Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Uri Hurwitz <uhurwitz AT yahoo.com>]

   First, the linguistic association.  Clearly  the consonants are identical 
in Akkadian and Heb. The Akkadian cuneiform sign for the first consonant can 
be either Kha  as in Arabic, ( fused with H (.) chet in Heb.), or -- Ayin. 
That the latter was the pronounciation in this case is  evident in the first 
letter of the same social term in such disparate linguistic cultures as 
Ugaritic and Egyptian, Ayin in both. The second consonantis B or P , these 
are quite interchangeble as is known.The third  is R in both.
  As for historical , anthropological  correspondence between )abiru and 
Ibrim.: The first are known throughout the ANE mostly in the second 
millennium,  not as an ethnicum, rather as landless outsiders, marauders but 
sometimes as mercenaries. In short an ill defined appellation. Ibrim in  the 
HB is a term used mostly by others such as the Philistines to describe the 
Herews or Israelites, not by the latter to describe themselves. Again an ill 
defined appellation.
 
  The )Apiru of the El-Amarna tablets may refer to the groups we read about 
in Genesis in the Patriarchial narratives that are involved in skirmishes and 
even battles (see the enigmatic chapt. 14). It is  certainly a period that 
preceeds the settlement/conquest,  but only five or six generations seprate 
Amarna from Merenpath. Perhaps some Hebrews  remained in Canaan, not all went 
down to Egypt, but this is ouside the scope of this list. 
 
  Uri

Yigal Levin <leviny1 AT mail.biu.ac.il> wrote:
OK, let's do it.

My impression has always been that the initial connection was made simply 
because, to the European scholars who first translated the el-Amarna letters, 
"Habiru" sounded lot like "Hebrew". However, even assuming an etymological 
connection between (PR and (BR,
a. A careful analysis of the EA texts finds no mention of the Apiru as 
"tribes", "invaders", "conquerors" or anything else that is similar to the 
biblical account of the conquest. Many of the cities mentioned in the 
conquest story, such as Jericho, Ai, Gibeon, Hebron, Debir, Shimron, Achshaph 
are not mention in the EA texts (and indeed many were not even settled at the 
time). 
b. The term "Ibri" and its uses in the Bible are also unclear. DOES it refer 
to an "ethnicity"? Is it a social status?
c. IF the EA letters were to be taken as evidence of a "Hebrew" invasion of 
Canaan during the 14th century, such an invasion had no real effect: the 
"wave" of destructions, the appearance of "Israelite" settlements in the hill 
country and the end of Egyptian rule of the country all began in the 12th 
century. 

Yigal
----- Original Message ----- 
From: Uri Hurwitz 
To: Yigal Levin ; b-hebrew 
Sent: Saturday, May 22, 2004 10:48 PM
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] True Date of the Jericho Battle


Yigal wrote: "However, even if that date is off by about a century either way 
it would not
make a difference, as there is NO archaeological OR textual evidence of any
appearance of anything that anyone could identify as "Israelites" until the
very end of the 13th century.

Yigal"
I believe you refer here to the the "Israel Stele" by Merenptah; indeed late 
13th cent., and there the matter could rest.

But some timid souls would still support Th. Meek's thesis, and he was not 
the first or the only one, that the infamous Habiru of the Amarna tablets in 
the 14th century were the Hebrews. He made this connection on clear 
linguistic grounds, which makes this worth discussion on this list. And it 
would push back the external references to biblical Hebrews by over a 
century. But please don't tell Rainey (among those who violently deny any 
connection with the Habiru) what I wrote here.

Uri 
,





_______________________________________________
b-hebrew mailing list
b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

_______________________________________________
b-hebrew mailing list
b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
                
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Domains - Claim yours for only $14.70/year
>From lizfried AT umich.edu  Sun May 23 11:09:43 2004
Return-Path: <lizfried AT umich.edu>
Delivered-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Received: from intolerance.mr.itd.umich.edu (intolerance.mr.itd.umich.edu
        [141.211.14.78])
        by happyhouse.metalab.unc.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id B531D20064
        for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Sun, 23 May 2004 11:09:42 -0400 
(EDT)
Received: from lizhp500 (pcp04068222pcs.sanarb01.mi.comcast.net 
[68.40.173.83])
        by intolerance.mr.itd.umich.edu (smtp) with ESMTP id i4NF9cOi014696;
        Sun, 23 May 2004 11:09:42 -0400
Message-Id: <200405231509.i4NF9cOi014696 AT intolerance.mr.itd.umich.edu>
From: "Lisbeth S. Fried" <lizfried AT umich.edu>
To: "'UUC'" <unikom AT paco.net>, <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Subject: RE: [b-hebrew] Isaiah 53 read within the book as a whole
Date: Sun, 23 May 2004 11:16:30 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
        charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.5510
In-Reply-To: <008701c43f66$a271d640$888372c3@Vadim>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1409
Thread-Index: AcQ/Zyngbc9/P2ovSQGDR3MqqyuMqABbqkNA
Cc: 
X-BeenThere: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.4
Precedence: list
List-Id: Hebrew Bible List <b-hebrew.lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew>,
        <mailto:b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/b-hebrew>
List-Post: <mailto:b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sympa AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=HELP>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew>,
        <mailto:b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 23 May 2004 15:09:43 -0000

