A Symposium on Psalm 137:9 Psalm 137 small A Verse to Criticize A Historical-Critical Reading

Prof. Marc Zvi Brettler

Personal Preface: The Difficulty with
Dispassionate Analysis of Horrific Texts

Many believe that scholars of antiquity, including biblical scholars, are supposed to be objective, and that they should convey the meaning of the past to the present generation dispassionately.  For me this is impossible when exploring texts such as Psalm 137:9, one of the most horrific biblical texts, which to paraphrase Alice (of Alice in Wonderland), only gets worser and worser the more deeply it is examined. 
Given that the Bible functions as a source of inspiration, it is not sufficient to ask the typical scholarly questions about this verse—what the text meant in context, how v. 9 fits in the broader psalm, what the psalm’s structure is, when and why Psalm 137 was written, how its sentiments relate to other ancient psalms from this period, etc.—all the sorts of questions that biblical scholars are taught to ask.  Nevertheless, the immediate horror of the verse does not obviate the need to ask these questions, some of which I explore below.

Composition History

Scholars debate the compositional history of Psalm 137, and how its final verses relate to the larger whole.  Many, quite plausibly to my mind, suggest that vv. 1-6 comprised the original psalm, to which the last three verses have been appended.  The evidence for this is suggestive, but not definitive.  Vv. 1-6 must derive from the post-exilic period—Babylon is שָׁ֣ם, “there,” implying that the author is already back in Judah. On the other hand, the raw sentiments of vv. 7-9 imply a setting soon after the Babylonian exile.^[1]  In other words, vv. 7-9 likely existed as part of (separate) composition, written in the Babylonian exile, and they were later appended to vv. 1-6 of the psalm, resulting in the current nine verse psalm incorporated in the Psalter.
Yet, vv. 7-9 are now well-integrated into the psalm, through the repetition of the root ז-כ-ר, “to remember.”  In its current form the psalm suggests that God must remember (ז-כ-ר) and punish Babylonian babies in return for “our” remembering Zion so very effectively: v. 1, בְּזָכְרֵ֗נוּ אֶת־צִיּֽוֹן (as we remembered Zion) and v. 6, תִּדְבַּ֥ק־לְשׁוֹנִ֨י ׀ לְחִכִּי֮ אִם־לֹ֪א אֶ֫זְכְּרֵ֥כִי (let my tongue stick to my palate if I cease to remember you).  Additionally, in its final form, Ps 137 is a measure for measure (מידה כנגד מידה) psalm, as is made explicit in v. 8b, which leads right into v. 9: אַשְׁרֵ֥י שֶׁיְשַׁלֶּם־לָ֑ךְ אֶת־גְּ֝מוּלֵ֗ךְ שֶׁגָּמַ֥לְתְּ לָֽנוּ׃, “a blessing^[2] on him who repays you in kind what you have inflicted on us.”  The root ג-מ-ל is used in the Bible to express measure for measure retribution.

אַשְׁרֵ֤י שֶׁיֹּאחֵ֓ז וְנִפֵּ֬ץ אֶֽת עֹ֝לָלַ֗יִךְ אֶל הַסָּֽלַע
Lexical Observations

The Use of the Word אשרי
Verse 8b lexically and syntactically prepares us for v. 9. It begins as well with אַשְׁרֵ֤י, a strong exclamatory form, which may be rendered as “O for the happiness of!” or “Blessings upon!” Elsewhere, אַשְׁרֵ֤י expresses joy for those who are saved by God (e.g. Deut 33:9), patiently wait for God’s deliverance (e.g. Isa 30:8), follow the path of the righteous (e.g. Ps 1:1), trust in God (e.g. Ps 34:9), reside in the Temple (e.g. Ps 84:5) or have lots of children (e.g. Ps 127:5). 
Like the אַשְׁרֵ֤י of 8b, the same word in 9 is followed by the (late Biblical Hebrew) relative particle שֶׁ (rather than the earlier אֲשֶׁ֖ר), an imperfect (future) verb (שֶׁיְשַׁלֶּם שֶׁיֹּאחֵ֓ז) and a third person singular pronoun (לָ֑ךְ and the suffix of עֹ֝לָלַ֗יִךְ).  This connects verses 8 and 9, thereby anchoring v. 9 well into the psalm.^[3]

Seizing and Dashing
Uniquely in the Bible, v. 9 uses in conjunction the two verbs א-ח-ז, “to seize” and נ-פ-צ, “to smash or dash.”  Seizing is not sufficient, smashing is not sufficient—both of these actions need to be accomplished for true happiness or blessing (אַשְׁרֵ֥י) to reign.
Furthermore, the second verb נ-פ-צ  is in the pi‘el conjugation.  It is not the case, as so many might have been taught in Hebrew school, that the main function of the pi‘el is to intensify the qal.  One function of the pi‘el is “pluralising,” namely indicating “the action…involves either multiple subjects or objects.”^[4]  In other words, the pi‘el of נ-פ-צ draws a picture of fragmentation; it is not just that the babies are smashed, but that this dashing results in shattered baby fragments.

Children or Babies
It is hard to determine exactly what age range עֹלָלַ֗יִךְ designates, though Lamentations 4:4, עוֹלָלִים שָׁאֲלוּ לֶחֶם (“little children beg for bread”), suggests that these are not babes, but old enough to speak, likely toddlers.  Thus, grasping them and smashing them again and again against a rock would require significant effort, and extreme callousness, as they are old enough to understand what is being done to them, and old enough to ask for mercy.

The Rock: A Geographical Location
The final word of the psalm is marked as definite (הַסָּֽלַע)—literally, “the rock.”  Yet, English and Hebrew use definite articles such as “the” very differently. Furthermore, does the singular סלע indicate one rock, or is it being used generically or collectively, as “rocks”?  These different possibilities are reflected in various translations, e.g. the JPS translates, “and dashes them against the rocks!” while the NRSV renders, “and dash them against the rock!” 
To complicate matters even further— הַסָּֽלַע is known as a geographical location in Edom—The Rock.  Near there, according to 2 Kings 14:7, the Judean King Amaziah massacred 10,000 Edomites; according to the parallel version in 2 Chr 25:12,

וַעֲשֶׂ֨רֶת אֲלָפִ֜ים חַיִּ֗ים שָׁבוּ֙ בְּנֵ֣י יְהוּדָ֔ה וַיְבִיא֖וּם לְרֹ֣אשׁ הַסָּ֑לַע וַיַּשְׁלִיכ֛וּם מֵֽרֹאשׁ־הַסֶּ֖לַע וְכֻלָּ֥ם נִבְקָֽעוּ:

Another 10,000 the men of Judah captured alive and brought to the top of Sela. They threw them down from the top of Sela and every one of them was burst open.

