Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Karl Randolph" <kwrandolph AT email.com>]

Vadim:

Where is the indication that this is a prophesy concerning their posterity 
and not to them personally? Where does it say that Canaan did not personally 
become a slave to Shem?

You can't use Genesis 49 as an example, as that specifically indicates that 
Jacob's statement is a prophesy. But there is no such indication in Genesis 
9. Therefore I conclude that your claim is an eisegesis done to maintain the 
fiction that LMW must refer a plural.

Karl W. Randolph.

Karl Randolph wrote:

> You wrote, "Take Gen 9:26, which Harold brings forward as the most 
> relevant to singular. Canaan will the slave of Shem. Of course, 
> Noah does not speak of one person becoming a slave to another, but 
> rather of their posterity. The collective plural of the people of 
> Shem is lmo."

Verses 26 and 27 here say nothing about the posterity, just the 
individuals are named. Saying that it refers to the posterity is not 
exegesis, but eisegesis, where you are adding to the text. <

Canaan did not physically became a slave to Shem. Noah prophecied 
about the posterity.

Vadim Cherny
-- 
___________________________________________________________
Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com
http://promo.mail.com/adsfreejump.htm