Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Shoshanna Walker <rosewalk AT concentric.net>]

Your point of view is only viable if one regards the midrash as a 
work of literature, composed by various authors, out of their 
imaginations.  That is incompatible with my point of view, that the 
Midrash is a recording of what was "popular knowledge" handed down 
through the generations.  Some of it could have been exaggeration, 
and not entirely accurate, but some of it was also probably very 
true.  We, alas, on this forum, will never know which was which, 
except for those of you who believe it was ALL just a fabrication - 
for you none of it is actually true.

Shoshanna




The "midrash" was possibly seeing  $IN(AR as consisting of $IN, 'two,
different' and (AR 'river', Y)OR or NAHAR. Thus $IN(AR = the land of
the $NEI Y)OR-IM. Another midrash may see (AR as standing for (IR, )
UR, 'city, people, throng'. Still another midrash may see $IN as
standing for 'tooth' and (AR being a contracted HAR, 'mountain',
ect., ect. Likewise for the -er of Sumer, the land of the big, (ACUM,
Aryans.
Isaac Fried, Boston University
On Feb 3, 2008, at 2:45 AM, Yigal Levin wrote:

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Shoshanna Walker" <rosewalk AT concentric.net>
>
>
> > Shinar is Babylon
>
> Probably correct in a general sense, but on what do you base this
> statement?
>
> > The Midrash identifies Chedorlaomer as Elom son of Shem son of Noah
> Which Midrash? Do you have a source?
>
> You really should read Maharal on midrashim.
>
>
>
> > Shoshanna
>
> And please remember to use your full name.
>
> Yigal Levin
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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