Thus, this psalm may conclude with a macabre pun:  the Babylonian children are being smashed to pieces either on (a/the) rock(s) or at Sela, an important site of their Edomite allies.^[5] A smashing baby pun!

Parallel Language with Jeremiah
A careful look at the uses of the vocabulary of v. 9 elsewhere in the Hebrew Bible brings us to Jeremiah 50-51, a long oracle against Babylon, which at some point originally concluded the book.^[6]  Most significantly, about half of the uses of the verb נ-פ-צ are found in Jeremiah 51:20-23:

נא:כ מַפֵּץ־אַתָּ֣ה לִ֔י כְּלֵ֖י מִלְחָמָ֑ה וְנִפַּצְתִּ֤י בְךָ֙ גּוֹיִ֔ם וְהִשְׁחַתִּ֥י בְךָ֖ מַמְלָכֽוֹת: נא:כא וְנִפַצְתִּ֣י בְךָ֔ ס֖וּס וְרֹֽכְב֑וֹ וְנִפַּצְתִּ֣י בְךָ֔ רֶ֖כֶב וְרֹכְבֽוֹ: נא:כב וְנִפַּצְתִּ֤י בְךָ֙ אִ֣ישׁ וְאִשָּׁ֔ה וְנִפַּצְתִּ֥י בְךָ֖ זָקֵ֣ן וָנָ֑עַר וְנִפַּצְתִּ֣י בְךָ֔ בָּח֖וּר וּבְתוּלָֽה: נא:כג וְנִפַּצְתִּ֤י בְךָ֙ רֹעֶ֣ה וְעֶדְר֔וֹ וְנִפַּצְתִּ֥י בְךָ֖ אִכָּ֣ר וְצִמְדּ֑וֹ וְנִפַּצְתִּ֣י בְךָ֔ פַּח֖וֹת וּסְגָנִֽים:

51:20 You are My war club, [My] weapons of battle; With you I clubbed nations, With you I destroyed kingdoms; 51:21 With you I clubbed horse and rider, With you I clubbed chariot and driver, 51:22 With you I clubbed man and woman, With you I clubbed graybeard and boy, With you I clubbed youth and maiden; 51:23 With you I clubbed shepherd and flock, With you I clubbed plowman and team, With you I clubbed governors and prefects.

The vocabulary overlap between our psalm’s last three verses and Jeremiah 50-51 suggests that the author of Ps 137:7-9 likely knew Jeremiah 50-51, and based his addition, imprecating Babylon and Edom, on these chapters.^[7] In other words, the images he uses and develops are traditional, and he is not at all original; like many ancient authors, in the Bible and elsewhere, he reuses earlier sources. 

Smashing Babies in the Bible

Our authors’ dependence on the passage in Jeremiah likely explains why he pairs‘עולל with נ-פ-צ, rather than the expected ר-ט-ש, the more common verb used for describing smashed toddlers: 

2 Kings 8.2	וַיֹּ֣אמֶר חֲזָאֵ֔ל מַדּ֖וּעַ אֲדֹנִ֣י בֹכֶ֑ה וַיֹּ֡אמֶר כִּֽי־יָדַ֡עְתִּי אֵ֣ת אֲשֶׁר־תַּעֲשֶׂה֩ לִבְנֵ֨י יִשְׂרָאֵ֜ל רָעָ֗ה מִבְצְרֵיהֶ֞ם תְּשַׁלַּ֤ח בָּאֵשׁ֙ וּבַחֻֽרֵיהֶם֙ בַּחֶ֣רֶב תַּהֲרֹ֔ג וְעֹלְלֵיהֶ֣ם תְּרַטֵּ֔שׁ וְהָרֹתֵיהֶ֖ם תְּבַקֵּֽעַ:	“Why does my lord weep?” asked Hazael. “Because I know,” he (=Elisha) replied, “what harm you will do to the Israelite people: you will set their fortresses on fire, put their young men to the sword, dash their little ones in pieces, and rip open their pregnant women.”
Hosea 14:1	תֶּאְשַׁם֙ שֹֽׁמְר֔וֹן כִּ֥י מָרְתָ֖ה בֵּֽאלֹהֶ֑יהָ בַּחֶ֣רֶב יִפֹּ֔לוּ עֹלְלֵיהֶ֣ם יְרֻטָּ֔שׁוּ וְהָרִיּוֹתָ֖יו יְבֻקָּֽעוּ:	Samaria must bear her guilt, for she has defied her God. They shall fall by the sword, their infants shall be dashed to death, and their women with child ripped open.
Nahum 3:10	גַּם־הִ֗יא לַגֹּלָה֙ הָלְכָ֣ה בַשֶּׁ֔בִי גַּ֧ם עֹלָלֶ֛יהָ יְרֻטְּשׁ֖וּ בְּרֹ֣אשׁ כָּל חוּצ֑וֹת וְעַל נִכְבַּדֶּ֙יהָ֙ יַדּ֣וּ גוֹרָ֔ל וְכָל גְּדוֹלֶ֖יהָ רֻתְּק֥וּ בַזִּקִּֽים:	Yet even she was exiled, she went into captivity. Her babes, too, were dashed in pieces at every street corner. Lots were cast for her honored men, and all her nobles were bound in chains.
Isaiah 13:16	וְעֹלְלֵיהֶ֥ם יְרֻטְּשׁ֖וּ לְעֵֽינֵיהֶ֑ם יִשַּׁ֙סּוּ֙ בָּֽתֵּיהֶ֔ם וּנְשֵׁיהֶ֖ם (תשגלנה) [תִּשָּׁכַֽבְנָה]:	And their babes shall be dashed to pieces in their sight, their homes shall be plundered, and their wives shall be raped.

In Kings and Hosea, the graphic parallel of ripping babies out of pregnant women is used, and in Isaiah—also an oracle against Babylon—the horrific element of לְעֵֽינֵיהֶ֑ם, “in their sight” is added. Some modern scholars, viewing such smashed baby verses as a group, suggest that they partake in a common literary trope that would not have been distressing to those who heard it.  I find this suggestion apologetic and even offensive.  Do such images ever lose their power?

Conclusion: Two Senses of the Phrase “Bible Critic”

Too often people accuse me of being a “Bible critic” because I engage in historical-critical research on the Bible. But in that phrase, “critical” does not mean to criticize, but to examine in a free and independent fashion, without particular religious preconceptions.^[11] Thus, my main goal in using the tools of historical-critical methodology is to understand the Bible, in its wonderful and extensive variety—the good and bad, the beautiful and the ugly, within its ancient contexts. 

