Biblical Hebrew Forum

[George Athas <George.Athas AT moore.edu.au>]

Jim,

Some gaps and problems with your thesis:


 1.  ABYMLK could simply mean "My father is king". This is a perfectly 
acceptable name. I don't know why you've avoided it as a possibility.
 2.  Even if ABYMLK means "father of the king", it too would be a perfectly 
acceptable name. The father of such a person called ABYMLK would merely be 
implying by the name that he hopes for a dynasty to continue through his son 
and grandson.
 3.  You haven't provided any evidence for equating Molech with 'Baal', which 
is an honorific usually reserved for the Syrian/Phoenician deity Hadad.
 4.  Given point 3, there is no evident basis for placing the patriarchal 
narrative in the Galilee.

Furthermore, given your previous posts, none of which has been convincing, 
there is no good reason for transplanting the seemingly plainly evident 
location of the majority of patriarchal narratives in the south of 
Syria-Palestine. It seems extremely tendentious that a text has so many 
'false positives' for the south, and so many intricately complex linguistic 
sidesteps to obscure a truly northern location.

Let me put it another way: When you add a series of 'if' statements together, 
you don't end up with a plausible theory, but rather an ever weakening view 
with a slim chance of being right.

If = plausible
If + If = possible
If + If + If = a long shot
If + If + If + If = tendentious
If + If + If + If +If = you're joking, right?
If + If + If + If + If + If = parallel universe (aka science fiction)


Jim, let me ask you to do something. Could you confirm to the list that you 
would like the patriarchal narratives to be set in northern Palestine, rather 
than southern Palestine, and that most evidence will not sway you from your 
view?



Regards,

GEORGE ATHAS
Moore Theological College (Sydney, Australia)
www.moore.edu.au