Lev 1:5, 8 "must" "will" "are to" for future/obligation? #1123

New Issue

Open

opened 2022-08-16 18:06:32 +00:00 by SusanQuigley · 0 comments

SusanQuigley commented

2022-08-16 18:06:32 +00:00

Owner

Email from Dan Bowman on the SUN Team, forwarded by Stacy Shawiak.
(She sent this 1/20/22, but it got buried in my email.

ULB changes
Leviticus “It will produce a sweet aroma for me; it will be an offering made to me by fire.” This should be “Yahweh” instead, which also matches 1.13.

Also, just curious, but any idea in Leviticus 1.5 why the man “must” kill but the priest “will” present? In Hebrew these are the same kind of verbs. 1.8 the priest “are to” place it. I don’t understand why these verbs have such different translations of future/obligation.

Thanks!
Daniel

Email from Dan Bowman on the SUN Team, forwarded by Stacy Shawiak. (She sent this 1/20/22, but it got buried in my email. **ULB changes** Leviticus “It will produce a sweet aroma for *me*; it will be an offering made to *me* by fire.” This should be “Yahweh” instead, which also matches 1.13. Also, just curious, but any idea in Leviticus 1.5 why the man “must” kill but the priest “will” present? In Hebrew these are the same kind of verbs. 1.8 the priest “are to” place it. I don’t understand why these verbs have such different translations of future/obligation. Thanks! Daniel