But at times I am also a Bible critic, criticizing what the Bible says—and I would like to criticize Psalm 137:9 with all my heart, soul, and being.  Applying critical tools to understand it well shows that it is even worse than it seems:

• It is worse than the Assyrian texts to which it is often compared,
• It makes a bad pun while discussing smashing toddlers to pieces,
• It exalts this action in the same way that elsewhere the Bible lauds having lots of children or following the divine path (אשרי).

Heaven help us all if we ignore the savageness of this text, and instead discuss it only as historical-critical philologists, in a dispassionate manner.

Violent Retribution in the Bible

If the psalm empathizes, it stops short of mandating violent retribution on Israel’s enemies. Nevertheless, other parts of the Bible do precisely that.

• Genocide of Canaanites – Deuteronomy, at the same time as it sets out an idealized system of law designed to establish an equitable and compassionate society, calls for the extermination of the tribes of Canaan (7:2; 20:16-18).

• Genocide of Amalekites – Saul kills every Amalekite other than their king, Agag, including women and children, and is only castigated for failing to kill the king and for taking spoils (1 Sam 15).

• Slaughtering Midianite women and children – Moses (Numbers 31:2, 15-18) orders the cold-blooded slaughter of the captive women and boys of Midian.

• Indiscriminate killing of enemies – David (1 Samuel 27:9) “leaves no man or woman alive” on his random raids into Geshurite, Amalekite, and Gizrite territory, which he does to deceive Achish about where he has been campaigning.

• Capital punishment for religious infractions – The Torah mandates death sentences for Sabbath breaking (Exod 31:14, Num 15:35), male homosexual acts (Lev 20:13), and a host of other transgressions.

The modern ‘believers’, nurtured on ideals of religious freedom and universal human rights, is left bewildered and uncomfortable, cornered by their own conscience into a defensive position.

Rabbinic Critique of Biblical Texts

Although reading the Bible with a critical moral eye may seem untraditional, in fact it is a time-honored exegetical method of many rabbinic commentators and much of halakhic tradition.

• Akeidat Yitzhak – Talmudic rabbis didn’t hesitate to claim that Abraham was in error in his attempt to sacrifice his son (b. Ta’anit 4a; Genesis Rabbah 55:5 and 56:8; Pesikta Zutra 44), while later liturgists transformed the message of the akedah into a prayer for God’s kindness and compassion.

• Slaughter of Shechemites – Jacob cursed the unrestrained violence of Shimon and Levi (Gen 49:5-7).

• Pinchas’ Zealotry – In a remarkable inversion of Bible’s praise of Pinhas, the Babylonian and Palestinian sages claimed his zealotry ran counter to the wisdom of the rabbis and it was only the direct intervention of the divine voice that saved him from execution as a murderer (b. Sanhedrin 82a; j. Sanhedrin 9:7).

• Annihilating Amalekites and the Seven Nations – The Babylonian sages effectively rendered inoperative the commandment to exterminate the Canaanites and Amalekites ( Yadayim 4:4; b. Berakhot 28a), and later in the 12^th century Maimonides redefined this disturbing mitzvah to refer only to enemies implacably committed to war on Israel (Mishneh Torah, Laws of Kings and their Wars, 6:1 and 6:4).

• The Beautiful Captive – The rabbis understood the law of the captive war bride as a lamentable concession to the aggressive “evil urge” that is unleashed in war (BT, Qiddushin 21b).

• David’s Adultery – While one talmudic rabbi, Shmuel bar Nahmani, tried to exonerate David for his adultery and lethal scheming (b. Shabbat 56a), the Bible itself makes abundantly clear that David’s sin is grave (2 Samuel 12:9-14) and the Talmud considers his fit punishment to be nearly unbearable (b. Yoma 22b).

→ Critiquing the Moral Failings in the Bible:
by Rabbi Dr. Eugene Korn

_____________

Professor Marc Zvi Brettler is Bernice & Morton Lerner Professor of Judaic Studies at Duke University, and Dora Golding Professor of Biblical Studies (Emeritus) at Brandeis University. He is author, most recently, of How to Read the Jewish Bible (also published in Hebrew), co-editor of The Jewish Study Bible and The Jewish Annotated New Testament, and co-author of The Bible and the Believer, all published by Oxford University Press. He is cofounder of Project TABS (Torah and Biblical Scholarship) -TheTorah.com.

02/28/2015
[1] See most recently John Ahn, “Psalm 137: Complex Communal Laments,” Journal of Biblical Literature 127 (2008), 285-6.
[2] This is not the place for discussing when אַשְׁרֵ֤י  should be translated as “blessed” versus “for the happiness of,” and the relation between these two possibilities.
[3] Note also the use of אַשְׁרֵ֤י in consecutive verses elsewhere in the Psalter (Pss. 32.1-2; 84.5-5; 119.1-2).
[4] See e.g. Paul Joüon and T. Muraoka, A Grammar of Biblical Hebrew (Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute 2006), 144.
[5] For more on Sela and its location, see http://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/biblical-sites-places/biblical-archaeology-sites/the-edomite-stronghold-of-sela/.  The fact that both Chronicles and Psalms share certain details may be a coincidence; these details are not sufficient to prove that the two texts are related. If, however, one did know the other, it seems more likely that Chronicles was aware of our psalm and made use of its imagery to write a new scene, not found in Kings, in the war between Amaziah and the Edomites (as was the Chronicler’s wont). It seems unlikely to me that the story in Chronicles is historical or preserves an old tradition that the psalmist might have known.  
[6]  Ch. 52 is an appendix, added mostly from the Book of Kings; it deals with the final years of Judah and its destruction, proving that Jeremiah was a true prophet since his predictions of doom came true.  Note that Jer 51:64b reads: עַד־הֵ֖נָּה דִּבְרֵ֥י יִרְמְיָֽהוּ׃,  “Thus far the words of Jeremiah.”
[7] For other commonalities between these units, see e.g. Frank-Lotha Hossfeld and Erich Zenger, Psalms 3 (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2011), 520 and Erhard S. Gerstenberger, Psalms, Part 2, and Lamentations (FOTL 16; Grand Rapids, Mich: Eerdmans, 2001), 393, with additional supporting literature cited there. 
[8] Many of these are collected in http://faculty.uml.edu/ethan_Spanier/Teaching/documents/CP6.0AssyrianTorture.pdf , from which this is quoted.
[9] Ibid.
[10] Nor do they, like the Bible, highlight ripping open pregnant women; see Mordecahi Cogan, “‘Ripping open Pregnant Women’ in Light of an Assyrian Analogue,” Journal of the American Oriental Society 103 (1983), 755-7.  Concerning children, on p. 755 he does mention a text from Assurnasirpal that states “I burnt their adolescent boys (and) girls,” but the emphasis in these Assyrian documents is on more general horror, rather than horror perpetrated against the very young.

