Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - [b-hebrew] "What's eating you?"

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Uri Hurwitz <uhurwitz AT yahoo.com>
  • To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: [b-hebrew] "What's eating you?"
  • Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2007 14:45:34 -0700 (PDT)

Hello Karl,

The root is NKH,( Nun, Kaf, He) "hit", quite common

in Hiph'il; in the verse you inquired about it is a

passive form in Huph'al (or Hoph'al, if you prefer)

in the imperfect, "you, pl., will

be/are beaten."

Uri Hurwitz





b-hebrew chaberim: In looking at Isaiah 1:5, what is the meaning of TKW?
Is it connected with TWK inside? Or is it a verb TKK or maybe TKH, as also
used in Deuteronomy 33:3 and Ezekiel 22:20–22? Or have I made an elementary
mistake that I need someone to slap me on the side of the head to recognize?
Karl W. Randolph.


---------------------------------
Be a better Heartthrob. Get better relationship answers from someone who
knows.
Yahoo! Answers - Check it out.
>From JimStinehart AT aol.com Mon Oct 15 17:50:16 2007
Return-Path: <JimStinehart AT aol.com>
X-Original-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Delivered-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Received: from imo-d23.mx.aol.com (imo-d23.mx.aol.com [205.188.139.137])
by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 647CC4C010
for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Mon, 15 Oct 2007 17:50:16 -0400
(EDT)
Received: from JimStinehart AT aol.com
by imo-d23.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v38_r9.3.) id 3.d27.160266a7 (29679)
for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Mon, 15 Oct 2007 17:50:11 -0400
(EDT)
From: JimStinehart AT aol.com
Message-ID: <d27.160266a7.34453a93 AT aol.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2007 17:50:11 EDT
To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: 9.0 Security Edition for Windows sub 5377
X-Spam-Flag: NO
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.9
Subject: [b-hebrew] Genesis 20: 1
X-BeenThere: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Biblical Hebrew Forum <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: Mon, 15 Oct 2007 21:50:16 -0000

