zellmer at digitelone.com
Mon Aug 23 19:30:04 EDT 1999
Baruch Alster wrote:
> Just one more question for Paul Zellmer:
> How do you reconcile your view of "progression" in this chapter with
> where Ezekiel talks of the destruction of Moab along with Ammon, "so
> Bene Ammon might not be remembered among the nations"? doesn't it
> like Ammon's destruction is more important in the oracle than Moab's
> punishment (which is not necessarily total destruction at all)?
Baruch, I again appeal to the logic that rapid annihilation is to be
considered as less severe than a more lengthy process of destruction, or
even near destruction. Of course, this reference should also be
troublesome to your proposal, since it refers to Ammon in the third
person and not the second. Does such a treatment make your
interpretation impossible? No. But if reference is made to the other
three groups only to serve as a lesson to Ammon, it seems to me that the
second person would be more likely.
Just my thoughts. I don't think either of our interpretations on this
passage make or break a major theological theme in the entire Tanakh.
More information about the b-hebrew