoroughly beginning in the s with Milman Parry and his student Albert Lord.
It seems that no theologians know about this, so they keep passing bomxn bad information to the next generation. Basically, his book is saying that Hebrew thought is dynamic, most words are rooted thoeleif verbs, and there is always of sense of becoming and of history having scope. He shows that Hebrew thought and language is more time-oriented and active.
Greek thought, which is more typical of the West, is more static and spatial. Even the way Greeks viewed history—more analytically and less purposefully—is different. Understanding both streams of thought helps us understand both Testaments of the Bible, as well as something of our own language and cultural perspective.
In Hebrew even the verb to behayahis dynamic. It has a passive voice! Do any Indo-European languages have a passive voice for to be?
Russian does the same thing. The significance of the verb to be is lost in Modern English, but in Old English pre there were actually two verbs to be: Wesan did not even have a past participle. Interestingly, too, in Old English become was more active, really be in the old sense plus come and is usually translated come or is coming when rendered in Modern English.
Hebrew descriptions are active. There are no real physical descriptions in the Old Testament and few in the New except for some minor details: Description had to do with motivation and action.
Hebrew Thought Compared with Greek by Thorleif Boman
Those are not physical descriptions, Boman tells us, but rather descriptions of actions and moral qualities. The hair suggests not so much physical beauty, but the actions and care given by a shepherdess.
The tower suggests moral strength and purity. The Hebrew view of history and character is personal and moral.
Review – Hebrew Thought Compared with Greek
Greek descriptions are more specific and physical, perceived with all the senses. The Greek sense of time also is secondary to the perception of space. Space is more important than time.
It is the opposite from the Hebrew perspective. Time to the Greek is noted by movements.
Hebrew Thought Compared with Greek
Time is linear, sometimes cyclic, but man is almost detached from it. The Greek sense sees man detached from the gods and therefore fatalistically detached from history. hebrww
Time to the Hebrew is based on rhythmic patterns, it is neither linear nor cyclic. Time is historical, and man cimpared part of it, and God is behind it. God is not only transcendent and immanent, but Boman calls Him transparent, revealing Himself through who He is by His deeds. The key deed, of course, in the Hebrew Scriptures is the Exodus.
Hebrew Thought Compared with Greek | W. W. Norton & Company
Boman summarizes simply by saying in effect, Hebrew emphasizes psychology more, while Greek is more logical and visual. Bradford compared the Mayflower crossing to the Exodus.
After all, our ancestors and founders were some of those Pilgrims and saints. Your email address will not be published. This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your grewk data is processed. Leave a Reply Cancel reply Your email address will not be published.
Questions, Comments, and Observations on the English Language.