Biblical Hebrew Forum

[JimStinehart AT aol.com]

James Christian:
 
Would you please comment specifically on the word )YL at Genesis 14:  6?  
No matter how lovely the oases south of the Dead Sea may be, the only  
relevant question here is whether or not one would see )YL in the wilderness 
of  
Zin (or, per the scholarly view, at the Gulf of Aqaba).  The Greek words  
don't matter.  What counts is the Hebrew word )YL.  I have asserted  that )YL 
is an oak tree or terebinth, not a palm tree or acacia tree or acacia  bush, 
and that )YL does not grow south of the Dead Sea, but rather )YL was  
abundant in the Transjordan in Biblical times.  Even if the Negev were a  
savannah 
in the Patriarchal Age, per Karl, still one would not see )YL south of  the 
Dead Sea, if )YL means "oak tree".  The logical conclusion is that all  of 
Genesis 14: 6 is being portrayed as occurring in the Transjordan, north of  
the Dead Sea, where there is )YL, there are Horites/Hurrians, there is  
well-wooded hill country/HRRM %(YR, and the eastern border is an impenetrable 
 
desert/Paran, just beyond the marginal pastureland/MDBR.  That is to say,  
every aspect of Genesis 14: 6 literally reeks of the Transjordan in the Late  
Bronze Age.  E-v-e-r-y-t-h-i-n-g  fits perfectly.  Why are you so  opposed 
to viewing the troops of the 4 attacking rulers as campaigning in the  
Transjordan at Genesis 14: 6?  As I see it, that's what the text says,  at 
least 
if )YL means "oak tree", and oak trees were abundant in the Transjordan  
north of the Dead Sea in Biblical times, while always being non-existent 
south  
of the Dead Sea. 
 
Jim Stinehart
Evanston, Illinois