Biblical Hebrew

The point of this article is not when we bring the Omer, but rather can we use Joshua 5 to argue for a date.  However, the discussion of when we start counting is unavoidable.  I will also note before we start that there are different opinions between scholars on how to treat this subject, and the point here is to give another point of view without offending anyone or creating animosity.

The word משיח-Mashiach-Messiah is derived from the root משח which is mostly associated with the idea of placing oil on something or someone.  The act of anointing was performed as an act of dedication of a person or an item to a service (mostly to God).  In this article, I will be looking into the background of this act, and the meaning of the title Mashiach.

One of the basic stipulations of any covenant in the world is the principle of trust and loyalty between the two or more parties.  Many books and papers have been written on the subject of covenants and treaties, but in this short paper I will examine one of the most important words used in covenant language–Love. 

One of the common arguments in Documentary Hypothesis (DH) is that the Torah is built from many documents (E, J, JE, P, H and D) which were written by different authors, and were placed together by someone later in time to create the whole Torah we have today.  This division has driven most of the Biblical Studies world, and is taught in many schools with some to little criticism.  However, new documentation from the Ancient Near East (ANE) has shown that at least some of the assumptions of the system are incorrect, and in some cases detached from historical discourse.

The verb שלח is most commonly used to indicate the idea of sending away.  Such is the case of Parashat Beshalch where Pharaoh sends away the Israelites from Egypt.  This is also the common use when someone sends a message or a messenger to someone, and this is the common use in modern Hebrew.  However, like most words in Hebrew there are many more meanings which stem from the basic semantic meaning.

Introduction

The Hebrew Bible often presents terms and phrases that challenge straightforward translation and interpretation. Many words, when studied within their immediate context, offer only partial meaning. Despite employing grammatical analysis and contextual examination, certain terms require a broader interpretive approach, incorporating both linguistic flexibility and historical parallels. This paper examines the term “בָּתִּים” (batim), often translated as “houses,” in Exodus 1:21. While many translations render this term as referring to “founding families,” the connection between “houses” and “family” remains unclear to the untrained student of Hebrew. By analyzing Biblical and historical contexts, this study explores how the term conveys the idea of legacy and dynasty.

Text and Translation

Exodus 1:21 states:

כִּּי יָרְאוּ הַמְיֶלְדֹת אֶת-הָאֵלֹהִים; וַיַעַש׃ לָהֶם, בָּּתִּים.

English translations include:

• “Indeed, because the midwives feared God, he made them founders of families” (CJB).
• “And because the midwives feared God, he made households for them” (NET Bible).
• “And because the midwives feared God, he gave them families of their own” (NIV).

The key term “batim” (houses) is understood here to imply “founding families” or “descendants.” Jewish commentators such as Rashi, Hizquni, and Ibn Ezra have similarly interpreted this term. However, this interpretation may not be immediately intuitive, as it requires an understanding of the nuanced relationship between “house” and “family.”

The Problem

The narrative presents a theological and linguistic challenge. While the text highlights the midwives’ righteous actions and divine reward, it offers no further details about the nature of these “houses” or how the gift was fulfilled. God’s speech is absent, and the reader is left with a general statement. To fully grasp the implications of this reward, one must turn to parallel Biblical passages and external historical documents for greater contextual clarity.

Biblical Context

The term “house” (בית) appears in various Biblical contexts as a metaphor for a dynasty or lasting legacy. For instance, in Psalm 89:4–5, we find:

כָֹּרַתִּי בְרִיתְי, לִבְחִירִי; נִשְׁבַּעָתִּי, לְדָוִד עַבְדִּי.

עַד-עוֹלָם, אָכִין זַרֶעֵךָ; וְּנִבְנִיתִּי לְדֹר-וָדוֹר, כִּסְאֲךָ סֵלָה.

