[b-hebrew] Genesis 41: 1: "Two Years of Days"
J.Read-2 at sms.ed.ac.uk
Wed Jul 15 16:33:28 EDT 2009
Oh dear! You still haven't answered the questions. I'll explain to you
why again but this time I'll be a little more explicit.
Quoting JimStinehart at aol.com:
> James Christian:
> Although I already answered both of your questions, I will answer them
> again, this time making the answers simpler.
> 1. You wrote: “1) When do you see a boy becoming a man? Stating things
> like 'In the ancient world ... blah, blah, blah' is not an answer unless you
> willing to provide some evidence in some form. If your only evidence
> is how they support your conclusions then this is called 'circular
> reasoning' and is unlikely to convince me.”
> The Jewish custom of a Bar Mitzvah at age 13 indicates that in the ancient
> and medieval worlds, the approximate time at which a boy became a man was
> age 13.
Your interpretation of the Bar Mitzvah speaking about the ancient and
medieval worlds is not evidence. It is your interpretation. You are,
as usual, heaping conjecture upon conjecture. Have you considered
there being more than just two phases to a male's life cycle?
> Likewise, the fact that most females in the ancient world bore their
> first child by age 15, and that age 13 was commonplace for a female to bear
> her first child, indicates that a girl became a woman in the ancient world
> at approximately the same time as a boy became a man.
Again. You talk about 'facts' but provide no evidence. Am I just
supposed to take your word for it most girls naughtily got a bun in
the oven between the ages of 10 and 12 when really they should have
waited till the grand old age of 13 or are you actually going to start
providing some primary source references at some point in this exchange?
> 2. You wrote: “2) How does the Quran's importance of the number 19
> support you claims when there is no indication of whether their
> tradition refers
> to 6
> month years or 12 month years? Restating your interpretation and
> embellishing me with further details of further conjectural
> interpretations of similar style is not what I consider evidence. It
> is just conjecture heaped on conjecture. Are you actually going to
> offer any evidence in the near future or just keep embellishing
> further conjectural ideas?”
> It is an objective fact that the number 19 has outsized importance in the
> Koran, and is viewed positively in the Koran. The most likely explanation
> for that numerical fact is that the Koran correctly ascertained that in terms
> of the 6-month “years” that are used to set forth everyone’s ages in the
> Patriarchal narratives, Ishmael was age 19 “years” when he was exiled by his
> father Abraham. (That is age 9½ in regular, 12-month years.) Thus the num
> ber 19 symbolizes the birth of the Arabs, who later became Muslims. It was
> when Ishmael was age 19 “years” in the Patriarchal narratives that Ishmael
> is portrayed in the text as separating from the Abraham-Isaac line. That is
> the explanation for the otherwise mysterious sura 74: 30 in the Koran:
> "Over it is 19." The number 19 symbolizes Ishmael, the birth of the
> Arabs, and
> the birth of Islam.
Ok! I am willing to take your word for it that 19 is an important
number in the Koran. Please, please, please stop repeating this very
simple point and address the issue. Why do you believe it to be 19 6
month years and not 12 month years. Nothing in the Koran or Islamic
tradition leads you to this. You are supporting your conclusion by
providing 'evidence' which you interpret in light of your conclusion.
This is called 'circular' reasoning and most people on this mailing
list are not impressed by that form of reasoning. It lacks any real
Please don't bother replying again if all you are going to do is
repeat the same stuff over and over again. Please attempt to show that
you have even understood the nature of the questions.
The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
Scotland, with registration number SC005336.
More information about the b-hebrew