[11] See John Barton, The Nature of Biblical Criticism (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox, 2007).

Jesus of the Bible does not love you!

God is just: He will pay back trouble to those who trouble you and give relief to you who are troubled, and to us as well. This will happen when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven in blazing fire with his powerful angels. He will punish those who do not know God and do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. (2 Thessalonians 1:6-8)

--------------

The above passage raises a couple of serious problems for Christians. Notice how the texts read during the second coming of Jesus he will have alongside with him powerful Angels who will punish those who do not obey the gospel of Jesus. Think about this for a moment, Christians tell us Jesus is a loving peaceful man who never hurt a fly. Yet this passage portrays a very evil dangerous figure no less than Hitler who was trying to dominate the world.

One of the other problem found in this passage is the short time span? What do we mean by that let me elaborate. According to the passage when Jesus arrives with his angels and finds anyone who is not obeying him should be destroyed seems very unfair, why because from a historical point the story of Jesus did not reach each and every person. Which means hundreds and thousands were unaware of Jesus and his gospel. If that's the case and Jesus was supposed have arrived those innocent people who knew him not would have been destroyed!. Paul himself wrote in Thessalonians that he is expecting Jesus anytime which says a lot if Paul was living during the 1st century. There are other passages found in the bible which reads that the second coming of Jesus will be a very violent one.

at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord,.....(Philippians 2:10-11)

But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them--bring them here and kill them in front of me.'" (Luke 19:27)

I want to point out that the above passage says anyone who doesn't obey the gospel of Jesus will be destroyed. You can say Luke 19:27 is a parable which is true, but note this is talking of Jesus's second coming

Now coming back to the initial passage 2 Thessalonians 1:6-8 if Christians were going to apply this standard of Muslims them we will pass with flying colours. How did I come to this concludes well Muslims believe in the Gospel of Jesus Pbuh, we do not believe In the gospels (plural) rather the singular Gospel which was originally given to Jesus Pbuh. And in the Gospel of Jesus we find the true message where Jesus Pbuh himself said to worship Allah Swt the true God and not to associate partners with him if anyone does then paradise will be forbidden for him. Every Muslim on the planet accept and obey such command.

However on the other hand Christians believe in what Mark, Matthew, Luke, and John said they don't have the gospel of Jesus. This is a fact which Christians admit to. So in short Jesus of the bible returns he will bring Angels and kill whosoever doesn't obey him. This also means the freedom of religion will be taken away.

Ask yourself this question, is Jesus of the bible loving and peaceful or violent taking away all religious freedom killing innocent people!

Hitler was a Christian

Here Hitler uses the Bible and his Christianity in order to attack the Jews and uphold his anti-Semitism:

"My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God’s truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter. In boundless love as a Christian and as a man I read through the passage which tells us how the Lord at last rose in His might and seized the scourge to drive out of the Temple the brood of vipers and adders. How terrific was His fight for the world against the Jewish poison. To-day, after two thousand years, with deepest emotion I recognize more profoundly than ever before the fact that it was for this that He had to shed His blood upon the Cross. As a Christian I have no duty to allow my self to be cheated, but I have the duty to be a fighter for truth and justice… And if there is anything which could demonstrate that we are acting rightly it is the distress that daily grows . For as a Christian I have also a duty to my own people." –Adolf Hitler, in a speech on 12 April 1922 (Norman H. Baynes, ed. The Speeches of Adolf Hitler, April 1922-August 1939, Vol. 1 of 2, pp. 19-20, Oxford University Press, 1942)

"Christianity could not content itself with building up its own altar; it was absolutely forced to undertake the destruction of the heathen altars. Only from this fanatical intolerance could its apodictic faith take form; this intolerance is, in fact, its absolute presupposition." -Adolf Hitler Mein Kampf (It is quite obvious here that Hitler is referring to destructing the Judaism alters on which Christianity was founded.)

"The personification of the devil as the symbol of all evil assumes the living shape of the Jew." -Adolf Hitler Mein Kampf (The idea of the devil and the Jew came out of medieval anti-Jewish beliefs based on interpretations from the Bible. Martin Luther, and teachers after him, continued this “tradition” up until the 20th century.)

"With satanic joy in his face, the black-haired Jewish youth lurks in wait for the unsuspecting girl whom he defiles with his blood, thus stealing her from her people." -Adolf Hitler Mein Kampf (It is common in war for one race to rape another so that they can “defile” the race and assimilate their own. Hitler speaks about this very tactic here.)

“The best characterization is provided by the product of this religious education, the Jew himself. His life is only of this world, and his spirit is inwardly as alien to true Christianity as his nature two thousand years previous was to the great founder of the new doctrine. Of course, the latter made no secret of his attitude toward the Jewish people, and when necessary he even took the whip to drive from the temple of the Lord this adversary of all humanity, who then as always saw in religion nothing but an instrument for his business existence. In return, Christ was nailed to the cross, while our present- day party Christians debase themselves to begging for Jewish votes at elections and later try to arrange political swindles with atheistic Jewish parties-- and this against their own nation.”–Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

"…the fall of man in paradise has always been followed by his expulsion." -Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf (See Genesis Chapter 3 where humankind is cast from Eden for their sins. Hitler compares this to the need to exterminate the Jews for their sin against Christ.)
“Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord.” –Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)

“The anti-Semitism of the new movement [Christian Social movement] was based on religious ideas instead of racial knowledge.” –Adolf Hitler Mein Kampf (This quote is very interesting for it disperses the idea that Hitler raged war due to being an Aryan supremacist. He states quite clearly that he has a problem with Jews for their belief not race. That is why many German Jews died in WW2 regardless of their Aryan nationality.)

“Only in the steady and constant application of force lies the very first prerequisite for success. This persistence, however, can always and only arise from a definite spiritual conviction. Any violence which does not spring from a firm, spiritual base, will be wavering and uncertain.” –Adolf Hitler Mein Kampf (Here Hitler is admitting that his war against the Jews were so successful because of his strong Christian Spirituality.)

