Hannah and Penniniah
Alright, we all know Samuel 1, Hannah wants kinds badly but doesn't conceive, and her adversary made provoked her sore and made her fret right?
Now, Strong's is far from the be all and end all for translation, but its a good tool for the lay man checking and surveying scripture. H6869, used 73 times, translated trouble, distress, anguish, adversity (not adversary, non personal) affliction, and all manor of bad events or bad things happening 72 times. Once, once, right here in 1 Samuel 1 our translator friends step out of this pattern and decide to interpret this as a personal force. Instead of the other times where its something bad happened to X, this time its someone did something bad to X.
Now, admittedly there are oddities with word forms in any language, but this seemed a little deliberate. It seems like KJV was trying to hint that Penniniah was the said adversary, and if the KJV hinted it, the newer translations try to smack it in you're face. ASV for instance goes right out of the trouble and adversity theme for translating this word and says "Her rival provoked her sore..." ect. The KJV I suspect in this case of trying to put their own agenda in the words (they do a few times, its a good translation in many respects but not free from error) but the ASV is trying very clearly to make sure people with mono have something to say every time there is a poly in the Bible weather the Bible says it or not.
Now, sure, Jacob had problems, he had problems from the get go. I'm not saying that there arn't inter-wife-problems in poly relationships, but look at the passage, it just doesen't fit to me. Elkanah was majorly sweet to her, we don't know too much about Penniniah but there is nothing to indicate she wasn't very nice too except this extremely stretched translation. I don't see how Penniniah COULD be as cruel as the trasnlaters want you to think she is with someone like Elkanah as head of household. Plus the text reads MUCH better and more clearly if you dont stick an agenda into it, change her adversary vexed her to her trouble vexed her and we have a perfectly flowing series of events. Hannah wants kids, she doesent get pregnant, her trouble getting pregnent causes her extreme anguish. That rings true to reality. No need for an outside force to make her miserable here, and I don't the text actually indicates one, outside perhaps satan.
Any Hebrew geeks around to lend credence or to disparage my research and conclusion?
RE: Hannah and Penniniah
1) I prefer the English Standard Version (ESV) for both clear, easy reading as well as accuracy in translation. In my opinion, it is much better than the KJV for a lot of these questions. However, it also seems to follow the same tack as KJV in making Penniniah out to be a bad girl in this matter. I Sam 1:6 "And her rival used to provoke her grievously to irritate her,..."
2) I agree with your reading that it doesn't need to be in there, but if Penniniah teased Hannah on their annual trips to Jerusalem, Hannah could take it worse that it really was intended, esp. in light of her continued grief about the issue already. I've said things to my wife that I thought were non-issues and discovered that she was VERY upset about it already, and my "joke" wasn't welcome. Prov 26:18,19 "Like a madman who throws firebrands, arrows, and death is the man who deceives his neighbor and says, 'I am only joking!'" I made a comparative comment to my sister-in-law about our respective babies (2 months apart). She got angry and called it "bragging".
My mom went to visit one of my sisters shortly after my sister'd repented of her man-hating lesbian ways. She'd moved out of her lover's house and was living alone and celibate: very lonely and very empty inside. Mom didn't think anything about it, but she started talking about Dad and her relationship with him and how wonderful it was to be married. Mom couldn't understand why my sister got so upset at the conversation. My mom is very vexing at times, usually when she least means it. Penniniah could've been directly cutting in her comments or even simply pointing out the obvious and keeping the wound open and fresh. When I was single and impatiently waiting on my fiancee to become my wife, I didn't even need a directed comment to start crying from the pain of our distance apart. Just a couple walking arm-in-arm would to it. Hannah was seeing Penniniah's children grow up and do those annual things that Jewish boys and girls did at the time. She wanted her son or daughter to do that, to feel the same joy and pride that Penniniah felt, to share that pride with their husband.
