Biblical Hebrew Forum

[K Randolph <kwrandolph AT gmail.com>]

Jim:

On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 6:48 AM, <JimStinehart AT aol.com> wrote:

>  Karl:
>
>
>
> 1.  You wrote:  “First of all, we are talking about Hebrew, not Canaanite.”
>
>
>
> That is a misleading statement.  The Hebrews passively recorded many 
> Canaanite geographical place names.  Thus the presence of )BL in a 
> Canaanite geographical place name, such as Abel-Beth-Maacah, does not mean 
> that )BL was used as a common noun regarding places in Canaan in Biblical 
> Hebrew.  )BL is never used that way in the Bible.
>
>
Oh? Where is your source? This is the third time I ask this question.

>
>
> Accordingly, it is quite important to distinguish between (i) Biblical 
> Hebrew common nouns in good standing that are used in the Bible outside of 
> geographical place names, such as XBR and XBL, as opposed to (ii) a 
> Canaanite word that only appears in the Bible as the beginning part of a 
> geographical place name.  XBR and XBL are good Biblical Hebrew words.  )BL 
> is not (at least outside of Daniel, as discussed below) a regular Biblical 
> Hebrew word regarding a topographical feature of Canaan (meadow, river, 
> etc.).  [)BL meaning “mourning” is a Biblical Hebrew word.]
>
>
Are you sure the two are not connected, namely through the tears that flow
during mourning?

>
>
> 2.  You wrote:  “Secondly, )BL, alternate spelling )WBL, is found in 14 
> verses in Tanakh: as early as Numbers before Israel crossed the Jordan, 
> also in Judges, Samuel
>
> and Kings as well as Daniel.”
>
>
>
> )WBL is found nowhere but in Daniel.
>
>
Shows how much you know about the Bible.

>   Surely you would agree that one unique reference in Daniel to a river in 
> Mesopotamia or Persia can have little bearing on the origin of 
> XBRWN/XBRN/“Hebron” as the name of the place where Abraham sojourns.
>
>
Of course, it’s a completely different word, different spelling, different
meaning.

>
>
> In all the other cases you cite, )BL is the first part of a Canaanite 
> geographical place name.  Abel-Shittim at Numbers 33: 49.  Abel-Meholah at 
> Judges 7: 22.  Abel-Keramiym at Judges 11: 33.  The Sorek Valley, literally 
> “Great Meadowland at Beth-shemesh”, at I Samuel 6: 18.  The other 
> references in Samuel are to Abel-Beth-Maacah.  The references in Kings are 
> either to Abel-Beth-Maacah or Abel-Meholah.
>
>
 The reference in Daniel is also to a specific watercourse, the same as the
other examples.

>
>
> I agree with the general scholarly view that )BL in the pre-Daniel books 
> means “meadow” or something similar, and is different from )WBL or )BL in 
> Daniel meaning “river”.
>
>
Is that “general scholarly view” objectively true, or only in your mind,
like many of your other claims? Or only a unique view that you claim is
general?

>
>
> 3.  You wrote:  “Third, do not confuse this noun with a participle 
> concerning the action of water flowing, as you did with two mentions in 
> Isaiah.”
>
>
>
> Isaiah 30: 25 and 44: 4 use a different word:  YBL.  YBL likely is related 
> to the words )WBL and )BL used in Daniel, and is focused on water.  YBL in 
> other contexts refers to the action of water flowing.  It’s all focused on 
> water, which is not how the Canaanite word )BL is used, either in the Bible 
> (excluding Daniel) or in secular history.
>
>
>
> 4.  You wrote:  “Fourthly, I asked you, where do you get your strange 
> definition, and you did not answer me. You did not get it from studying the 
> text of Hebrew.”
>
>
>
> Excluding Daniel, )BL in context in the Bible (as a topographical word) 
> always seems to refer to “meadow” or “excellent pastureland”.
>
>
That’s what I question, and so far you have provided no reason to believe
you. Whereas there is good reason from within the text that )BL means
watercourse.


> Moreover, if you look at the context of how )BL is used historically, such 
> as on the Thutmosis III list and as elsewhere attested in Canaanite 
> geographical place names, it once again means “meadow” or “excellent 
> pastureland”.  This is the definition that secular historians tell us.  The 
> Bible and secular history are fully in accord on this.
>
>
The 10th century BC Thutmosis III / Shisherka list is irrelevant until after
you verify your claims, which so far you have failed to do. You haven’t even
tried.

>
>
> Finally, in a previous post, I noted the only decent footnote I found in 
> any translation regarding )BL at I Samuel 6: 18:
>
>
>
> “Reading ‘eben with some Heb. mss., Septuagint, and Targum, most mss. and
>
> editions ‘abel, ‘meadow[?]’.” 2003 JPS Hebrew-English Tanakh
>
>
Looking at the context, this is a time that the word refers not to a
geological formation, but to the action of mourning. That footnote is wrong.
You need to learn Hebrew and read it in Hebrew, not depend on translations.

>
>
>  Why should that be any surprise to anyone?  Why would that be considered 
> controversial?
>
>
Because you have not demonstrated that it is true.

>
>
>
> Jim Stinehart
>
> Evanston, Illinois
>
>
Karl W. Randolph.