“You said, ‘I made a covenant with the one I chose, I swore to my servant David, ‘I will establish your dynasty forever, build up your throne through all generations'” (Psalm 89:4–5).

In this passage, the verb “bnh” (בנה), which literally means “to build,” refers metaphorically to the establishment of David’s dynasty. In contrast, Exodus 1:21 employs the verb “’sh” (עשה), meaning “to make.” While these verbs differ, the concept they convey is similar: the formation of a lasting legacy. Hebrew often demonstrates such linguistic flexibility, using overlapping metaphors to describe similar ideas. Thus, the “houses” promised to the midwives reflect a divine reward of enduring family lines or dynasties.

Historical Context

The metaphorical use of the term “house” to signify a dynasty or familial legacy is not unique to the Hebrew Bible; it is also a prevalent concept in Ancient Near Eastern texts, where it serves as a powerful symbol of continuity, stability, and generational inheritance. For instance, in the Treaty of Hattusili III with Ulmi-Teshup, the term “house” is employed to represent dynastic continuity and permanence, as seen in the statement: “…nobody will take away from the descendant of Ulmi-Teshup either his house or his land in order to give it to a descendant of somebody else” (Kingsbury, 210). In this context, the “house” does not merely refer to a physical dwelling but encapsulates the familial and political legacy tied to land ownership, a key determinant of status and authority in Ancient Near Eastern societies.

This metaphorical usage finds parallels in other significant texts, such as the Amarna Letters, where vassal kings frequently express their allegiance to the “house” of the Egyptian pharaoh. For example, in EA 286, Rib-Hadda of Byblos writes, “May the king, my lord, know that I guard the house of the king, my lord, wherever I may be” (Moran, 289). Here, the “house” signifies not a physical building but the dynastic line of the pharaoh, whose protection and loyalty Rib-Hadda pledges to uphold. The term thus functions as a metaphor for political and familial allegiance, reinforcing the interconnectedness of dynasty, power, and loyalty in diplomatic contexts.

Another example can be found in the Sefire Treaties, which provide additional evidence for the metaphorical use of “house” in the Ancient Near East. In these treaties, “house” is often employed to represent a dynasty or familial lineage and is tied to the oaths of loyalty and the potential consequences of breaking those oaths. For instance, one treaty states, “May their houses be overthrown, and may their offspring be cut off” (Fitzmyer, 62). This usage emphasizes the vulnerability of dynasties to divine retribution when treaties are violated, further underscoring the term’s symbolic weight.

The concept of “house” as a dynasty is also present in Mesopotamian legal traditions, such as the Code of Hammurabi. In these legal codes, references to the “house of the father” (bīt abim) highlight the familial and dynastic structures integral to inheritance and societal continuity. The family unit, often represented as a “house,” formed the backbone of Mesopotamian society, ensuring the perpetuation of names, property, and status across generations (Roth, 167). This usage mirrors the biblical context of “house” as a metaphor for familial legacy, as seen in the promises made to figures like David in 2 Samuel 7:16, where God declares, “Your house and your kingdom shall endure before me forever.”

The Baal Cycle from Ugarit provides a mythological counterpart to the political and legal texts of the Ancient Near East, illustrating how the concept of “house” was applied in the divine realm. In the cycle, Baal’s construction of his “house” by the craftsman deity Kothar-wa-Hasis symbolizes not only the establishment of Baal’s rule but also his divine authority and permanence. The text declares, “Baal will build his house of cedar / and his dwelling of bricks” (Parker, 133). This act of building a house is a metaphor for establishing Baal’s divine kingship and his enduring legacy within the pantheon.

These examples demonstrate the widespread and multifaceted use of “house” as a symbol of legacy and continuity across the Ancient Near East. When applied to Exodus 1:21, where the midwives are rewarded with “houses,” this broader cultural context enriches our understanding of the biblical text. The statement, “And because the midwives feared God, He made them houses,” reflects the metaphorical use of “house” as a reward that ensures the midwives’ familial and generational continuity. By saving Israelite male infants, the midwives preserved the dynasties and family names of the Israelites, thereby safeguarding their collective identity. Their divine reward mirrors their actions, with the granting of “houses” signifying not just a personal blessing but a recognition of their pivotal role in ensuring the continuity of the covenantal people.

