Biblical Hebrew Forum

[JimStinehart AT aol.com]

George:

1.  You wrote:  “‘En’ does not mean gateway - it means 'spring' or
'fountain'. Plain and simple.”

Not true.  All lexicons agree that the primary meaning of (YN is “eye”.
Of particular relevance here, the Patriarchal narratives in a majority of
cases use (YN in the sense of “in sight of”.  For example, Abraham does not
buy Sarah’s burial plot at a “fountain”, but rather “in sight of”/L-(YN-Y
the sons of the Hittites.  Genesis 23: 11, 18  (YN M$P+ can thus be viewed as
meaning “in sight of M$P+/MCPH”, that is, “in sight of the Beqa Valley”.
Rather than being mere speculation, this is an historically attested Late
Bronze Age nickname for QD$ of Upper Galilee, per item #5 on the mid-15th
century BCE Thutmosis III list.

2.  You wrote:  “Incidentally, there is no evidence for Amalekites in
Galilee, but plenty for the Negev region.”

Not true.

(a)  In secular history, there’s no evidence for Amalekites anywhere.

(b)  In the Bible after Genesis, Amalekites pop up anywhere and everywhere,
always in armed, militant, nefarious opposition to the Hebrews.  Thus at
Judges 12: 15, the Amalekites are in “the land of Ephraim”, in central
Canaan, north of Judah.  “Amalekites” is not used in the Bible after Genesis 
to
designate a particular ethnic group or locale.  Rather, (MLQY effectively
means “foreign devils”.

(c)  I would be delighted to explain the secular historical meaning of
(MLQY at Genesis 14: 7, but that would take a separate post.

3.  In 5,000 years of human history, there was only one “country of the
Amorites” referenced at Genesis 14: 7:  Amurru in 14th century BCE Lebanon.

4.  There is no QD$, and no (YN M$P+, 60 miles south of Gaza, or anywhere
in that general location, that is attested by those names in secular history
prior to the common era.  By contrast, I have shown QD$ (YN [M]$P[+] in
northeast Canaan at items #4-#5 of the T III list:  KD$ (EN $-Wi.  All three 
of
those names, both at Genesis 14: 7 and on the T III list, are referencing
historical QD$ of Upper Galilee.

5.  All the objective evidence from the secular history of the ancient
world supports my view that the unpointed text of Genesis 14: 7, prior to its
radical reinterpretation by Ezra (under duress and horrible circumstances),
referred to historical places in northernmost Canaan and Lebanon, using
well-attested historical nomenclature for such places from the Late Bronze 
Age.
There is  n-o-t-h-i-n-g  in the secular history of the ancient world that
backs up the scholarly view of Genesis 14: 7.  That scholarly view merely
follows Ezra’s radical, ultra-southerly reinterpretation of the geography of 
the
Patriarchal narratives, in claiming that QD$ is not historical QD$ of Upper
Galilee, the country of the Amorites is not historical Amurru in Lebanon,
and that the four invading rulers nonsensically headed for a spot deep in the
western Negev Desert that is 60 miles south of Gaza.  Although you claim
that my view of Genesis 14: 7 is “far-fetched” and “implausible”, in fact it
is the scholarly view of Genesis 14: 7 that has no backing whatsoever in
secular history, logic, or the unpointed text of Genesis.

Jim Stinehart
Evanston, Illinois

**************A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy
steps!
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1221322936x1201367173/aol?redir=http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=668072&hmpgID=115&bcd
=Mayfooter51209NO115)