Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] Hebrew as a holy language

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: JimStinehart AT aol.com
  • To: J.Read-2 AT sms.ed.ac.uk, George.Athas AT moore.edu.au
  • Cc: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Hebrew as a holy language
  • Date: Thu, 21 May 2009 10:25:58 EDT


1. James Christian wrote: “Let us postulate that it is historically true
that Abraham came out of Ur and wandered around Canann. … c) As a chaldean
of Ur, what was likely to be Abraham's mother tongue of birth d) did Abraham
learn Canaanite while wandering about in Canaan?”

Abraham did not “come out of Ur”.

(a) No university scholars view the Hebrews as originating in Ur.

(b) The Patriarchal narratives do not portray the Hebrews as originating
in Ur. As leading commentator Gordon Wenham notes at p. 55 of “World
Biblical Commentary: Genesis 1-15” (1987), MWLDT means “kindred”. Our own
Prof.
Yigal Levin has likewise noted that whereas MWLDT can mean “birth” or “
birth place” in modern Hebrew, MWLDT means “kindred” in Biblical Hebrew. Thus
Genesis 11: 28 says that Haran died in the presence of his father, at the
place where Haran’s kindred/MWLDT were, in Ur of the Kasdim/K%DYM (i.e., Late
Bronze Age Ur; Kasdim is n-o-t “Chaldean”!). MWLDT is the most
economical way to refer to Abraham, Nahor and Lot, who are Haran’s
kindred/MWLDT/descendants of a common ancestor. Genesis 11: 31 does n-o-t
say that Haran
was born in Ur. Abraham only visited Ur once, very briefly, on his father’s
one and only caravan trip from Canaan out to distant Ur to buy lapis lazuli.

(c) Linguistics proves the case. Biblical Hebrew is a virgin pure west
Semitic language. Biblical Hebrew is not a modified east Semitic language.

(d) Abraham learned pre-Hebrew on his mother’s lap, in Canaan. YHWH
speaks pre-Hebrew to Abraham at Genesis 12: 1-3 in Harran, because that was
Abraham’s native language. (Over the centuries, the original spellings and
grammar of the Patriarchal narratives were modified slightly to conform to
fully-developed Biblical Hebrew. The substantive content was never changed.)

(e) No (M of Abraham or Terakh is ever mentioned in Mesopotamia in the
Patriarchal narratives. That’s not an oversight. No, that’s because no
ancestor of Terakh ever stepped foot in Mesopotamia. The Hebrews are
indigenous
to Canaan.

(f) Genesis 25: 8 specifically says that when Abraham died and was buried
in Canaan, Abraham was gathered to his (M/people/ancestors. That sentence
makes sense only if Terakh’s ancestors had lived in, were indigenous to, and
were buried in, Canaan.

2. James Christian wrote: “Let us also postulate that it is historically
true that Jacob and sons ended up in Egypt and that later generations ended
up in slavery and eventually came out of to wander about in Sinai.”

There was no 400-year bondage of the Hebrews in Egypt.

(a) Virtually no university scholar sees a 400-year bondage of the
Hebrews in Egypt in secular history.

(b) All of Joseph’s prophecies come true in the Patriarchal narratives.
The Patriarchal narratives end with Joseph’s prophecy that very shortly after
Joseph’s death, YHWH will lead the Hebrews back home to Canaan. Genesis
50: 24-25

(c) The prophecy at Genesis 15: 14, 16 says nothing about Egypt, and is
not referring to Egypt.

(d) Once again, linguistics proves the case. Biblical Hebrew is a virgin
pure west Semitic language. There are virtually no traces of Egyptian in
Biblical Hebrew. The Hebrews were never in bondage in Egypt.

3. Abraham could not speak Egyptian or Akkadian. Abraham likely could not
speak Hurrian or Aramaic either. (Abraham’s brother, Nahor, probably
learned both Hurrian and pre-Aramaic as second languages.) Abraham, like many
other people in Canaan, was able to get by in all the many various patois of
west Semitic languages that were spoken in Canaan. That was routine in Late
Bronze Age Canaan.

4. The Patriarchal narratives give accurate secular historical information
about all of these issues. In my controversial view, the Patriarchal
narratives are 700 years older than the rest of the Bible, and are much more
accurate concerning the secular history of the Late Bronze Age than is the
rest
of the Bible.

Jim Stinehart
Evanston, Illinois

**************Huge savings on HDTVs from Dell.com!
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1221836042x1201399880/aol?redir=http:%2F%2Fad.doubleclick.ne
t%2Fclk%3B215073686%3B37034322%3Bb)




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page