=20
Tory Thorpe:=20
1. Gaza=20
You wrote: "There need be no mention of Gaza in Genesis for it to have=20
existed =20
before Genesis was composed, or for it to have existed in the time =20
Abraham is believed to have lived. The city evidently predates the =20
Amarna age and the reign of Pharaoh Thutmose III. So the non-mention =20
in Genesis is for you merely an argumentum ex silentio."=20
I agree completely that Gaza was in existence, and was very well known,=20
during the Patriarchal Age. But that just means that the fact that Gaza is=
not=20
mentioned in the Patriarchal narratives is extremely important.=20
2. Qadesh and Shur=20
You wrote: "The same is true in the secular material for the Qadesh and=20
Shur located south of Hebron and Beer-Sheba."=20
I disagree with that assertion completely. As far as I know, there is no=20
secular historical evidence for a Qadesh or a Shur being in or near the Sin=
ai=20
Desert in Biblical times. That is completely different from (i) Gaza, a=20
well-known historical city just northeast of the Sinai Desert, and (ii) the=
=20
Lebanese city-states of Qadesh and Sur, who were very famous during the his=
torical=20
time period of the first Hebrews, and whose names are suspiciously
similar=20=
to=20
the sites of Qadesh and Shur in the Sinai Desert that are mentioned in the=20
Bible but are not known outside of the Bible.=20
3. Beersheba =20
You wrote: "There is only one "biblical" city named Beer-Sheba attested in=
=20
the =20
biblical sources. =E2=80=A6It is much simpler to see that Hagar's 'wilder=
ness of=20
Beer-=20
Sheba' (whatever the name of the place was at this moment) became =20
popular overnight once news spread that water was there. Abraham =20
later gave it the name Beer-Sheba which stuck, according to Genesis, =20
and the rest is Jewish history."=20
You say "later", but that is not what the text says. The transition from=20
Hagar's story to getting back to Abraham is introduced as follows: "And it=
=20
came to pass at that time,=E2=80=A6." Genesis 21: 22 That logically means=
that at the=20
same time as YHWH was showing Hagar a pre-existing, functioning well at=20
Hagar's "Beersheba", Abraham was dealing with Abimelech and calling a
well=20=
that =20
Abraham's men had dug "Beersheba", a well which Abimelech's men had violentl=
y =20
taken away from Abraham's men. It defies credulity that Abraham would exil=
e=20
Hagar and Ishmael, and then Abraham would promptly follow in Hagar's=20
footsteps and go to the very place to which Hagar and Ishmael had been exil=
ed. =20
Whereas Hagar's Beersheba is in the lonely wilderness, where both Hagar and=
=20
Ishmael are in grave danger of dying of thirst without a soul being around
=20=
to=20
notice them, Abraham's Beersheba is the center of unbelievable hubbub,
with=20=
all=20
sorts of various peoples everywhere one looks. "And it came to pass at that=
=20
time, that Abimelech and Phicol the captain of his host spoke unto Abraham,=
=20
saying: 'God is with thee in all that thou doest. =E2=80=A6 And Abraham r=
eproved=20
Abimelech because of the well of water, which Abimelech's servants had viol=
ently=20
taken away. =E2=80=A6 Wherefore that place was called Beer-sheba;
because=20=
there they=20
swore both of them. So they made a covenant at Beer-sheba; and Abimelech=
=20
rose up, and Phicol the captain of his host, and they returned into the lan=
d of=20
the Philistines." Genesis 21: 22, 25, 31-32 All that activity and =20
commotion signify a very different geographical location than the deadly sil=
ence =20
and loneliness of Hagar's Beersheba.=20
4. Philistines=20
You wrote: "Not everyone agrees that classic Philistines are being=20
described in=20
the Patriarchal narratives. How about Proto-Philistines?"=20
That might address the problem of the classic Philistines being an=20
historical anachronism. But why would the leader of the proto-Philistines=
have the=20
purest west Semitic name on earth: "Abimelech"? Wouldn't a Hebrew author=20
portray the proto-Philistines as being foreigners to Canaan? And if the=20
Patriarchal narratives were composed after the classic Philistines had been=
deadly=20
rivals of the Hebrews for centuries (a view which is apparently unanimous a=
mong=20
secular scholars today, though it is not my view), why then would Abimelech=
=20
be portrayed as being so gallant? "And Abimelech said [to Abraham]: =20
'Behold, my land is before thee: dwell where it pleaseth thee.' =E2=80=
=A6And it came to =20
pass at that time, that Abimelech and Phicol the captain of his host spoke=20
unto Abraham, saying: 'God is with thee in all that thou doest.'" Genesis=
20:=20
15; 21: 22=20
Abimelech, you see, is not a "Philistine" at all. Rather, Abimelech has=20
hired some foreign mercenaries to try to secure access to those all-importa=
nt=20
water wells on the mainland. The author of the Patriarchal narratives=20
disparagingly refers to those foreign mercenaries as being "Invaders"/"Phil=
istines". =20
