Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Bryant J. Williams III" <bjwvmw AT com-pair.net>]

Dear Jack,

Thank you for the correction on MBA.

Although many scholars go with the late date of the Exodus, primarily because 
of
the name of Rameses II (what happen to Rameses I?), the text of the Tanahk
clearly places it in the 15th Century BCE. Furthermore, since the time of the
bondage in Egypt is 430 yrs this places Joseph in Egypt in the 19th Century 
BCE.
This would make Abraham, Isaac and Jacob in the 21st-20th Century BCE. I would
take the "Pharaoh who knew not Joseph" as the first of the Hyksos rulers.

Regarding the prophecy, I am quite aware that Genesis was not written until
Moses (15th Century BCE; edited later), but Joseph would have known of the
prophecy because of what his father Jacob would have told him. Prior to Moses
writing the Pentateuch this prophecy would have been in oral form.

Rev. Bryant J. Williams III


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jack Kilmon" <jkilmon AT historian.net>
To: "Bryant J. Williams III" <bjwvmw AT com-pair.net>; <JimStinehart AT aol.com>;
<kwrandolph AT gmail.com>
Cc: <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>; <LBReich AT alum.mit.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, August 11, 2010 1:01 PM
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Patriarchal Narratives was TD(L


> Hi Bryant:
>
> EBAI to EBAIV dates from 3300 BCE to 2000 BCE and the so-called "Patriarchal
> Period" (an uncomfortably imprecise term) would be MBAI to III or 2000 BCE
> to 1550 BCE.  If Joseph is historical (and for various literary reasons I
> believe he was) his tenure as a vizier in Egypt would best fit the reign of
> the last Hyksos Pharaoh Apepi I/II at the end of the Second Intermediate
> Period and the emergence of the New Kingdom and the Tuthmosid 18th Dynasty.
> I won't speculate about the origins of a contemporary Delta chieftain named
> "Yakobaam."
>
> Accordingly the chronology does not fit Joseph being aware of a Genesis
> prophecy given Genesis was not yet written.  There was no Hebrew script at
> this time when proto-alphabetic acrophonic systems in Egypt and the Sinai
> were just emerging but certainly there was a Canaanite language.  Aramaeans
> settled in Aram around the 13th century BCE and Abraham is reported to have
> been born in Sumerian UR (not of the Chaldees).  Numerous anachronisms occur
> in the OT simply from the account being written centuries after the events.
>
> Jack
>
> Jack Kilmon
> San Antonio, TX
>
> --------------------------------------------------
> From: "Bryant J. Williams III" <bjwvmw AT com-pair.net>
> Sent: Wednesday, August 11, 2010 2:14 PM
> To: <JimStinehart AT aol.com>; <kwrandolph AT gmail.com>
> Cc: <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>; <LBReich AT alum.mit.edu>
> Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Patriarchal Narratives was TD(L
>
> > Dear Jim,
> >
> > Abraham is clearly EBA. It is evident that most of the Patriarchal
> > Narratives
> > were in the EBA. Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and Joseph would be found
> > between
> > 2000-1800 BC (BCE). It is also evident that Joseph clearly understood the
> > prophecy regarding that the Israelites would be in Egypt for 400 years
> > were to
> > take his body and be buried alongside his father, Jacob. See Genesis
> > 50:24-26;
> > Exodus 13:19; and Joshua 24:32. This is what the texts say. Every thing
> > else is
> > speculation. It does mean something when one is looking in the wrong
> > century for
> > the Patriarchs.
> >
> > What you postulated is good to do, if and only if, there is clearly
> > evidence
> > that clearly shows that what you are saying is correct, but the
> > scholarship is
> > repeatedly not showing that. Furthermore, it does no good to use various
> > terminology such as, "late date theory", "pin point accuracy," "modern
> > scholars," "university scholars,"etc., to produce list anxiety and
> > monopoly. It
> > shows that your theory is redundant in argumentation and not on solid
> > rock, but
> > is on shifting sand. Back to the drawing board.
> >
> > Rev. Bryant J. Williams III
> >
> > Rev. Bryant J. Williams III
