JimStinehart at aol.com
JimStinehart at aol.com
Thu Sep 15 14:45:02 EDT 2011
Consider that the following six names of peoples at Genesis 15: 19-21, and
a-l-l personal names associated in the Bible with such six names, make
more sense in Hurrian than in west Semitic:
1. Kenizzites, and associated personal names: Jephunneh, Othniel, Caleb,
2. Kenites, and associated personal names: Heber, Hobab, Reu-el.
3. Hittites, and associated personal names: Ephron, Uriah.
4. Jebusites, and associated personal name: Araunah.
5. Perizzites. (No associated personal names.)
6. Girgashites. (No associated personal names.)
There’s a good reason why none of those names makes good sense in west
Semitic. They’re all Hurrian!
As I mentioned to you in a prior post of mine, the Table of Nations in
chapter 10 of Genesis [which is not part of the Patriarchal narratives] contains
three of these six names. Genesis 10: 15-18 lists 11 peoples, including
Heth [a shortened form of “Hittites”], the Jebusites and the Girgashites, as
having been begotten by Canaan. All 11 such peoples seem to reference
peoples whose original homelands were in Lebanon or Syria, which would include
the Hurrians. [Per the curse of Genesis 9: 25-27, which says that Canaan
shall serve Shem, perhaps that Biblical author is asserting that those peoples
whose original homelands were north of Canaan are supposed to be beholden to
the Hebrews, who per the Table of Nations are viewed as coming from a
different line of Noah’s descendants, Shem.] In any event, that grouping in
chapter 10 of Genesis is broadly consistent with my view that the Biblical author
of the Table of Nations understood Heth (and the “Hittites”), the
Jebusites and the Girgashites as being Hurrians, whose original homeland was in
Syria, but who had dominated the ruling class in Canaan for part of the Late
Now consider also Exodus 3: 8, 17, where three of these six names appear in
a list of six peoples who lived in Canaan prior to Israel: “Hittites”,
Perizzites and Jebusites. Note that all three such peoples are viewed as
people who lived in Canaan proper prior to Israel, not as people who lived
exclusively north of Canaan proper. That fits perfectly with my view that all
six names reference peoples who lived in Canaan proper during the Patriarchal
Age, namely the Hurrian ruling class in Canaan during the Amarna Age. As
noted above, the personal names associated with the “Hittites” and the
Jebusites in the Bible are all Hurrian names, not west Semitic names.
Indeed, all 16 names mentioned in this post are Hurrian, not west Semitic.
And to get the number up to 17½ [the peculiar number that dominates the
Patriarchal narratives, as in Abraham dying at stated age 17½ tenfold], add
MDYN-YM, MDN and MDYN, all of which, as I mentioned in a prior post, are Late
Bronze Age references to the Hurrian state of Mitanni in eastern Syria.
A good place to start, but not to end, is with the Kenizzite names Caleb
and Achsah. They are not west Semitic names meaning “Dog” and “Fetters for a
Criminal”!!! [“As a dog [K-KLB] returneth to his vomit, [so] a fool
returneth to his folly.” Proverbs 26: 11. “He goeth after her straightway, as
an ox goeth to the slaughter, or as a fool to the correction of the stocks
[W-K-(KS]”. Proverbs 7: 22.] No, Caleb and Achsah are fine Hurrian names [“
Kelip” and “Akisi”] with the following very positive meanings: “It
Pleases [Deity]” and “Led by [Deity]”. The key is that QN-Z-Y [rendered by KJV
as “Kenizzite”] is the same name as Qa-ni-iz-za, a Hurrian name attested at
the Late Bronze Age Hurrian province of Nuzi in eastern Syria, being in
particular an Akkadian-based name with Hurrian characteristics. That Hurrian
name means “Firm Is Blessed [Deity]”.
The only way to understand the names Kenites, Kenizzites and Jebusites is
to see them as having a root that is the Hurrian version of an Akkadian verb,
plus one or more classic Hurrian suffixes. Just like Yi-id-ya in the
Amarna Letters. Same. Those four names are Akkadian-based names with Hurrian
characteristics. That’s the winning linguistic analysis that scholars have
Karl, here’s one of the few things that you and I can agree on:
The Patriarchal narratives are much older, and more historically accurate,
than university scholars realize.
More information about the b-hebrew