Skip to main content
Biblical Hermeneutics

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

Required fields*

10
  • 2
    This question is awfully similar to another. Either way, this answer explains that "μονογενής" is a euphemism for "sole heir": An Answer to: What are the translations of the Greek word μονογενής in Ancient Versions?Is it “only” or “only-begotten”? Commented Jul 14, 2017 at 5:26
  • @elikakohen - What about the Hebrew word in Gen 22:2? Does it have exactly the same usage as μονογενὴς in Greek? Commented Jul 14, 2017 at 7:53
  • 1
    Brilliant - It is because of the contradiction in Hebrew, (and limited use), that indicates that this is not literal. The question then is, "if it is not literal, then what does the metaphor/euphemism actually mean?" So, at that point you have to chase down the most ancient translations, in Greek, (the Septuagint), and Aramaic, (Targum Onkelos especially, Targum Jonathan, etc), and even other Semitic or Greek literature. Further - he might have legally disowned his other son, by exiling him, (though there does not seem support for this - drawing a blank for another example in corpus). Commented Jul 14, 2017 at 18:06
  • 1
    Brilliant - There are many places where it is valid to infer metaphorical use, (or exaggeration, or hyperbole), if / when an impossibility is noted, or a contradiction appears within the same exact context. Genesis 1 is the most famous example of this - where the "sun wasn't even set as a sign for days" until the fourth day - leading to the conclusion that the first 3 days - at the very least - must have been reckoned metaphorically, (and most probably the others). Commented Jul 14, 2017 at 18:08
  • @elikakohen - "leading to the conclusion that the first 3 days - at the very least - must have been reckoned metaphorically" - Why do you completely rule out the possibility of 3 days being referred to as periods of time, each one of which is equal exactly to any of the following days? After all, God does not need a sign for days to measure out periods of time. (Thanks for other explanations). Commented Jul 14, 2017 at 18:15