Rabbi Ben Abrahamson on Isaiah

Although there are many passages in the Torah which have been traditionally understood by Islamic scholars to describe the Prophet (pbuh), Tabari quotes only one, because it was the basis of a sahih hadith and not anyone's personal opinion:

Narrated Ata bin Yasar: I met `Abdullah bin `Amr bin Al-`As and asked him, "Tell me about the description of the Messenger of God in the Torah. He said, "Yes, by God, he is described in the Torah in the same way that he is described in the Qur'an: in the Qur'an: 'O Prophet, We have sent thee as a witness, and good things to bear, and warning' [Surat 33:45]; a refuge to the nations. Thou art My Messenger, I have named thee the trusting. He is neither harsh nor rough, nor crying in the streets. He does not reward evil with evil, but pardons and forgives. We shall not take him until through him We have caused the crooked nation to say, There is no god but God, and through him We shall open uncircumcised hearts, deaf ears, and blind eyes." (Sahih Bukhari 3, 34, 335)

The first part of the hadith "witness..warner..refuge to the nations" reminds of these verses in Isaiah:

20. And it shall be for a sign and for a witness to the Lord of Hosts in the land of Egypt, for they shall cry out to the Lord because of oppressors, and He shall send them a savior and a prince, and he shall save them.

21. And the Lord shall be known to the Egyptians, and the Egyptians shall know the Lord on that day, and they shall serve [with] a sacrifice and a meal offering, and they shall make vows to the Lord and they shall fulfill [them]. (Isaiah 19:20-21)

The second part reminds me of these verses, also in Isaiah.

1. Behold My servant, I will support him, My chosen one, whom My soul desires; I have placed My spirit upon him, he shall promulgate justice to the nations.

2. He shall neither cry nor shall he raise [his voice]; and he shall not make his voice heard outside.

3. A breaking reed he shall not break; and a flickering flaxen wick he shall not quench; with truth shall he execute justice.

4. Neither shall he weaken nor shall he be broken, until he establishes justice in the land, and for his instruction, islands shall long.

5. So said God the Lord, the Creator of the heavens and the One Who stretched them out, Who spread out the earth and what springs forth from it, Who gave a soul to the people upon it and a spirit to those who walk thereon.

6. I am the Lord; I called you with righteousness and I will strengthen your hand; and I formed you, and I made you for a people's covenant, for a light to nations. 

7. To open blind eyes, to bring prisoners out of a dungeon, those who sit in darkness out of a prison. (Isaiah 42:1-7)

The verses in Isaiah end with a reference to the desert and the villages of Kedar:

10. Sing to the Lord a new song, His praise from the end of the earth, those who go down to the sea and those therein, the islands and their inhabitants.

11. The desert and its cities shall raise [their voice]; Kedar shall be inhabited with villages; the rock dwellers shall exult, from the mountain peaks they shall shout.

12. They shall give glory to the Lord, and they shall recite His praise on the islands. (Isaiah 42:10-11)

--------------------------

Isaiah 42:1 says

Behold My servant, I will support him, My chosen one, whom My soul desires; I have placed My spirit upon him, he shall promulgate justice to the nations.

Mathew 12:18 says

Behold my servant, whom I have chosen; my beloved, in whom my soul is well pleased: I will put my spirit upon him, and he shall shew judgment to the Gentiles.

It doesn't look like anything is left out

Behold My servant (hen avdi) = Behold my servant (idou ho pais)

I will support him (etmakh) = of whom I prefer (mou hon heretisa)

My chosen one (bo bechiri) = my beloved (ho agapetos)

whom My soul desires (ratzeta nafshi) = in whom my soul delights (mou eis hon eudokesen he psuche)

Actually, IMHO what would have immediately become apparent to Jews and proto-Muslims of the 6th century is that "in whom My soul desires" and " in whom my soul delights" are conceptually equivalent with Daniel 10:19, "O man of delights" where the word HaMuDot which shares the same root as the name of the Prophet muHaMaD (pbuh). It is possible that Aramaic and Arabic translations of Isaiah 41:1 used the word "hamudot".

Isaac Marries 3 year-old Rebecca (Rabbinical Commentary)

Related post from before: https://islamicarchives.wordpress.com/2016/09/05/what-is-the-minimum-age-of-marriage-according-to-jewish-law/

Summarized and Taken from : https://discover-the-truth.com/2016/10/26/the-age-of-rebecca-when-she-married-isaac-biblical-perceptive/

Genesis 25:20 King James Version (KJV)

20 And Isaac was forty years old when he took Rebekah to wife, the daughter of Bethuel the Syrian of Padanaram, the sister to Laban the Syrian.

The following are two respected Rabbis statements who said that Rebecca was 3-years-old when she was married off. Rabbi Solomon Itzhaki (A.K.A. Rashi a well-known respected Jewish Scholar, 1040 – 1105 AD), comments on Rebecca’s age of marriage:

“1. Rashi’s commentary on Genesis 25:20 says: forty years old: For when Abraham came from Mount Moriah, he was informed that Rebecca had been born. Isaac was then thirty-seven years old, for at that time Sarah died, and from the time that Isaac was born until the “Binding” [of Isaac], when Sarah died, were thirty-seven years, for she was ninety years old when Isaac was born, and one hundred and twenty-seven when she died, as it is stated (above 23:1): “The life of Sarah was [a hundred and twenty-seven years.”] This makes Isaac thirty-seven years old, and at that time, Rebecca was born. HE WAITED FOR HER UNTIL SHE WOULD BE FIT FOR MARITAL RELATIONS-THREE YEARS-AND THEN MARRIED HER.— [From Gen. Rabbah 57:1] [Retrieved it from this website:http://www.chabad.org/library/bible_cdo/aid/8220/showrashi/true%5D

Rabbi Tobiah Ben Eliezer (1050 – 1108 AD) also confirms that she was 3-years-old when she was married to Isaac:

“Isaac was thirty-seven-years old at his binding… When Abraham returned from Mount Moriah, at that very moment Sarah died, and Isaac was then thirty-seven; and at that very time Abraham was told of Rebekah’s birth; THUS WE FIND THAT REBECCA WAS THREE YEARS OLD WHEN SHE MARRIED ISAAC.” (Pesikta Zutrata (Lekah Tov), Gen. 24., Midrashic commentary on the Pentateuch, by Rabbi Tobiah Ben Eliezer)

Rebecca’s young age is alluded too in Genesis 24:57-59. The following verse corroborates with the previous evidences shown that Rebekah, was a very young girl when she got married. She was so young that she needed a nursing woman with her when she was married off:

“Then they said, “Let’s call the young woman and ask her about it.” 58 So they called Rebekah and asked her, “Will you go with this man?” “I will go,” she said. 59 So they sent their sister REBEKAH ON HER WAY, ALONG WITH HER NURSE and Abraham’s servant and his men. 60 And they blessed Rebekah and said to her.” – Genesis 24:57-60

If Rebekah was a grown woman as some have assumed, who attained full womanhood, why would she need a ‘nursing woman’ to accompany her? This very verse shows she was very young and not at an age where she can take care of herself.

