Biblical Hebrew Forum

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

Hi Jim,

let me see. I'll write off to all the Hebrew departments in Universities
around the globe and ask if anybody will fund my PhD bid for a thesis which
fundamentally posits that the Salt Sea was the mediterranean sea and not the
Dead Sea and that Sodom and Gomorah were therefore nowhere near the Dead
Sea. Now, just how many positive replies do you think I'm going to get Jim?

It's not a conspiracy to hide the truth from the world Jim. It's a matter of
simple economics. Nobody is going to fund a PhD for such a ridiculous
hypothesis. The internal evidence is against your theory. The Salt Sea is
quite clearly the Dead Sea. This is indisputably clear.

James Christian

On 13 May 2010 00:37, <JimStinehart AT aol.com> wrote:

>
> George Athas:
>
> You wrote:  “The biggest hurdle in your theories is the fact that no one in
> the biblical narratives has the same name as anyone in the Amarna
> correspondence. That's pretty big misalignment. (Ok, go ahead and tell me
> how
> apparently that's of no significance...)”
>
> With all due respect, your assertion is simply not true.
>
> 1.  Abimelek is the same name for the ruler of Shur in Gerar/Galilee in the
> Amarna Letters and in chapters 20, 21 and 26 of Genesis.  And Abimelek has
> the same problem in both sources:  access to contested water wells.
>
> 2.  Bieri in Amarna Letter EA 174 is close to Bera at Genesis 14: 2, both
> of whom are being ravaged by the rampaging Hittites.
>
> 3.  B-Risha at Genesis 14: 2 is likewise close to Abdi-Risha at Amarna
> Letter EA 363, having the identical circumstances as noted at #2 above.
>
> 4.  The Hurrians are the historical Hurrians (in the Transjordan).
>
> 5.  The Amorites are the historical Amorites (in Lebanon).
>
> 6.  QD$ is attested as qd$ in Ugaritic literature, being the same name of
> the same city in eastern Upper Galilee.
>
> 7.  Tidal is the Hittite kingly name Tidal.  Yes, it’s a Patriarchal
> nickname, and a nasty one at that.  In context it means “Murderer”, because
> Hittite King Suppiluliuma I seized the Hittite throne by the dastardly
> expedient
> of murdering his own older brother named Tidal.  He’s the primary military
> figure in the “four kings against five”, both in chapter 14 of Genesis and
> historically in the Great Syrian War.
>
>
> I can list more names that match the world of the mid-14th century BCE if
> you like.  I honestly do not see that as a major problem with my theory of
> the case.  On the contrary, that  i-s  a major problem for the view of
> university scholars, who cannot match a single name at Genesis 14: 6-7 to
> any
> attested name south of the Dead Sea in the ancient world.  There’s not even
> a
> single match on the scholarly view of the case, George.  Nothing.  Nada.
> Meanwhile, I’ve got “Hurrians”, “Amorites” and “QD$” for sure, and I could
> go
> on.
>
> George, do you realize that no university scholar has  e-v-e-r  asked any
> of the following pertinent questions about names in chapter 14 of Genesis,
> as
> far as I have been able to determine?
>
> (1)  What does the Hurrian name “Arioch” mean?  Is it based on a Hittite
> word, which in turn is based on an Indo-Aryan word, and does it mean “Mr.
> Aryan”?
>
> (2)  Is “Elassar” a Hittite word?  If so, what does it mean, and what is
> the significance of that?
>
> (3)  Do the letters in “Chedorlaomer” make perfect sense as a Ugaritic
> curse?
>
> (4)  Is MLK (LM at Genesis 14: 1 in defective spelling attested in only one
> place in the ancient world, namely at Ugarit in the 14th century BCE?  What
> is the significance of that objective fact?
>
> (5)  Is XCCN TMR at Genesis 14: 7 a Hurrian name?
>
> If university scholars were right that it’s all non-historical fiction, why
> then the refusal of any university scholars to investigate any of those
> fairly obvious questions about names in chapter 14 of Genesis?
>
> As you well know, Yigal Levin, an expert in Biblical geography, and a very
> fine and open-minded person, has steadfastly refused to ever consider
> looking north of the Dead Sea as a possible analysis of the names of
> peoples and
> places at Genesis 14: 6-7.  Why?  If it’s all fiction, why do university
> scholars absolutely refuse to look into any of these fairly obvious
> questions
> about names that I raise?
>
> Is there a “Big Secret” here?  What’s the “Big Secret”?  Why don’t any
> of your colleagues on the planet see fit to ask the above questions about
> names in chapter 14 of Genesis?  The world would be interested in their
> scholarly investigations, believe you me.  Why does Jim Stinehart have to
> do all
> this work on his own?  What gives?
>
> It would be wonderful, wonderful, wonderful if university scholars were to
> get interested in investigating the names in chapter 14 of Genesis, and
> then
> publish their findings in some forum that would be accessible to all.  That
> would be great, wouldn’t it?  Why aren’t university scholars doing that,
> George?  What are you guys hiding from us?  Are you hiding good news or bad
> news?  Why no scholarly investigation, at least no scholarly investigation
> that has been published and is accessible, of the foregoing questions about
> names in chapter 14 of Genesis?
>
> Jim Stinehart
> Evanston, Illinois
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
>