b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum
List archive
- From: "Karl Randolph" <kwrandolph AT email.com>
- To: "b-hebrew" <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
- Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Machir and the Exodus ?
- Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2004 12:33:54 -0500
George:
The Deuteronomist, i.e. the guy who wrote most of the book of Deuteronomy,
was Moses, who wrote by present guesstimation about 1400 BC. The book of
Chronicles was written after the Galut Babel, about 5400 BC. Unless Moses
went into hiding and lived for over a millennium, he, i.e. the
Deuteronomist, did not author Chronicles, someone else did.
Secondly, Moses use of the land in Deuteronomy was almost universally
identified by its context as the land Israel was to possess, written before
Israel went up to possess it, previously identified as Canaan; in contrast,
the land in 1 Chronicles 7:21 is not identified. The men were simply called,
men of Gath born in the land. Different people interpret that in different
ways.
It sounds like your objection to my reading of the text is based on modern
philosophies, not linguistic or other grounds.
Karl W. Randolph.
----- Original Message -----
From: "George F. Somsel" <gfsomsel AT juno.com>
> On Wed, 08 Sep 2004 16:02:26 -0500 "Karl Randolph" <kwrandolph AT email.com>
> writes:
> > George:
> >
> >...
> >
> > So to give a statement that sounds similar to the phrase in
> > question, The Chinese born in this land are called ABCs.
> >
> > Karl W. Randolph.
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "George F. Somsel" <gfsomsel AT juno.com>
> >
> > > On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 00:04:57 -0500 "Karl Randolph"
> > <kwrandolph AT email.com>
> Karl,
>
> But the statement is not that they were "called" anything. It is that
> they "did" something, viz. killed the sons of Ephraim. This was not a
> military action involving an invader but "men of Gath who were born in
> the land." It would seem to me that this is the implication of "born in
> the land", not that the scene is located elsewhere (viz. Egypt). As you
> and Peter have been discussing, the term (M H)RC in many cases is
> determined either explicitly (people of the land of Moab) or implicitly
> by its context. I do see a tendency in the Deuteronomist and in the
> Deuteronimistic writings to use H)RC to refer to Israel.
>
> george
> gfsomsel
--
___________________________________________________________
Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com
http://promo.mail.com/adsfreejump.htm
-
Re: [b-hebrew] Genealogies and the Exodus ?
, (continued)
- Re: [b-hebrew] Genealogies and the Exodus ?, Yigal Levin, 09/05/2004
- Re: [b-hebrew] Machir and the Exodus ?, Karl Randolph, 09/05/2004
-
Re: [b-hebrew] Machir and the Exodus ?,
Karl Randolph, 09/06/2004
- Re: [b-hebrew] Machir and the Exodus ?, Peter Kirk, 09/06/2004
-
Re: [b-hebrew] Machir and the Exodus ?,
Karl Randolph, 09/07/2004
- Re: [b-hebrew] Machir and the Exodus ?, Peter Kirk, 09/07/2004
- Re: [b-hebrew] Machir and the Exodus ?, Yigal Levin, 09/07/2004
- Re: [b-hebrew] Machir and the Exodus ?, George F. Somsel, 09/07/2004
- Re: [b-hebrew] Machir and the Exodus ?, Karl Randolph, 09/08/2004
- Re: [b-hebrew] Machir and the Exodus ?, George F. Somsel, 09/08/2004
- Re: [b-hebrew] Machir and the Exodus ?, Karl Randolph, 09/10/2004
-
Re: [b-hebrew] Machir and the Exodus ?,
George F. Somsel, 09/10/2004
- Re: [b-hebrew] Machir and the Exodus ?, Peter Kirk, 09/10/2004
- Re: [b-hebrew] Machir and the Exodus ?, Karl Randolph, 09/11/2004
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.