Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Kevin P. Edgecomb" <kevin AT bombaxo.com>]

No, Mr Stinehart, we're not getting anywhere.

Your points in order:

1.)  Etymologically, the Hebrew Shin`ar is likely from the Akkadian Shanharu, 
not Sumeru, but all refer precisely to the same geographic region (not a 
political unit, by the way).

2.)  Kasdim is likewise considered to derive from the Kassite word for 
Akkad/Babylonia/Shanharu:  Karduniash.  The presentation of that second 
consonant alternately as /r/l/s/sh/ indicates that it was a lateral 
fricative, represented in different ways depending upon convention.

3.)  The Hebrew Shin`ar, from Shanharu, appears also in Genesis 10 and 11 and 
Daniel 1, clear references to the area of Babylonia.

4.) Tidal most certainly does not equate to Tudhaliya, mooting your point.  A 
more likely possibility would be something like the city name Tuttul, and the 
Goiim representing Guti.

5.) Amraphel has often been taken to represent Hammurapi, but even this is 
not likely.  That there were several to bear the name means nothing.  You 
grasp at straws and redefine geographical names to suit your fancy.  The four 
kings of Genesis 14 are all Mesopotamia-based.  If you can't understand it as 
historical and find that ridiculous, then it's your problem, not the problem 
of the author or his original audience, who found it believable enough not to 
reject it out of hand, but to continue the tradition of copying.

6.) You make a complete mess of the Egyptian evidence, and the simple fact, 
recognized by ALL, that Sangaru is Shanharu is Sumeru is Babylonia, and that 
the Pharaoh is merely boasting! Ach! And what possesses you to equate 
Amenhotep III with the pharaoh of Exodus, or any other one mentioned in the 
Bible, for that matter?  No doubt you are working with an alternate 
chronology in addition to an alternate philology....

This is over.  I return to deleting your messages.  The spaghetti of your 
ideas is too tangled to straighten now that it is boiled in such a ferment of 
peculiarity.  I herewith cease the attempt to correct you.

It is an admirable thing when one has such a devotion to so great a book as 
the Bible.  It is unfortunate when this devotion overtakes everything else, 
and one begins to twist evidence in order to correct any presumed 
shortcomings it may have.  You have my respect for your devotion, but not for 
your stubbornness in rejecting and resisting the conclusions of people who 
know a good deal better than you in the subjects under question.

Regards,
Kevin P. Edgecomb
Berkeley, California