Question Concerning Inspiration

Peter Kirk Peter_Kirk at sil.org
Sat Dec 2 04:42:09 EST 2000


Well, if you have to go through some other realm (or by sea) to get from
Israel to Kuntillat Ajrud, you pay your money (literally!) and you take your
choice. The coastal plain would be easier for travel than the highlands of
Judah. Who knows which would have been cheaper? And whichever way you go
(apart from through Moab), I guess, KA is en route from Israel to Eilat.
(But could KA be en route from Israelite-controlled Moab to Egypt?) Don't
forget there was no Suez canal as a short cut from the coastal plain to
Eilat! So much for your "the only rational way for Israelites to get there
[KA] is straight through this hypothesized Jerusalem territory".

As for the 6-chambered gates in the 10th century, which "indicate that they
were built by the same realm." This looks like confirmation of the Biblical
account, which indicates that Judah and Israel were one at this time. You
continue, "In this case that realm was Israel, for we know that Megiddo and
Hazor were Israelite." But what 10th century evidence do we have for that
which rules out the alternative that they were under the control of Judah at
that time? As for Jerusalem being a village, you cannot be sure of that as
you have no answer to the hypothesis that all remains from this period
(including perhaps similar gates) were cleared away, or buried deeply,
during the building of the platform of Herod's temple.

By the way, what has this discussion to do with Biblical Hebrew? Not much if
you are rejecting the evidence from the BH text!

Peter Kirk

-----Original Message-----
From: Ian Hutchesson [mailto:mc2499 at mclink.it]
Sent: 02 December 2000 04:11
To: Biblical Hebrew
Subject: Re: Question Concerning Inspiration

<snip>

Peter, responding to my question of how one gets from Israel to Kuntillat
Ajrud, says:

>Very easy, you go round by the coastal plain.

Oh, if it were that simple. This of course means passing through the various
Philistine cities' territory. However, normally when one sets up trading
stations one does so near enough to one's area of control. Land trade is
strongly connected to power. (Much of Assyria's territorial gains were to
guarantee trade.)

If they could whizz down the coast, why put a waystation deep in the Negev?
Why not simply tap it in more acceptable conditions? The answer of course is
that they probably didn't go down the coast.



But then we know that cities like Gezer and Lachish each had a type of gate
in the late tenth century also found at Megiddo and Hazor -- the famous
six-chamber gates. The same gates indicate that they were built by the same
realm. In this case that realm was Israel, for we know that Megiddo and
Hazor were Israelite. (This is of course strengthened by the Finkelstein
redating of the archeological chronology.)

Strangely enough in the chambers of the Gezer gate there were found "low
plastered stone benches which run around the three sides". Such benches were
also found at Dan, Tell en-Nasbeh (Mizpah) and Khirbet el-Qom, this last
being south east of Lachish. Of course, the Judeans could have used the same
techniques and the same materials! But then during the ninth century,
Jerusalem seems to have been not more than a village, and constructional
methods do tend to represent the culture of the one realm which used them.

<snip>




More information about the b-hebrew mailing list