09-06-2004, 03:06 AM
Dave Wrote:There is no reason for the distinction that he was her betrothed/husband to be made here again, in this section, it was stated in the following section already.
Ah, but I do see a reason for this distinction (i.e. for baalah to be in the text), and it is the one that Andrew Gabriel Roth has pointed out -- namely to show that this Joseph who is the baalah is a different Joseph than the Joseph who is the gowra (Matt 1: 16), and so the 14-14-14 generations really lines up.
Wayne