Biblical Hebrew Forum

[James Read <J.Read-2 AT sms.ed.ac.uk>]

I think I agree with Yigal's sentiments here. This wasn't the kind of  
thing I was hoping for (although, the information about other cultures  
celebrating a 30 month was informative and may prove to be a useful  
lead).

Just to get the discussion back on course my original aim was to get a  
precise understand of the hebrew terms we translate as year, month,  
week and day. I think year, month and day we have a reasonable clear  
picture of because of natural phenomena and corroborative evidence  
from tradition and internal evidence. But the term week and sabbath  
which seems to be used in connection and in parallel with new moon.  
And that was what I intended this thread to be about. An objective  
discussion of the definition of hebrew week. Lines of evidence worth  
considering are probably:

1) Internal use of the term in the hebrew texts
2) Recourse to similar cultures e.g. babylonian, sumerian and their calendars
3) Evidence from contemporary cognate usage
4) Traditions that are traceable to written source that can be dated

If anyone has any of the above to mention that I may not be aware of  
or have considered I would much appreciate that kind of input.

James


Quoting Yigal Levin <leviny1 AT mail.biu.ac.il>:

> Okay, people. I think that unless anyone has something strictly
> language-related to add, this thread as run its course.
>
> Thank y'all,
>
> Yigal Levin
> Co-moderator, b-hebrew
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: b-hebrew-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org
> [mailto:b-hebrew-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of Bill Rea
> Sent: Sunday, May 10, 2009 11:20 PM
> To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Hebrew calender, years, months, weeks and days
>
>
> Ben Crick wrote:
>
> > > After the Flood the earth's rotation speeded up, giving an extra 5.25
> days
> > > on top of the 360. At the same time, the month was shortened from 30
> earth
> > > days to 29.5 earth days.
>
> And  JP van de Giessen responded
>
> > There is no proof for this. On the other hand, the rotation of the earth,
> the
> > rotation of the earth and moon, and the rotation of the earth around the
> sun
> > is very stable. There are too many ancient sources which proofs there was
> no
> > significant change in any of the above mentioned rotations.
>
> JP, I'm sure Ben knows there is no proof of his statement but because of his
> religious faith he doesn't need any. There's very little point in trying to
> counter religious arguments with scientific ones. Its like telling a dog it
> should act like a cat.
>
> Bill Rea Ph.D., ICT Services, University of Canterbury   \_
> E-Mail bill.rea AT canterbury.ac.nz                         </   New
> Phone +64-3-364-2331, Fax  +64-3-364-2332               /)  Zealand
> Unix Systems Administrator                             (/'
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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 - www.avg.com
> Version: 8.5.325 / Virus Database: 270.12.24/2107 - Release Date: 05/10/09
> 07:02:00
>
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew



--
The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
Scotland, with registration number SC005336.