This broader context can be found in Beckman’s Hittite Diplomatic Texts, which explores the dynastic implications of “house” in Hittite treaties, and Moran’s The Amarna Letters, which provides insights into the political and familial dimensions of the term in diplomatic correspondence. Similarly, Mordechai Cogan’s studies on the use of familial metaphors in biblical texts highlight the importance of “house” as a symbol of legacy and identity in both the Bible and the broader Ancient Near East. These sources demonstrate how the biblical use of “house” fits into a larger cultural framework, where the term serves as a metaphor for dynastic continuity and societal stability.

Similarly, in Exodus 1:21, the midwives’ reward can be understood as a legacy granted by God. By saving Israelite male infants, the midwives ensured the continuation of family names and dynasties, preserving Israel’s collective identity. Their divine reward mirrors their actions, emphasizing the value of safeguarding family continuity.

Conclusion

The term “batim” in Exodus 1:21 exemplifies the complexity of Biblical language, where seemingly simple words carry profound theological and cultural significance. While the immediate context highlights the midwives’ righteousness and divine reward, understanding the broader implications requires examining parallel Biblical texts and Ancient Near Eastern sources. This analysis underscores the metaphorical use of “house” to signify family, dynasty, and legacy, enriching our appreciation of the Hebrew Bible’s linguistic depth.

Bibliography

·  Alter, Robert. The Art of Biblical Narrative. Basic Books, 1981.

·  Cogan, Mordechai. Bound for Exile: Israelites and Judeans Under Imperial Yoke. Eisenbrauns, 2006.

·  Fensham, F. Charles. The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia: Volume 2. Edited by Geoffrey W. Bromiley, Eerdmans, 1979.

·  Fensham, F. Charles. “Widow, Orphan, and the Poor in Ancient Near Eastern Legal and Wisdom Literature.” Journal of Near Eastern Studies 21, no. 2 (1962): 129–139.

·  Hallo, William W. “The House of David: A House in Retrospect.” Near Eastern Archaeology 61, no. 4 (1998): 231–234.

·  Kingsbury, Edwin. The Promises of God: Their History and Their Interpretations. Mustang, 2009.

·  Moran, William L. The Amarna Letters. Johns Hopkins University Press, 1992.

·  Sarna, Nahum M. Exploring Exodus: The Origins of Biblical Israel. Schocken Books, 1986.

·  Steiner, Richard C. “The Aramaic Sefire Treaty and the Metaphor of House as Dynasty.” Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 223 (1976): 11–27.

It is not uncommon for people to go round and make arguments about different topics. This is a good practice which enables everyone to study well and understand better. The problem begins when people develop an agenda which obscures the research and confuses facts with speculation.  I like textual criticism but here are some points about the article called “Masoretic Text vs. Original Hebrew” found here:

http://theorthodoxlife.wordpress.com/2012/03/12/masoretic-text-vs-original-hebrew/

Clothing can be used as a motif in Biblical literature and sometimes is used to depict an element about the person wearing it. In the book of Genesis, we find several cases describing clothing, and in the case of Ya’aqov and Esav, it is a fundamental element in the storytelling. 

וַתִּקַּח רִבְקָה אֶת בִּגְדֵי עֵשָׂו בְּנָהּ הַגָּדֹל  הַחֲמֻדֹת  אֲשֶׁר אִתָּהּ בַּבָּיִת

“Then Rebecca took the best clothes of Esau her older son, which she had in the house”  Gen 27:15

The Hebrew calls Esau’s clothing חמדת which is translated as best/favorite.

Originally Published:  1 August 2016