Biblical Hebrew Forum

[James Christian <jc.bhebrew AT googlemail.com>]

Hi,

On 7 May 2010 00:24, <JimStinehart AT aol.com> wrote:

>  James Christian:
>
> You and I agree that the author of Genesis 36: 8-43 knows nothing
> whatsoever about the historical Hurrians.
>

Now, I don't think I said that. Maybe he did maybe he didn't. It is
irrelevant to the discussion because the Hurrians are not mentioned anywhere
in the bible. Your identification of the Horites with the Hurrians is
completely wrong. The Hurrians had a wide extending empire. The Horites
lived exclusively in Seir. Applying circular logic to make the Horites look
like Hurrians isn't going to convince anybody. We don't like circular logic
around here.


>   But in an earlier post, I listed all the many factors that strongly
> suggest that chapter 14 of Genesis was composed in the Late Bronze Age.
>

Chapter 14 of Genesis was composed in the late bronze age because your
theory is right. Your theory is right because Genesis 14 was composed in the
late bronze age. Circular logic! = not a reliable line of evidence!



>   If chapter 14 of Genesis is a Late Bronze Age composition, then the early
> Hebrew author of chapter 14 of Genesis certainly knew all about the Amorites
> and the Hurrians,
>

The key word here is 'if'. You are starting to show signs of acknowledging
your reliance on circular logic. In any case you go on to show that your
assumptions in the if clause are also unreliable.


> and he knew that both the Amorites and the Hurrians lived exclusively north
> of the Dead Sea.
>

Hurrians are irrelevant. Your identification with the Horites is clearly
wrong. The Amorites are known to have been primarily nomadic. Only a
minority of their populace built and settled in cities and left some
archaeology for us. Your assumption that they never lived South of the Dead
Sea is clearly unstable.


> Your theory of Genesis 14: 6-7, like the scholarly theory, insists that
> both the Amorites and the Horites/Hurrians are portrayed as living south of
> the Dead Sea.
>

I didn't mention anything about the Hurrians. I don't care about them. Why
should I? They aren't mentioned anywhere in the Torah.


>   But that simply cannot be, if chapter 14 of Genesis was composed in the
> Late Bronze Age.
>
>

Again you use an if clause the substance of which is based on circular
logic. Hurrians are not mentioned. Amorites were primarily nomadic. Ergo
your assumptions are clearly wrong.


> The strongest argument against the conventional geographical
>

Please don't talk about conventional (whatever that means). Stay focused
with what has been presented to you.


> understanding of Genesis 14: 6-7 is that chapter 14 of Genesis dates all
> the long way back to the Late Bronze Age,
>

Only when applying your assumptions based on circular logic.


> to a period when everyone in the ancient Near East knew that the Amorites
> and the Hurrians lived north of the Dead Sea.
>

No Hurrians mentioned in the text. I think it's about time you dropped the
Hurrians. Amorites were principally nomadic. They lived just about
everywhere. They were so many in number that the term Amorite is almost
synonymous with Canaanite. Also, your assumptions on who knew what at what
time is also highly questionable.


> Accordingly, both Genesis 14: 6, and Genesis 14: 7,  m-u-s-t  be
> referencing locales  n-o-r-t-h  of the Dead Sea.
>
>

Circular, circular, circular. Based on false assumptions. And contrary to
the testimony of the rest of the Torah. Are you starting to see why your
theories are more than just a little difficult to swallow?

James Christian


> Jim Stinehart
> Evanston, Illinois
>