Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Peter Kirk <peterkirk AT qaya.org>]

On 11/05/2005 23:41, Karl Randolph wrote:

> ...
>
>
> Whoops, you’re right. I was going by what I had been told, and that had been 
> wrong.
>
> Sumerian seems to have had no cognates, at least none recognized.
>  

Thank you. Some Turks (especially those who claim that the original 
homeland of the Turks was in the Middle East rather than in Central 
Asia) claim that Sumerian is cognate with Turkish, but the link is very 
tenuous.

> > > ...
> > >
> > >      
> > Precisely. That is why I objected to your unqualified "Abraham was 
> > not even from Sumer".
> >    
> Would you have been happier had I written, “The only text that mentions 
> Abraham rules out that he was from Sumer”?
>
>  
No, I wouldn't, because nothing rules out Abraham being from Sumer. What 
text are you talking about, anyway? There are many texts mentioning 
Abraham. If you are talking about Genesis 11:31, this rules out nothing. 
After all, Haran was only a short distance off the only practical route 
from the southern Ur to Canaan, assuming that Terah and his family, and 
perhaps their sheep, didn't want to die of thirst in the desert on the 
way. If I meet someone in Seattle who says they come from Moscow, I 
might well assume that they are from Moscow in Russia, not Moscow, 
Idaho, even though the latter is much nearer.

--
Peter Kirk
peter AT qaya.org (personal)
peterkirk AT qaya.org (work)
http://www.qaya.org/



--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.11.8 - Release Date: 10/05/2005