Dear Vadim,
You must have a different bible from mine.
Mine says:
52:8 The sound of your sentinels (O Zion)!  They've lifted a voice!
As one they've rejoiced in song!
For every eye shall see YHWH's return to Zion.
9. Burst forth in song! O ruins of Jerusalem
For YHWH has comforted his people. He has redeemed Jerusalem.
10. He has bared his holy arm before the eyes of all the nations.
All the ends of the earth have seen it! -- the saving power of our God!
11. Depart! Depart! Get out from there!
Touch no unclean thing.
Get out from the midst of it! Purify yourselves,
you who carry YHWH's vessels.
12. For you will not go out in haste,
and you will not go out in flight.
For YHWH will walk before you,
The God of Israel will be your rear guard.

This is the return of the temple vessels.
They are leaving Babylon and the temple of Marduk 
and traveling across the highway that is prepared in
the desert and going to Zion. This is a physical return
of YHWH to the temple of Zion, it is a physical return
before every eye. It is not a metaphysical or spiritual
return, but a return that every eye has seen.
It is also a recapitulation of the Exodus from Egypt.
In the Egyptian Exodus they went out in haste, they fled,
this is a measured orderly going out, since it is sanctioned
by Cyrus and there is no fear of his changing his mind.
As in the Egyptian Exodus, YHWH walks before and behind.
This was the whole purpose of Cyrus' coming. He came to
rebuild the Jerusalem and Judah and YHWH's temple, and
it was fulfilled. That is why Isaiah refers to Cyrus as the Messiah,
he has restored the status quo anti.
Read my article Cyrus the Messiah?
To fail to understand this is to fail to understand the whole book
of Isaiah. 
Best,
Liz


> -----Original Message-----
> From: b-hebrew-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org 
> [mailto:b-hebrew-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of UUC
> Sent: Friday, May 21, 2004 2:48 PM
> To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Isaiah 53 read within the book as a whole
> 
> Dear Liz,
> 
> Is52:11 has nothing to do with the holy vessels.
> clei is earthenware, cheap and unimportant. In this context, 
> clei is weapons of the Almighty. Military connotation is 
> evidenced by the next verse, assuring of the divine help.
> 
> But anyway, I don't take Prophets and Writings as you seems 
> to do, as chronologic record. They are not.
> 
> 
> > In Isaiah 52 we read of the temple vessels being brought 
> back to Zion. 
> > In Ezra we again read of the temple vessels being counted out by 
> > Cyrus. Are you saying they were never returned? I don't read the 
> > return of the vessels as a prophesy but rather as something 
> that was 
> > taking place before the eyes of the prophet and of all the world.
> > So, on what basis do you say that they weren't returned?
> > There is, in fact, no actual mention in Ezra of the vessels 
> actually 
> > being placed in the temple, but that seems a flimsy basis to assume 
> > that they weren't returned.
> > I view the return of the vessels as the physical embodiment 
> of YHWH's
> return
> > to Zion. It is not just the rebuilding of the temple and the 
> > restoration
> of
> > the people and the vessels to it, but really the restoration of YHWH
> himself
> > to his temple
> > and to his city that makes Cyrus the Messiah. This was 
> fullfilled. The 
> > promise is laid out in Isaiah 40 and its fulfillment is described in
> Isaiah
> > 52.
> > See my article "Cyrus the Messiah? The Historical 
> Background of Isaiah 
> > 45:1"  Harvard Theological Review 95 (2002): 373-393.
> > Liz
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: b-hebrew-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org
> > > [mailto:b-hebrew-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of UUC
> > > Sent: Friday, May 21, 2004 11:42 AM
> > > To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> > > Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Isaiah 53 read within the book as a whole
> > >
> > > Dear Liz,
> > >
> > > We have predictions in Is52, and then a person appears 
> executed. He 
> > > didn't fulfill the prophet's expectations.
> > >
> > >
> > > Best regards,
> > >
> > > Vadim
> > >
> > >
> > > > Why do you say the predictions of the previous chapters
> > > were unfulfilled?
> > > > Liz
> > > > You wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Dear David,
> > > > >
> > > > > >To this I would insist we add that
> > > > > any ?final reading| must make sense within the book read as a 
> > > > > whole.< Actually, I suggest that Isaiah 53 was 
> interpolated by a 
> > > > > hand attempting to imitate Isaiah' and Job's style to explain 
> > > > > why the prophecy of the previous
> > > > > chapter(s) was unfulfilled. So 53 doesn't fit semantically by 
> > > > > definition.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > b-hebrew mailing list
> > > > b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> > > > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
> > > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > b-hebrew mailing list
> > > b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> > > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
> > >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > b-hebrew mailing list
> > b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
>