Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] Genesis 20: 1

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Yigal Levin <leviny1 AT mail.biu.ac.il>
  • To: b-hebrew <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Genesis 20: 1
  • Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 05:55:19 +0200

Shoshanna,

I've stopped trying to read Jim's run-on posts carefully, but I think that what he was saying was that Sodom was in the northern part of the Dead Sea, which is visible from Hebron, and not where it's usually pointed to in the southern basin (which is called Sodom in modern Israel), which is more visible from Arad. IF this is what he was saying, he may be right. In any case, this has nothing to do with Lot's wife. All the Torah says is that SHE was turned into a pillar of salt - not that the whole region was made of salt. A single pillar of salt about 5 or 6 feet high and a foot or two thick would hardly have lasted the past several thousand years of earthquakes, flash floods and so on.

Yigal Levin



----- Original Message ----- From: "Shoshanna Walker" <rosewalk AT concentric.net>

For instance, if, as you claim, S'dom was in the North, and not in
the Dead Sea area, where ALL THE MOUNTAINS ARE MADE OF SALT (maybe
you don't know Israel so well, but you can actually break off pieces
of the mountains, and they are pieces composed of crystals of SALT,
and salty to taste), then you would have to call G-d a liar for
reporting that Lot's wife was turned into a pillar of salt for
turning around to look at S'dom up in the north - after all, if the
whole story took place in the north, WHERE THERE ARE NO SALT
MOUNTAINS, then that is much more of a geographical impossibility
than that of Avraham being able to see the SMOKE of the destruction
of 4 cities from not a lot of miles west of them, which is not
impossible at all - as I could see the actual waters of the Dead Sea
from Jerusalem.

Layla Tov


Shoshanna


Shoshanna:
If YHWH had told Abraham, in a conversation not reported in the text, that
nothing had happened between Abimelech and Sarah, then why wouldn'Äôt
Abraham be
ecstatic with joy at Isaac'Äôs birth? Sarah is ecstatic with joy at Isaac'Äôs
birth, but Abraham says nothing.
'ÄúAnd Abraham was a hundred years old, when his son Isaac was born unto him.
And Sarah said: 'God hath made laughter for me; every one that heareth will
laugh on account of me.'Äô And she said: 'Who would have said unto Abraham,
that Sarah should give children suck? for I have borne him a son in his old
age.' And the child grew, and was weaned.'Äù Genesis 21: 5-8
Abraham is not reported to praise YHWH upon Isaac'Äôs birth. Abraham is not
reported to say one nice word to or about Isaac prior to the binding incident.
Why?
The author of the Patriarchal narratives has not made a 'Äúmistake'Äù, nor has
he 'Äúoverlooked'Äù this issue. Rather, the author is forcing us to consider
that Abraham may have had doubts about what had happened, or not
happened, when
Sarah was in Abimelech'Äôs household.
Perhaps nothing at all happened. But based on what the text says, it does
not appear that YHWH told Abraham that nothing had happened. That is a key
element in the text.
I agree with you that the text is perfect, as is. But I do not agree that
these stories are simple. The author is laying his real point between the
lines a little bit.
It may well be that nothing in fact happened between Abimelech and Sarah,
but what I am saying is that Abraham does not appear to know that.
That is the key for making this story work, historically. Abraham must have
a bona fide doubt, for many years, as to whether Isaac is his blood son or
his adopted son. It is virtually certain that in fact, Isaac is Abraham'Äôs
blood son. Though much less certain, nothing at all may have happened between
Abimelech and Sarah. But the key is that Abraham is not sure what did or did
not happen between Abimelech and Sarah. That'Äôs all I'Äôm saying.
If Abraham had been certain from the beginning that nothing at all had
happened between Abimelech and Sarah, Abraham would have jumped for
joy at Isaac'Äôs
birth. The text reports, however, that whereas Sarah waxed lyrical at Isaac'Äô
s birth, Abraham said nothing (other than to confirm Isaac'Äôs divinely-given
name). Abraham'Äôs silence speaks volumes as to what Abraham knew for sure
from YHWH, and what Abraham had his doubts about.
In the end, Isaac is Abraham'Äôs blood son. But the way the text tells the
story, Abraham was not sure about that for many years.
Jim Stinehart
Evanston, Illinois



************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
_______________________________________________
b-hebrew mailing list
b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
_______________________________________________
b-hebrew mailing list
b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew




--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.14.13/1074 - Release Date: 16/10/2007 14:14







Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page