The maiden was very beautiful, a virgin whom no man had known. She went down to the spring, filled her jar, and came up. Genesis 24:16)

-----------

בתולה, “a virgin;” according to the view that Rivkah was only three years old, the Torah hardly needed to add this detail; the Talmud Niddah 44, explains this by saying that even if she had been violated by someone, her hymen had grown together again, (something that was known to people in those days).

(Commentary Chizkuni, Genesis 24:16:1)

Cut long story short Genesis 24:43-59 (Rebecca the little girl between 3 to 9 given as marriage)

An unknown man (servant of Abraham) sees a little girl נַעֲרָה naarah (Rebecca 3 to 9) drawing water, he speaks to her, puts a ring on her nose and bands on her arm. The unknown man asks for the hand of little Rebecca to her brother. He (brother Laban and father Bethual) agree to send little Rebecca away with that unknown man so she can marry his masters son Isaac, and he took her away with her nurse

Chizkuni commentary
ואת מנקתה, “and her nursemaid. (NURSE)” She was used to her as she was still so young.

Strong’s Definitions

יָנַק yânaq, yaw-nak'; a primitive root; to suck; causatively, to give milk:—milch, nurse(-ing mother), (give, make to) suck(-ing child, -ling).

Strong’s Definitions
נַעֲרָה naʻărâh, nah-ar-aw'; feminine of a girl

Brown-Driver-Briggs
1 girl, damsel; קְטַנָּה ׳נ little girl only

Conclusion : Rebecca was so young when she was given for marriage, her nurse had to go with her. talk about Child marriage

Quran and Sunnah

The teaching Prophet Muhammed Pbuh.  if it's not found in the Quran then  look for it in the Sunnah of Prophet Muhammed Pbuh (Ahadith)

Here is a beautiful Hadith which clarifies this.

------------------------

Harith ibn Amr reported: Some men among the companions of Mu’adh said the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, sent him to Yemen and the Prophet said:

كَيْفَ تَقْضِي

How will you judge?

Mu’adh said, “I will judge according to what is in the Book of Allah.” The Prophet said:

فَإِنْ لَمْ يَكُنْ فِي كِتَابِ اللَّهِ

What if it is not in the Book of Allah?

Mu’adh said, “Then with the tradition (sunnah) of the Messenger of Allah.” The Prophet said:

فَإِنْ لَمْ يَكُنْ فِي سُنَّةِ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ

What if it is not in the tradition of the Messenger of Allah?

Mu’adh said, “Then I will strive to form an opinion (ijtihad).” The Prophet said:

الْحَمْدُ لِلَّهِ الَّذِي وَفَّقَ رَسُولَ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ

All praise is due to Allah who has made suitable the messenger of the Messenger of Allah.

(Source: Sunan At-Tirmidhi 1327, Grade: Sahih)

---------------------

From this beautiful Hadith we gather that if something is not found in the Quran then we should look for it in the Sunna of Prophet Muhammed Pbuh. If it's not found both in the Quran and Sunna of Prophet Pbuh then strive to form an opinion (ijtihad).

Next time a non-Muslim asks you show from the Quran where is the word Tawheed  mentioned. Do not hesitate to tell them as Muslims we base our teachings from both Quran and Sunnah. Show them the Hadith which was confirmed by Prophet Muhammed Pbuh.

We are not like  the Christians who follow the bible only. We Muslims follow both Quran and Sunnah.

Hudhaifa reported:

The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) narrated to us two ahadith. I have seen one (crystallized into reality), and I am waiting for the other. He told us: Trustworthiness descended in the innermost (root) of the hearts of people. Then the Qur'an was revealed and they learnt from the Qur'an and they learnt from the Sunnah….. (Sahih Muslim Book 1, Hadith 274)

Yahya related to me from Malik that he heard that the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, "I have left two matters with you. As long as you hold to them, you will not go the wrong way. They are the Book of Allah and the Sunna of His Prophet."

 (Muwatta Malik The Decree Book 46, Hadith 3)

Any Islamic matters in discussions both Quran and Sunnah should be used. Thus, asking us where Tawheed is found we can show you from the Sunnah 

According to Paul, Melchizedek had no genealogy?

There is no record of his father or mother or any of his ancestors--no beginning or end to his life. He remains a priest forever, resembling the Son of God. (Hebrews 7:3)

How comes Paul being a student of rabbi Gamaliel did not know Melchizedek was Shem? In Judaism it is taught that Shem was Melchizedek who Abraham met.

And Malchizedek: The Midrash Aggadah (Targum Jonathan, Ned. 32b, Mid. Ps. 76:3) states that he was Shem, the son of Noah (Rashi commentary on Genesis 14:18)

He asked Melchizedek1See Nedarim 32b, where Melchizedek is identified with Shem, the son of Noah., ( Orchot Tzadikim 14:19)

When Abraham returned from the war, Shem, or, as he is sometimes called, Melchizedek, the king of righteousness, priest of God Most High, and king of Jerusalem, came (Legends of the Jews 1:5:119)

identification of Shem with Melchizedek occurs in the Talmud (loc. cit. in this note), and see Buber’s note 18 on p. 30 of the Midrash Agadah, cf. also Pal. Targum and Jer. Targum on Gen. xiv. 18, (Pirkei DeRabbi Eliezer 8:4)

This goes to show Paul had no clue of the traditional view of Shem. And to make matters worse for Paul, Shem did have a genealogy his father was Noah and mother Naamah. How could Paul assume making up such a lie about Melchizedek will go unnoticed?

Paul was not the student of rabbi Gamaliel and nor was he aware of who Melchizedek was. Paul have deceived millions of Christians till now who believe Melchizedek resembled the son of god? Little do they know Paul lied. Melchizedek was none other than Shem.

Why Does the Torah Describe Babies Born Hands First?