The Hebrew author is trying to show some solidarity with Amorite princeling=
=20
ruler Abimelech, while subtly castigating the foreign=20
mercenaries/"Philistines" that Abimelech has hired. Only the head foreign=
mercenary, Phicol, has a=20
non-west Semitic name, befitting a Sherden foreign mercenary who is not a=20
west Semitic speaker. Note that all the facts in the received Hebrew
text=20=
work=20
perfectly for viewing the "Philistines" as being foreign =20
mercenaries/"Invaders"/Sherden, who were important factors in Lebanon during=
the Patriarchal Age=20
of the mid-14th century BCE. These foreign mercenaries/"Philistines" have=20
no relationship whatsoever to the later classic Philistines, in my view. =20
There were no foreign mercenaries in either the Negev Desert or the Sinai =20
Desert.=20
5. Bethel/Ai =20
You wrote: "[T]here is certainly nothing in our text about =20
Abraham journeying to Ai where he then viewed the destruction of =20
Sodom from higher ground."=20
Au contraire, that is exactly what the text portrays. At Genesis 12: 8,=20
Bethel/Ai (just north of Jerusalem) is where Abraham first calls the name Y=
HWH. =20
At Genesis 13: 2, those critical facts are repeated. Then at Genesis 13: =20
2-17, Abraham is at Bethel/Ai when he separates from Lot, and YHWH
promises=20=
to =20
Abraham and his descendants all the land that can be seen from that=20
mountaintop at Bethel/Ai. Genesis 13: 14 Years later, after Abraham has b=
een told =20
that Sodom will probably be destroyed by YHWH the next morning, Abraham goes=
=20
north from Hebron 27 miles to that same mountaintop at Bethel/Ai, in order t=
o =20
witness the after-effects of the dramatic destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah=
: =20
"And Abraham got up early in the morning to the place where he had stood=20
before the LORD [YHWH]. And he looked out toward Sodom and Gomorrah, and t=
oward=20
all the land of the [kikkar/river valley/Jordan River Valley/"Plain"], and=20
beheld, and, lo, the smoke of the land went up as the smoke of a
furnace."=20=
=20
Genesis 19: 27-28 =20
The next time we hear about Abraham is when Genesis 20: 1 tells us that=20
Abraham departed "from there" and settled between Qadesh and S(h)ur. =20
Accordingly, the reference to "from there" at Genesis 20: 1 must be referri=
ng to=20
Bethel/Ai. Please note that the text does not state that Abraham
returned=20=
south=20
from Bethel/Ai to Hebron. No, Abraham had already gone 27 miles north of H=
ebron=20
to Bethel/Ai. Presumably after waiting for the rest of his people and=20
animals to make it up to Bethel/Ai to join him, Abraham then leads his huge=
=20
entourage further north, to southern Lebanon, where Abraham settled between=
the=20
Lebanese city-states of Qadesh and Sur, in historical Garu (Biblical "Gera=
r").=20
Note how the entire text makes perfect sense on this view. The Hebrew text=
=20
is perfect, as is. The problem is our lack of understanding of what the=20
Hebrew text is actually saying. If one drops the millennia-long
erroneous=20=
view=20
that the Patriarchal narratives were composed by a southern Hebrew from=20
Judah, who never would have considered portraying Isaac as being born in Su=
r on=20
the northern edge of, or just north of, Israel, then one can see what
this=20=
text=20
is actually saying. There's nothing wrong with Isaac being born in Sur. Su=
r=20
was considered to be part of Canaan, as it was south of Sidon (south-centra=
l=20
Lebanon), which appears to have been the dividing line.=20
6. Secular History =20
In secular history, there is no "Qadesh", and there is no "Shur", as a site=
=20
in the Sinai Desert in Biblical times. In secular history, there is no=20
"Gerar" in the Negev Desert in Biblical times. But in secular history,
in=20=
Lebanon,=20
we see "Qadesh", we see "Sur", and we see "Garu". Not only that, but in =20
secular history, during the time period of the first Hebrews, we also see in=
=20
Lebanon "Abimilki" as the princeling ruler of Sur, we see "habiru", and we s=
ee =20
Abimilki interacting in an awkward, ambiguous way with the habiru as he =20
desperately seeks to gain and maintain access to much-needed water wells. C=
an all=20
of that be but a bizarre "coincidence"? =20
Everything makes sense if Genesis 20: 1 is referring to southern Lebanon as=
=20
the place where Abraham and Sarah went to have the baby. The story is then=
=20
sensible, and it closely tracks many elements of the well-documented secula=
r=20
history of the mid-14th century BCE, which is a likely time period for the=20
first Hebrews.=20
7. Genesis 20: 1 =20
Why not give some consideration to a sensible, historical re-interpretation=
=20
of Genesis 20: 1? We know for sure that Qadesh and Sur were world-famous=20
Lebanese city-states during that time period. Why not then explore the=20
possibility that Genesis 20: 1 may be referencing those historical Lebanese=
=20
city-states?=20
Jim Stinehart=20
Evanston, Illinois



************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page