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > From: <JimStinehart AT aol.com>
> > To: <kwrandolph AT gmail.com>
> > Cc: <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>; <LBReich AT alum.mit.edu>
> > Sent: Wednesday, August 11, 2010 8:32 AM
> > Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] TD(L
> >
> >
> >>
> >> Karl:
> >>
> >> 1.  You wrote:  “[F]or ‘pinpoint accuracy’ you need to take the story of
> >> Abraham in its context, a context that indicates that Abraham lived in
> >> the
> >> early bronze age, not late.”
> >>
> >> Karl, that’s where you’re wrong.  The words in the text are thoroughly
> >> redolent of the mid-14th century BCE in the Late Bronze Age.
> >>
> >> 1.  K$DYM at Genesis 11: 28, 31.  That references the Kassites, the Late
> >> Bronze Age rulers of southern Mesopotamia.
> >>
> >> 2.  NHRYM in the Amarna Letters and at Genesis 24: 10 is the name of the
> >> Hurrian great power state in eastern Syria during the Late Bronze Age.
> >>
> >> 3.  TD(L is an authentic Hittite kingly name, being a nasty Hebrew
> >> nickname
> >> [his murdered older brother’s name] for mighty Hittite King Suppiluliuma
> >> I.
> >>  The only time the Hittites threatened beloved Canaan was under
> >> Suppiluliuma, at the time of the Great Syrian War in the mid-14th century
> >> BCE.
> >>
> >> 4.  )B-Y-MLK.  Abraham interacts with Ab-i-Melek, who both in chapter 21
> >> of
> >> Genesis and in eight Amarna Letters is always catatonic about how to get
> >> access to contested water wells.
> >>
> >> Even the literary concepts in the Biblical text are redolent of the Great
> >> Syrian War in the mid-14th century BCE, such as the reference at the end
> >> of
> >> chapter 14 of Genesis to Abraham not taking a sandal lace:  “Speiser
> >> correctly observed that the phrase…neither a string nor a sandal lace is
> >> based
> > on
> >> Near Eastern formulae….  We now have a text from Ugarit remarkably close
> >> to
> >> Gen 14 in some ways.  Niqmaddu, king of Ugarit, has been plundered by his
> >> enemies [members of the league of 5 rebellious Hurrian princelings].  His
> >> [newly-embraced] suzerain, the Hittite king Suppiluliuma, comes to his
> >> rescue
> > and
> >> drives the invaders away.  In response Niqmaddu attempts to give
> >> Suppiluliuma a gift as a sign of his appreciation.  The text is damaged
> >> at
> > this point,
> >> but may be restored to read as follows:  ‘Suppiluliuma, the Great King,
> >> saw
> >> the loyalty of Niqmaddu, and as far as what belongs to
> >> Ugarit…Suppiluliuma,
> >> the Great King, will not touch anything, be it straw or splinter….’
> >> Abram
> >> appears to follow similar royal etiquette [at the end of chapter 14 of
> >> Genesis] in refusing anything from the king of Sodom [‘neither a string
> >> nor a
> >> sandal lace’] in return for his accomplishments.”  Victor P. Hamilton,
> >> “The
> >> Book of Genesis Chapters 1-17” (1990), at p. 414.  [Niqmaddu of Ugarit is
> >> Biblical “Chedorlaomer”, and Suppiluliuma is Biblical TD(L.]
> >>
> >> 2.  You wrote:  “There is no linguistic evidence that TD(L was Tudhaliya.
> >> The only reason we see for you to make that claim, is to make it fit your
> >> theories.”
> >>
> >> Au contraire, Tudhaliya is spelled identically at Genesis 14: 1 and in
> >> Ugaritic literature.  That’s letter-for-letter accuracy in a Late Bronze
> >> Age
> >> historical context.  But then again, that’s simply par for the course for
> >> the
> >> Patriarchal narratives.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Jim Stinehart
> >> Evanston, Illinois
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> b-hebrew mailing list
> >> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> >> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
> >>
> >
> >
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
> >
> >
> > Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
> > Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> > Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.3/696 - Release Date: 02/21/2007
> > 3:19
> > PM
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > b-hebrew mailing list
> > b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
> >
> >
>
>
> -- 
> Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.3/696 - Release Date: 02/21/2007
3:19 PM
>