[b-hebrew] "Shinar" at Genesis 14: 1 Is Not "Sumer", Part I
Kevin P. Edgecomb
kevin at bombaxo.com
Fri Feb 1 16:30:17 EST 2008
No, Mr Stinehart, we're not getting anywhere.
Your points in order:
1.) Etymologically, the Hebrew Shin`ar is likely from the Akkadian Shanharu, not Sumeru, but all refer precisely to the same geographic region (not a political unit, by the way).
2.) Kasdim is likewise considered to derive from the Kassite word for Akkad/Babylonia/Shanharu: Karduniash. The presentation of that second consonant alternately as /r/l/s/sh/ indicates that it was a lateral fricative, represented in different ways depending upon convention.
3.) The Hebrew Shin`ar, from Shanharu, appears also in Genesis 10 and 11 and Daniel 1, clear references to the area of Babylonia.
4.) Tidal most certainly does not equate to Tudhaliya, mooting your point. A more likely possibility would be something like the city name Tuttul, and the Goiim representing Guti.
5.) Amraphel has often been taken to represent Hammurapi, but even this is not likely. That there were several to bear the name means nothing. You grasp at straws and redefine geographical names to suit your fancy. The four kings of Genesis 14 are all Mesopotamia-based. If you can't understand it as historical and find that ridiculous, then it's your problem, not the problem of the author or his original audience, who found it believable enough not to reject it out of hand, but to continue the tradition of copying.
6.) You make a complete mess of the Egyptian evidence, and the simple fact, recognized by ALL, that Sangaru is Shanharu is Sumeru is Babylonia, and that the Pharaoh is merely boasting! Ach! And what possesses you to equate Amenhotep III with the pharaoh of Exodus, or any other one mentioned in the Bible, for that matter? No doubt you are working with an alternate chronology in addition to an alternate philology....
This is over. I return to deleting your messages. The spaghetti of your ideas is too tangled to straighten now that it is boiled in such a ferment of peculiarity. I herewith cease the attempt to correct you.
It is an admirable thing when one has such a devotion to so great a book as the Bible. It is unfortunate when this devotion overtakes everything else, and one begins to twist evidence in order to correct any presumed shortcomings it may have. You have my respect for your devotion, but not for your stubbornness in rejecting and resisting the conclusions of people who know a good deal better than you in the subjects under question.
Kevin P. Edgecomb
More information about the b-hebrew