Biblical Hebrew Forum

["wattswestmaas" <wattswestmaas AT eircom.net>]

Hallo Yigal,   Firstly it will never be my intention to question anyone on
this board in a negative manner.  Far from it  --  I am the least educated
of you all and by no means can do that.

Secondly please read carefully the below mentioned statement, I talk about
the SAME source and not you, I have always appreciated your comments as
being helpful.  OK.

"-----------I must also add that the same source says that some
proffessionals consider
amalekites to be mythological, but that is without question an absurd
conclusion.-----------"

        
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------

Now for the rest........As far as Zoar is concerned the scripture leaves us
with no doubt that this is a FUTURE name by the words "the same is Zoar" so
that is cleared up.  Dan is mentioned and from the context obviouly refers
to that territory which is OBVIOUSLY not dan's yet, everyone would know that
right!  The country of the Amalekites seems not to be so clear.  And this is
ONLY a question OK,  WHY say this and not refer DIRECTLY to whoever was
defeated in that particular land?  Surely that would be the same as if I
said:
"and Hitler invaded the lands of the Jutes, angles and saxons"????

Lastly,  the source came from a bible archeology dictionary on the web,
unfortunately I did not note the reference since I knew I would be likely to
receive more reliable up to date knowledge from this board.


Chris  --  Ireland





As far as the ONE mention of "the field of the Amalekites" in Gen. 14:7, in
a story that is connected to Abraham: the same chapter also mentions Zoar
(verse 2), which would only be given that name in Gen. 19:22, and Dan (verse
14), which would only be given that name in Josh. 19:47, when it would be
named after Abraham's great-grandson! The book of Genesis in particular is
full of such "anachronisms", in which a "later" name, which would have been
familiar at the time the story was written. We could understand "the field
of the Amalekites" as meaning the area in which the Amalakites would live
later on.
All other references to the Amalekites make them contemporaries of the
Israelite wanderings up until the early monarchy. Based on the Bible alone,
it would have been David who finally "broke" them.

Yigal