Biblical Hebrew Forum

[davedonnelly1 AT juno.com]

On Thu Aug 26 08:34:36 EDT 2010 
Yigal Levin leviny1 at mail.biu.ac.il  wrote:

>>>
Dave, the two positions are not mutually exclusive. 

Without getting into the question of the precise pronunciation of the
Tetragramaton, Jewish (Masoretic) tradition never denied that that was
God's
true name. 

the tradition is simply that God's true name is sacred and should
thus never be pronounced. Vocalizing "Adonai" and the like goes back to
Second Temple times, and is reflected by the LXX "Kyrios", which was
rendered "Dominus" Latin and became the English "Lord". 

The various
Mesoretic pointings of the name simply indicate which substitute
pronunciation should be used, not that that is the "true" pronunciation
of
YHWH.

Yigal Levin
>>>
======================================================================
Vigal,

You used two "that"'s in a row in two different sentences above.

In the sentence immediately above You wrote:

"The various
Mesoretic pointings of the name simply indicate which substitute
pronunciation should be used,
not that that is the "true" pronunciation of  YHWH."

If the substitute pronunciation is "Adonai" or Elohim" it doesn't seem
like anyone is likely to believe that either of those readings is the
true pronunciation of God's Name. 

However in the first sentence above you wrote:
Without getting into the question of the precise pronunciation of the
Tetragramaton, Jewish (Masoretic) tradition never denied that that was
God's
true name. 


What were you referring to as that
and which you stated that  Jewish (Masoretic) tradition never denied that
that was God's
true name. 

Dave Donnelly
____________________________________________________________
Obama Urges Homeowners to Refinance
If you owe under $729k you probably qualify for Obama's Refi Program
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/4c76be4314f8087d630st03duc
>From JimStinehart AT aol.com  Thu Aug 26 17:11:21 2010
Return-Path: <JimStinehart AT aol.com>
X-Original-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Delivered-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Received: by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix, from userid 3002)
        id B731F4C028; Thu, 26 Aug 2010 17:11:21 -0400 (EDT)
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on malecky
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,
        RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,
        T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL autolearn=disabled version=3.3.1
Received: from imr-ma02.mx.aol.com (imr-ma02.mx.aol.com [64.12.206.40])
        by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 241974C01F
        for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Thu, 26 Aug 2010 17:11:20 -0400 
(EDT)
Received: from imo-da04.mx.aol.com (imo-da04.mx.aol.com [205.188.169.202])
        by imr-ma02.mx.aol.com (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id o7QLB0Xq024220;
        Thu, 26 Aug 2010 17:11:00 -0400
Received: from JimStinehart AT aol.com
        by imo-da04.mx.aol.com  (mail_out_v42.9.) id o.dda.ff12d4b (45475);
        Thu, 26 Aug 2010 17:10:54 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from magic-d23.mail.aol.com (magic-d23.mail.aol.com
        [172.19.146.157]) by cia-mc06.mx.aol.com (v129.4) with ESMTP id
        MAILCIAMC064-b1a34c76d85e3a3; Thu, 26 Aug 2010 17:10:54 -0400
From: JimStinehart AT aol.com
Message-ID: <c8640.388522cb.39a8325e AT aol.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2010 17:10:54 EDT
To: randallbuth AT gmail.com, b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: 9.0 SE for Windows sub 5046
X-AOL-IP: 68.78.128.227
X-AOL-SENDER: JimStinehart AT aol.com
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 26 Aug 2010 17:32:31 -0400
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.13
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Aramaic to Hebrew language switch?
X-BeenThere: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13
Precedence: list
List-Id: Biblical Hebrew Forum <b-hebrew.lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/options/b-hebrew>,
        <mailto:b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/b-hebrew>
List-Post: <mailto:b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sympa AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=HELP>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew>,
        <mailto:b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2010 21:11:22 -0000