3) Most people forget that monogamous marriages are often frought with anger, arguments, and bitterness, esp when the couple is young, naive, and stupid ... like my wife and I were. A preacher on the radio was going on and on how Jacob's marital troubles stemmed from his having two wives. The very next verse he read was the trouble between Jacob and the love of his life: Rachel. Gen 30:1,2 "...'Give me a child lest I die!'...'Am I in the place of God, Who has withheld from you the fruit of the womb?'" This goes back to the core problem of all strife, anger, bitterness, and argumentation in all relationships, esp. marriages: selfishness. That's what James 4:1-3 says, "What causes quarrels and what causes fights among you? Is it not this, that your passions are at war within you? You desire and do not have, so you murder. You covet and cannot obtain, so you fight and quarrel. You do not have, because you do not ask. You ask and do not receive, because you ask wrongly, to spend it on your passions." If a couple doesn't figure out REAL, Godly love with one spouse in the house, they'll simply compound their trouble and expose their infantilism even more by bringing in another. When Godliness rules each spouse, polygyny should be much easier to both accept and enjoy than when the headship and love issues are still getting worked out. Just talking about a 2nd wife has done wonders for my relationship with both God and my wife and been enormously beneficial to her as well. Even if I never get a 2nd wife, it's been a wonderful 3 year conversation so far.
-TNF
ReRe
1) ASV is American Standard version, similar to ASV as noted by that verse. There is no CSV so ASV was my refrence here, plus I had it on my E-Sword. ASV is very good overall too, and by extension I expect ESV is.
2) Here I think we misunderstand each other, or perhaps you're meaning is just unclear to me. The passage itself is essential in my opinion, it directly shows her motive in her extreme promise later on. What I'm dubious concerning is how its been translated, the root word that they translate to rival here is used 72 other times (pretty good frequency) and is never translated into a personal force any other time. It is my premise that the KJV translators wrote this in a way that was intentionally misleading, and the standard versions intentionally mistranslated. There is an apparent anomaly in the usage of the word and I wondered if anyone who knew the language knew if there was a reason it was translated differently here or if its an agenda to make poly look bad. It could well be as you say to, or she could have been outright cruel, but you're explanation is a great deal more plausible and in line than outright cruelty. The question in my mind still boils down to, does it actually say it like that or has it been written in?
3)I'm glad you're already reaped benefits by open conversation. Ask around and a lot of people have gaps of many years between a first and second wife, and many more like us just searching or open. I doubt its possible to hurry finding the right person.
That radio speaker is an illustration of how mono speakers tend to thing. It was polygamy's fault, even though the next verse explains what the actual problem was. Its very annoying.
Good talkin to you,
JP
Re3
1)I have several translations both electronic and in print. ASV is hampered by Olde English speech that makes it very hard for me to read. I can do it, but it takes a lot of energy to work through: read, "retranslate" in my own mind, then decipher what was meant by both the words and the thoughts, and finally to cross-reference that verse in my own mind with other verses which say something similar or different. ESV is a very easy read. eSword has it so you could add it on. I tend to read faster online anyway.
2) Let me clarify. I was agreeing with you. Rather than jump to the "intentionally misleading" conclusion, I'd rather give them the benefit of the doubt and think that something was different in this passage as opposed to the other 72 times. While the rest of the passage definitely supports the understanding of Hannah's deep personal distress, even without Peninnah's involvement, there are several other words used that probably gave them pause in the translation:
(KJV+ from eSword)
1Sa 1:6 And her adversaryH6869 alsoH1571 provokedH3707 her sore,H3708 for toH5668 make her fret,H7481 becauseH3588 the LORDH3068 had shut upH5462 H1157 her womb.H7358
A) The double meaning word for both "co-wife"/"adversary" or "rival" H6869.
B) The word in question "provoked" H3707. This word is often translated "provoked" or "anger".
C) "sore" H3708. This word is often translated "provoked", "grief", or "wrath".
D) "make her fret" H7481. This word is also translated as "thundered", "roared", or "troubled".
Put this many aggressive and confrontational words with the rest to make a complete thought, and you'll be hard pressed to NOT implicate Peninnah in some way. This isn't the cruxt of the passage as a whole, but it shows that she was feeling it from all sides. It could've been that Peninnah wasn't even actively trying to do anything, but the effect is the same. "What set her off?"