Jacob is famously born with his hand grasping the ankle of his twin brother, Esau. Similarly, Zerah puts his hand out first, before being overshot by his twin brother Peretz. Does this reflect men’s ignorance of childbirth or their familiarity with other realia?^[1]

Dr. Eran Viezel

The Birth of Esau and Jacob, 1360 – 1370, Master of Jean de Mandeville, Getty Museum

An Impossible Birth Story

The story of Judah and Tamar in Genesis 38 ends with Tamar giving birth to twins:

בראשית לח:כז וַיְהִי בְּעֵת לִדְתָּהּ וְהִנֵּה תְאוֹמִים בְּבִטְנָהּ. לח:כח וַיְהִי בְלִדְתָּהּוַיִּתֶּן יָד וַתִּקַּח הַמְיַלֶּדֶת וַתִּקְשֹׁר עַל יָדוֹ שָׁנִי לֵאמֹר זֶה יָצָא רִאשֹׁנָה.לח:כט וַיְהִי כְּמֵשִׁיב יָדוֹ וְהִנֵּה יָצָא אָחִיו וַתֹּאמֶר מַה פָּרַצְתָּ עָלֶיךָ פָּרֶץ וַיִּקְרָא שְׁמוֹ פָּרֶץ. לח:ל וְאַחַר יָצָא אָחִיו אֲשֶׁר עַל יָדוֹ הַשָּׁנִי וַיִּקְרָא שְׁמוֹ זָרַח.

Gen 38:27 When the time came for her to give birth, there were twins in her womb! 38:28 While she was in labor, one of them put out his hand, and the midwife tied a crimson thread on that hand, to signify: This one came out first. 38:29But just then he drew back his hand, and out came his brother; and she said, “What a breach you have made for yourself!” So he was named Perez. 38:30 Afterward his brother came out, on whose hand was the crimson thread; he was named Zerah.

The story has two features that contradict the reality of childbirth.^[2]

One at a time – Twins cannot switch places mid birth. They do not come out of the uterus together nor are they both in the birth canal at the same time.

Hands first – Babies are generally born head first (cephalic presentation), with the baby’s hands positioned alongside its body, pressed in by the birth canal, toward the direction of its legs. Less common are the breech presentations (3-4%).^[3] In rare cases (0.1% incidence), an arm or both arms can present together with the head or buttocks (compound presentation). But, to the best of my knowledge, babies never emerge with their arms extended forwards.^[4]

The Meaning of the Story

The story is meant as an allegory or a foundational myth, explaining the relationship between two Judahite clans, that of Zerah and that of Peretz. Since biblical tradition associates King David with the Peretz clan, it is clear that this clan wins out, although the story implies that Zerah had some claim to seniority as well.^[5]

Some scholars have suggested that the withdrawal of Zerah’s hand back into Tamar’s womb indicates that Zerah is voluntarily relinquishing his birthright.^[6] In other words, Zerah is the active child, first putting out his hand, then withdrawing it in favor of his brother.

And yet, this does not fit well with the comment of the midwife, who describes Peretz as the active one: “What a breach you have made for yourself?!” (מַה פָּרַצְתָּ עָלֶיךָ פָּרֶץ). Thus, I suggest that the author is implying that Zerah’s brother Perez grabbed his twin by the feet and pulled him back, and then hurried to be the first out of the womb. In other words, the twins grappled with each other in the womb, Zerah took the lead first, but ultimately, Peretz emerged first.

Jacob and Esau: Another Grappling Twins

This reading is supported by the parallels to the birth of the pair of twins narrated earlier in the Torah, Jacob and Esau:

בראשית כה:כד וַיִּמְלְאוּ יָמֶיהָ לָלֶדֶת וְהִנֵּה תוֹמִם בְּבִטְנָהּ. כה:כה וַיֵּצֵא הָרִאשׁוֹן אַדְמוֹנִי כֻּלּוֹ כְּאַדֶּרֶת שֵׂעָר וַיִּקְרְאוּ שְׁמוֹ עֵשָׂו. כה:כווְאַחֲרֵי כֵן יָצָא אָחִיו וְיָדוֹ אֹחֶזֶת בַּעֲקֵב עֵשָׂו וַיִּקְרָא (נ”ש‎: ויקראו) שְׁמוֹ יַעֲקֹב…

Gen 25:24 When her time to give birth was at hand, there were twins in her womb. 25:25 The first one emerged red, like a hairy mantle all over; so they named him Esau. 25:26 Then his brother emerged, and his hand had hold on Esau’s heel; so he (SP: they) named him Jacob….

Scholars have long emphasized the commonalities between these stories in both language and content.^[7] Both,

• Begin with the words וְהִנֵּה תְאוֹמִים/תוֹמִם בְּבִטְנָהּ “behold, there were twins in her womb”;
• Describe competition in the womb between twin brothers;
• Have the first child associated with red (hair or string)
• Assume that the one that comes out second (Jacob) or is supposed to come out second (Peretz) will be dominant.

These literary connections highlight the motif shared between both stories—how two groups of similar origins are described as twins, and the ultimate ascendency of one over the other is foreshadowed in their birth.

Both stories also assume that babies emerge from the maternal womb with their hands extended forward. Jacob’s grasping of Esau’s heel pre-supposes that the first part of Jacob’s body to come into the world was his hand. This positioning is stated explicitly in the case of Zerah, and may be implied with respect to Perez as well, who fought his way past his brother, pulling him back.  Yet, both texts present physiological impossibilities.

The Door of the Womb

Perhaps this image is related to the idea that the womb is depicted metaphorically as a door, and doors are opened with hands. The use of a door as a metaphor for the womb is found most clearly in Job 3, where Job curses the day he was born:

איוב ג:י כִּי לֹא סָגַר דַּלְתֵי בִטְנִי…

Job 3:10 Because it did not block the door of my [mother’s] womb…

This accords with other biblical descriptions of doors whose locks are placed on the inside and so they are opened or closed from within rather than from the outside.^[8] But again, it is important to remember that this entailment of the door metaphor, that the door is opened by a hand from the inside, is not accurate from a physiological perspective.

Men Did Not Attend Childbirth

So how did these two stories about birth hands-first arise?  Biblical narratives were written by men or mostly by men, and in ancient Israel, as was the case in most places until recently, men were not present at childbirth.^[9] The view that childbirth generated impurity, as evident in the requirements for post-partum purification (Leviticus 12), would have reinforced cultural gender divisions so that only women would have attended to a woman giving birth.

Biblical birth scenes feature a “midwife” (Gen 35:17; 38:28) or “midwives” (Exod 1:15–21), and similarly “the women attending her” (1 Sam 4:20). In contrast, the father is not present at the birth, but rather awaits word from a messenger, as reflected in Jeremiah 20:15:

אָרוּר הָאִישׁ אֲשֶׁר בִּשַּׂר אֶת אָבִי לֵאמֹר יֻלַּד לְךָ בֵּן זָכָר…

Cursed is the man who brought my father the news, saying: A boy is born to you.