Ed Walkwitz and Randall Buth:
=20
In my considered opinion, the traditional interpretation of the Patriarcha=
l=20
narratives as to Abraham=E2=80=99s origins is completely erroneous, both=
 textually=20
and historically.  I view the Patriarchal narratives as portraying Abraham=
=20
as being indigenous to Canaan.  That is why the first Hebrews and the Cana=
a
nites spoke the same language, having only minor dialectal differences. =
 The=20
Patriarchal narratives open with Abraham on a one-time caravan trip from=
=20
Canaan way out to Ur in southern Kassite Babylonia, to buy lapis lazuli as=
=20
commercial merchandise.  No, the early Hebrews weren=E2=80=99t professiona=
l merchants,=20
but this was a one-time desperation move in the face of having recently be=
en=20
reduced to living in tents in Canaan (whereas Abraham=E2=80=99s father, Te=
rakh, as a=20
young man, and Terakh=E2=80=99s ancestors at all times, had lived in settl=
ed=20
villages in a more peaceful, prosperous Canaan).
=20
Thus YHWH speaks to Abraham at Genesis 12: 1 in perfect Hebrew, a language=
=20
that Abraham learned at his mother=E2=80=99s knee and spoke as a native.
=20
Terakh and Nahor get stuck, unfortunately, at Harran in Naharim/Mitanni,=
=20
where they learn Hurrian as a second language, not Aramaic.  The word Saha=
duta=20
at Genesis 31: 47 can be viewed as being a Sanskrit name, revered by the=
=20
Hurrians, that is similar to the Sanskrit name of Hurrian princeling Suwar=
data=20
in the Amarna Letters.  Note that the names of their descendants, includin=
g=20
descendants who never left Mitanni/Naharim, continue to be west=20
Semitic/Hebrew names, based on the family=E2=80=99s origins in west Semiti=
c-speaking Canaan: =20
Bethuel, Laban, Leah, Rachel, etc.  Note also that Laban, Leah and Rachel,=
=20
being native Hebrew speakers, can speak perfect Hebrew to Jacob with ease,=
=20
whereas if the family originated in Mesopotamia and that part of the famil=
y had=20
never been to Canaan, how could they be speaking fluent Hebrew?  Rather=20
than being obvious =E2=80=9Cmistakes=E2=80=9D in the text, all of this fit=
s in perfectly with=20
my view that the Patriarchal narratives portray Abraham, Terakh and the=20
Hebrews as being indigenous to Canaan.  =20
=20
Note that Abraham is surprised by nothing as he enters Canaan upon leaving=
=20
Harran.  Why should he be surprised?  He had lived in Canaan his entire=20
life.  True, Abraham and his ancestors had not previously lived at the Pat=
riarchs
=E2=80=99 =E2=80=9CHebron=E2=80=9D.  [The very name =E2=80=9CHebron=E2=80=
=9D itself, which may be XBRW + standard=20
suffix -N, rather than the more expected XBR-N, recalls the Ugaritic name=
=20
for an idealized kingdom, Khuburu, which is kind of like FDR historically=
=20
naming the Presidential retreat, a very real place (not a fictional place)=
 in a=20
very real time, by the wondrously mythical name:  =E2=80=9CShangri-la=E2=
=80=9D.]  The=20
early Hebrews were now living in tents, and moving around from place to pl=
ace,=20
having been displaced from their ancestral villages elsewhere in Canaan.=
 =20
Textual proof of my view is at Genesis 25: 8, which states as follows, bei=
ng a=20
statement that makes sense only if all of Abraham=E2=80=99s ancestors exce=
pt his=20
unfortunate father had lived and died and been buried in beloved Canaan:=
  =E2=80=9C
Abraham breathed his last and died in a good old age [at the Patriarchs=E2=
=80=99 =E2=80=98Hebron
=E2=80=99, in Canaan], an old man and full of years, and was gathered to=
 his people.
=E2=80=9D  Abraham was =E2=80=9Cgathered to his people=E2=80=9D in Canaan,=
 a phrase that makes no=20
sense if all of Abraham=E2=80=99s ancestors are portrayed in the text as=
 living and=20
dying and being buried in Mesopotamia.
=20
As to non-biblical sources, most historians agree that the Hebrews are=20
indigenous to Canaan.
=20
Finally, since Randall Buth is an expert in the Hebrew language, he if=20
anyone should know that Hebrew is a virgin pure west Semitic language, sho=
wing=20
precious few traces of Mesopotamia or Egypt.  Scholars call Hebrew a =E2=
=80=9C
conservative west Semitic language=E2=80=9D, which is the scholarly way of=
 saying =E2=80=9Cvirgin=20
pure west Semitic language=E2=80=9D.  The language of Hebrew itself, with=
 so few=20
foreign loanwords and so few linguistic connections to Mesopotamia or Egyp=
t, is=20
telling us that the Hebrews are indigenous to Canaan.
=20
Ed Walkwitz, please ask Randall Buth if =E2=80=9CTerakh=E2=80=9D is a west=
 Semitic name,=20
based on Ugaritic parallels.  If so, then how can scholars view the=20
Patriarchal narratives as telling us that the Hebrews originated in southe=
rn=20
Mesopotamia, near Ur, a place where west Semitic was not a primary languag=
e?  And=20
how can you possibly imagine a more virgin pure Hebrew name than Abram? =
 It=E2=80=99s=20
)B-RM, meaning =E2=80=9C[the divine] Father is exalted=E2=80=9D.  Even Bib=
lical Minimalists=20
can=E2=80=99t imagine a more virgin pure Hebrew name than that.  No one bo=
rn in=20
southern Mesopotamia would be expected to have a name like Abram.  If we=
 take=20
the personal names in the Patriarchal narratives seriously, the text is=20
telling us, historically accurately, that the Hebrews were indigenous to=
 Canaan.
=20
Jim Stinehart
Evanston, Illinois