If I was putting this in my words, I'd probably translate it something like:
"And her co-wife also provoked her grief to a roar because the Self-Existant shut up her womb."
3) My wife and I have decided to leave it in God's hands, and let Him lead her to us in His time. That way He'll pick the perfect person the second time just like He did with us the first time. If He chooses to have noone else come along, that's fine with us. If He does, that's great too. Oddly enough, it was my wife who reminded me that if God picks her, she'll be perfect. At the same time, she was freaking out that He just might pick someone at all. (Women are weird; gotta love 'em.)
-TNF
Re4
1) So ESV is a more modernized ASV? I didnt realize there was a big difference. I understand the retranslate thing, My wife uses NIV for convince in most occasions. I use KJV because it is the standard of our church both traditionally and because our Pastor found it to be generally most technically accurate (though he has done comparative study's and pointed out where other translations are better on several occasions)
Doesn't the screen glare get to you with too much online reading? I usually use it when I want the machine to sift through things for me but I prefer to read paper when I'm doing general study or reading for fun.
2) A} Is the crux of the matter here, notice on the Strongs reference it says trasnsitively female rival? That means it has been translated that way, it doesn't mean it was correctly translated that way, its just a note that says it has been done that way. The words it can be accurately translated to are listed after that. It is important to note that it isn't ever used to refer to a co-wife, it wouldn't mean that here even if my postulate is wrong.
B,C, and D I have no argument with, and are quite right, though I would note that circumstances are quite as capable of people of provoking someone, and they are thus non-definitive.
To add a little more,
1Sa 1:7 And as he did so year by year, when she went up to the house of Jehovah, so she provoked her; therefore she wept, and did not eat.
While the She in She provoked her is not italicized (so as to indicate a word that was added) I would need someone with knowledge of word structure to affirm it, as H3707 is translated to she provoked, and while it may mean a XPersonal Provoked, it is not used in a gender specific way (it is also he provoked ect...) so as to merit the use of she here. If this was definitely effeminate it would solve my doubts as well, but I do not know as it sits.
While no doubt the sight of children anywhere would have provoked Hannah, and Penniniah's children all the more, that is a different thing than maliciously aggravating the situation. I have heard too many times this used to say that polygyny is bad because it always has bad consequences, and frankly this is not the meaning or even the implication of the passage. In this we are in clear and good agreement.
To explain my attitude a bit, I appreciate the benefit of the doubt in translation, but I have not given it for some time. The source of sceptically here is in the constant translation of logos as word in the NT. In many places this was clearly done to imply that the bible itself says the bible is infallible, but that is neither accurate nor smart. We know about the accuracy of the bible by its content, not because the book itself says its true. More importantly Logos has much deeper connections to purpose and reason than the English word word has. Could Kirkigaard have puppeted his devastating philosophy of fiedism had the Bible clearly spoken of the power of Gods reason? Could it taint even to this day if we where instructed to study the purpose of Gods plan and have faith in his logic? Heaven Forbid! One could never say faith without reason when Christ says have Faith in His Reason. To that end whenever something a little off comes up I try to do diligence in questioning it, there has been translation with an agenda, no reason to think there wouldnt be more.
So, if you are right its a thing to be glad for, but that tag in Strongs Transitively, that still makes me think even Strong didn't really see that word being translated like it was in 1Samuel. But, on the other end, it reads that she was feeling bad from all sides weather or not Penninah herself provoked her. Clearly her situation was a very hard one.
3) That's the best way, trust and obey, for there's no other way, to be happy in Jesus, but to trust and obey. Thats funny that shes talking about trusting God to find the right person while worrying about having a second at all. My wife is usually the one that says 'relax and trust God and it will work out in the end' but when it comes to finding a second she is the one freaking out. She was the cause of us looking in the first place and it seems that she has the responsibility of finding the second. In all matters she can just trust, but in this one she is always fretting that it will never happen, and I'm relaxed and say trust and wait. Its quite the reversal.
This has turned into a good long conversation, thank you, its quite enjoyable.
JP