Childbirth, then, was a female event that took place within a closed circle of women, and it is possible that men would have had only scant information about the experience. This is also reflected in the Bible’s stereotypical and one-dimensional descriptions of birthing mothers. Women in childbirth are described as helpless, suffering great pain, and screaming bitterly.^[10] We may presume that the cries of woman were heard even by those outside the birthing room, causing this trope to develop.

Another text that points to a stereotyped perception, devoid of awareness of actual childbirth, is the mocking description:

ירמיה ל:ו …רָאִיתִי כָל גֶּבֶר יָדָיו עַל חֲלָצָיו כַּיּוֹלֵדָה…

Jer 30:6 …I see every man with his hands on his loins like a woman in labor…[11]

The men in this verse are grabbing their loins out of fear, and the verse describes this inaccurately as a posture as typical of women in childbirth. The author is incorrectly positing that the woman’s loins were the locus of pain, and were grabbed by the woman, during childbirth, since men tend to grab their organ when it is hurt or injured.  Had the biblical descriptions of childbirth been written by women, they would have been entirely different.^[12]

The Realia Behind the Misconception: Animal Births

The male authors of these passages assumed that human children were born in the same way as farm animals—births that they would have seen. In standard births of cows, sheep, and goats, as well as horses, camels, and donkeys, the hooves (the tips of the forelegs) are the first parts of the body to emerge from the womb. The hooves precede the tip of the newborn animal’s nose and its mouth, which are thrust forward by the pressure of the birth canal.^[13]

In difficult births, when the animal refuses to come out of the womb, a farmer will tie a rope around the forelegs, which are sticking out, and pull the animal out. The pulling action brings the forelegs out first, while the head retreats somewhat, emerging from the birth canal only after the legs have fully emerged. Ancient farmers and shepherds likely employed similar methods to assist an animal with a difficult birth, and this would have further reinforced their conceptions about the sequence in which limbs emerged during birth.

From Farm Animals to HumansMost likely, ancient Israelite men’s equation between animal and human birth would have been intuitive. This erroneous assumption was held by the narrators and authors of the stories about childbirth in the Bible, and it functions as a significant basis for the story of the births of Jacob and Esau and of Zerah and Perez.

___________________

Dr. Eran Viezel is a Senior Lecturer in Ben Gurion University’s Department of Bible, Archaeology and Ancient Near Eastern Studies. He holds a Ph.D. from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and his main field of research is Jewish exegesis. Among his publications are The Commentary on Chronicles Attributed to Rashi (Jerusalem: Magnes, 2010), ‘To Settle the Plain Meaning of the Verse’: Studies in Biblical Exegesis (Jerusalem: The Bialik Institute, 2011) (with Sara Japhet), tens of academic articles, in addition to two books of poems and two novels. 

[1] This article is a revised version of my, “The Influence of Realia on Biblical Depictions of Childbirth,” VT 61.4 (2011): 685-689. See now: John Makujina, “Male Obstetric Competence in Ancient Israel: A Response to Two Recent Proposals”, VT 66.1 (2016): 78-94.

[2] The Bible contains only a few accounts of childbirth. In addition to Gen 25:25–26; 38:28–30; Job 3:10–13, which are discussed in this essay, births are also described in Gen 30:3; 35:16–20; Exod 1:15–21; 1Sam 4:19–22; Ezek 16:4–6. These latter examples do not contain information relevant to the current topic. For general analyses of childbirth in antiquity, see Marten Stol, Birth in Babylonia and the Bible: Its Mediterranean Setting (Cuneiform Monographs 14; Groningen: Styx, 2000); Tarja S. Philip, Menstruation and Childbirth in the Bible: Fertility and Impurity (New York: Peter Lang, 2006). On Hittite birth rituals, see Gary M. Beckman, Hittite Birth Rituals (Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz, 1983).

[3] Breech is actually an umbrella for a number of presentations, in which either the baby’s buttocks (complete/incomplete breech or frank presentations) or its feet (footling presentation) emerge first.

[4] In point of fact, one position can lead to a hand-first birth, but only in stillborns. In the transverse presentation (0.3% incidence), the baby lays perpendicular to the cervical opening and as labor progresses, the head of the baby will curve away from the exit of the birth canal until its neck breaks. In modern times, such cases are handled with a Caesarian section. For data on these births, see F. Gary Cunningham, et al. (eds.), Williams Obstetrics, 21^st Edition(New York: McGraw Hill, 2009), 456–457.

[5] The legitimacy of the dynasty of Peretz is also learned indirectly and by the way of negation from Achan’s actions (“Achan son of Karmi the son of Zimri the son of Zerah”, Josh 7:1).

[6]  Thus, Philip, Menstruation and Childbirth in the Bible, 90.

[7] See especially Yair Zakovitch, “Jacob’s Deceit,” in Baruch Ben-Yehuda Jubilee Volume (Ben-Zion Lurie, ed.; Tel Aviv: The Israel Society of Biblical Literature, 1981), 125–127 [Hebrew]; ibid., An Introduction to Inner-Biblical Interpretation (Even Yehudah: Rekhes, 1992), 13–15 [Hebrew].

[8] This is true for both actual physical doors (e.g. Deut 3:5); and in metaphorical usage (e.g. Zech 11:1); further evidence that the standard location of locks was on the interior of doors may be garnered from Song of Songs (5:4–5).

[9]  Philip, Menstruation and Childbirth in the Bible, 88, 92, 97–98, 104, 131.

[10] Isa 26:17; Jer 4:31, and see also, the Hodayot scroll from Qumran: 1QH 3:8–9; 5:32–33; Elisha Qimron, The Dead Sea Scrolls: The Hebrew Writings, vol. 1 (Jerusalem: Yad Ben Zvi, 2010), 72, 77 [Hebrew].

[11]  For the meaning of חֲלָצָיו, see V. Hamp, ‘ch^alātsayim’, TDOT IV, pp. 441–444.

[12] Cf. Bernadette J. Brooten, “Early Christian Women and Their Cultural Context: Issues of Method in Historical Reconstructions,” in Feminist Perspectives on Biblical Scholarship (ed., Adela Y. Collins; Biblical Scholarship in North America 10; Chico: SBL, 1985), 67–73, who has rightly pointed out that information on women in ancient literature often reveals little of the actual life of women.

[13]  See Patrick T. Colahan et al., Equine Medicine and Surgery (Goleta, 1991), Vol 2, pp. 994–997; D. G. Pugh, Sheep and Goat Medicine (Philadelphia, 2002), pp. 163–165.