Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Schmuel <schmuel AT escape.com>]

Shalom b-hebrew,

Shoshanna
> No offense to anyone, but this is a typical example of running around in 
> circles and not understanding anything, because of not going to the 
> source, ie;Torah and Oral Torah, for knowledge.

Schmuel

Well they are discussing in Torah (Pentateuch) and Tanach.

If you can share views from Talmud or rabbinical commentaries, about Dan,
and the numbering and names of the tribes, I am sure the forum would 
appreciate..

There is another part of the Dan discussion that I would like to mention...

My understanding is that in also in Tanach (perhaps 1 Chronicles 7)
and in the Messianic Testament, (Revelation 7) there are more listings of
tribes that exclude Dan ... the Revelation exclusion is particularly
a  textual "hot-button" issue......... (because of some of the explanations
that are given in commentary for the omission) ... so I find this discussion
particularly interesting and perhaps able to shed more light on those 
omissions ....

Thank you :-)

Ian
<snip>
> If anyone has problems with the notion that Dan was not
> originally a tribe of Israel, they might like to explain
>
> 1) why Dan's original homeland is placed firmly in
>    sea people territory, including Ekron and Timna
>    (Jos 19:40ff) between the Philistines and the  Tjekker;
>
> 2) why a group that had never had any connection with
>    the sea according to the biblical tradition, could
>    suddenly be already dwelling in ships in Jdg 5:17;
>
> 3) why Dan is considered "like" a tribe of Israel;
>
> 4) as the Denyen were one of the sea peoples who ended
>    up on the Levantine coast post 1170 BCE, why the
>    name Dan is linguistically extremely similar to
>    dnnym as the Denyen are called elsewhere (see the
>    etymology supplied by Gen 30:6 with dnny)
>
> 5) why 2 Sam 24:6 mentions the unexplainable dnh y`n,
>    usually transliterated as Dan-jaan, which is
>    linguistically similar to Denyen;
>
> 6) why Dan was apportioned Philistine heartland (Jos
>    19:40ff) but ends up somewhere totally different,
>    while considering that the sea peoples took
>    possession of the whole coast (explaining why Dan
>    could have a tradition locating it in Philistine
>    lands but ending up north); and
>
> 7) why Dan, according to Jdg 18:1, had no lands among
>    the tribes of Israel allotted to them, at such a
>    late date.

Ian
> We could also look at the favourite son of the tribe
> of Dan, Samson, with his sun-god name and his
> Philistine wives. There is a wealth of evidence for
> the lateness of Dan's inclusion among the tribes of Israel.
>
> If the twelve tribes are so sacrosanct to people, they
> might also like to explain why the Bani-Yamini were a
> problem for the people of Mari, why Amenemope seems to
> connect Asher and Zebulun with the sea peoples along
> with Gaza, Ashkelon and Ashdod, why Simeon doesn't even
> rate a mention in Moses' farewell speech which talks of only eleven 
> tribes, etc.

Shalom,
Steven Avery
Queens, NY


schmuel AT escape.com

Messianic_Apologetic-subscribe AT yahoogroups.com
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Messianic_Apologetic/