Biblical Hebrew Forum

[jimstinehart AT aol.com]

James Christian:

Many of us would love to see a Ph.D thesis on one or more of the following 
topics:

1.  What is the meaning of the Hurrian name Arioch?

2.  Is Elassar a Hittite name, and what is its meaning?

3.  Is Amrapel a west Semitic name that apparently means "Amorite Splittest"?

4.  Is "Shenir" a Hurrian word for Hurrian-dominated Syria?

5.  Are the letters that make up "Chedorlaomer" a Ugaritic curse?

6.  Is MLK (LM in defective spelling uniquely attested at Ugarit, and what is 
the significance of that?

7.  Is XCCN TMR a Hurrian name?  [Arioch is a bona fide Hurrian name, and 
since chapter 14 of Genesis is recognized by scholars as being very old, the 
reference to Hurrians at Genesis 14: 6 is probably a reference to the 
historical Hurrians.  So a Hurrian analysis makes sense for names in chapter 
14 of Genesis.] 

8.  Is QD$ the west Semitic rendering of a Hurrian name, either KD$W or KD$WN?

9.  Is En Mishpat the functional equivalent of (YN $W at item #5 on the T III 
list, and is $W a Hurrian word, with both phrases referencing towering Mt. 
Hermon, which dominated the view of Qadesh of Upper Galilee?

10.  Is Seir at Genesis 14: 6 the same as Seru in Abdi-Heba's Amarna Letter, 
and in both cases is that the Seir/Jazer in the well-wooded hill country of 
the Transjordan?

No one but you is interested in asking a young scholar to try to date the 
Amarna Letters, as you do,  by the absence of a reference therein to Sodom 
and Gomorrah.  And no one but you would ask a scholar if the Mediterranean 
Sea is a salt sea.

But the 10 questions listed above could change the world.  Why don't any 
university scholars investigate those questions, and publish their findings?  
What gives?

Jim Stinehart
Evanston, Illinois






-----Original Message-----
From: James Christian <jc.bhebrew AT googlemail.com>
To: JimStinehart AT aol.com
Cc: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org; George.Athas AT moore.edu.au
Sent: Wed, May 12, 2010 4:53 pm
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Genesis 34:8 consorting with the hapiru


Hi Jim,
let me see. I'll write off to all the Hebrew departments in Universities
round the globe and ask if anybody will fund my PhD bid for a thesis which
undamentally posits that the Salt Sea was the mediterranean sea and not the
ead Sea and that Sodom and Gomorah were therefore nowhere near the Dead
ea. 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
imple economics. Nobody is going to fund a PhD for such a ridiculous
ypothesis. The internal evidence is against your theory. The Salt Sea is
uite 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

______________________________________________
-hebrew mailing list
-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
ttp://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew