Biblical Hebrew Forum

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

Dear Jim,

[Jim Stineheart]
Melchizedek is not a king or ruler or princeling.  He has taken no part in the
fighting, yet the fighters make a large tithe to him.  Melchizedek is
exclusively a priest, not a priest-king, or a priest who is also a ruler.

[Bryant]
The text of Genesis 14:18 clearly states that Melchizedek is a king:
    Hebrew: Genesis 14:18
    וּמַלְכִּי־צֶ֙דֶק֙ מֶ֣לֶךְ שָׁלֵ֔ם הֹוצִ֖יא לֶ֣חֶם וָיָ֑יִן וְה֥וּא כֹהֵ֖ן
לְאֵ֥ל עֶלְיֹֽון׃

    LXX: Genesis 14:18
    18 καὶ Μελχισεδεκ βασιλεὺς Σαλημ ἐξήνεγκεν ἄρτους καὶ οἶνον, ἦν δὲ 
ἱερεὺς
τοῦ θεοῦ τοῦ ὑψίστου.

    Vulgate: Genesis 14:18
    18 at vero Melchisedech rex Salem proferens panem et vinum erat enim
sacerdos Dei altissimi

    NASB, 1995 Update: Genesis 14:18
    18 And Melchizedek king of Salem brought out bbread and wine; now he 
was
a cpriest of 1God Most High.

    NRSV: Genesis 14:18
    18 And King Melchizedek of Salem brought out bread and wine; he was priest
of God Most High.

Now, since your identification of Melchizedek is totally incorrect based on 
the
Hebrew text, let alone the LXX and Vulgate, then the rest of your conclusions
are also incorrect.

Rev. Bryant J. Williams III
 ----- Original Message ----- 
From: <jimstinehart AT aol.com>
To: <uhurwitz AT yahoo.com>; <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Sunday, February 06, 2011 9:17 AM
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Jerusalem - spelling, in historical perspective


>
> Uri Hurwitz:
>
> You wrote:  “The name [the ending of “Jerusalem”] probably originated, in
part, with the name $LM, a Ugaritic deity. This can be supported in Gen. 14:18
in the reference to Malchizedek, king of Shalem.”
>
> 1.  Melchizedek is not a king or ruler or princeling.  He has taken no part 
> in
the fighting, yet the fighters make a large tithe to him.  Melchizedek is
exclusively a priest, not a priest-king, or a priest who is also a ruler.
>
> 2.  This priest should be viewed as having a double name:
>
> MLK-Y-CDQ MLK-$LM
>
> The MLK/“king” is not a reference to a princeling ruler, much less to the
priest Melchizedek being a princeling ruler.  No, “king” means “King”, that is
“(Divine) King”.
>
> Melchizedek is a high priest whose deity, his name proclaims, is both (i) 
> King
of Righteous Victory, and (ii) King of Safety.  $LM at Genesis 14: 18 has
nothing to do with Jerusalem, but rather is the common word for “safety, 
peace,
protection”, which often was a divine attribute.
>
> 3.  The geographical words that the Biblical text uses are absolutely
incompatible with Jerusalem, while fitting Beth Shan perfectly in all 
respects.
>
> (a)  M$QH, at Genesis 13: 10.  The Jezreel Valley, the site of Beth Shan, is
“well-watered”, being a farmer’s paradise and the best agricultural land in
Canaan.  Jerusalem has plenty of drinking water for city inhabitants, but is 
not
M$QH, not being a prime agricultural area.
>
> (b)  (MQ H-%DYM, at Genesis 14: 3.  The quintessential “valley of tilled
fields” in Canaan is of course the Jezreel Valley, the site of Beth Shan.  
There
is no valley of tilled fields at or near Jerusalem.
>
> (c)  $WH, at Genesis 14: 17.  The famous “level plain” in Canaan is of 
> course
the Esdraelon Plain, which is the Jezreel Valley, on the east end of which 
sits
Beth Shan.  There is no “level plain” at or near Jerusalem, which as everyone
knows is situated in the heart of hilly hill country.
>
> 4.  Since nothing about Melchizedek fits Jerusalem, and everything about
Melchizedek fits Beth Shan, we should be able to recognize Melchizedek as 
being
the high priest of the cult of Mekal, at the famous Temple of Mekal at Beth 
Shan
in the mid-14th century BCE.  Mekal was claimed to be the “king” of both
“righteous victory”/CDQ and “safety”/$LM.  Abraham starts with those pagan
concepts concerning Mekal, and then brilliantly presents them in terms that
could apply to almost all religious views of the period, including early
Judaism.  For example, certainly YHWH is a “king” of both “righteous victory”
/CDQ and “safety”/$LM.  Abraham diplomatically does not diss Mekal, because
Abraham is trying at that point to unite the ancient near east south of 
northern
Lebanon into a grand anti-Hittite United Front, so that the “four kings 
against
five” historical disaster [total victory by the dreaded Hittites, under 
“Tidal”
/Suppiluliuma I] up north would not be repeated down south in Canaan itself.
>
> 5.  Your comparison to Ugarit cuts against your position, when you write:
“The name probably originated, in part, with the name $LM, a Ugaritic deity.”
No, at Ugarit, $lm is probably an attribute of a god, not the name of a god:
>
> “slm.  This root, ‘to be well, at peace’, appears in many West Semitic names
of all periods.  Compare $lm at Ugarit (Grondahl 1967: 193) and in Phoenician
(Benz 1972: 180) and Aramaic (Maraqten 1988: 102).  This may be a sentence 
name
that was shortened by omission of the divine name.”  Richard S. Hess, in K.
Lawson Younger, editor, “Ugarit at 75” (2007), at p. 119.
>
> 6.  Note that it was routine in the Late Bronze Age for a name to feature 
> $LM,
meaning “safety, peace, protection”, which routinely was an attribute of a
deity, while not being the name of a deity.  [Indeed, the literal proper
n-a-m-e  of a deity usually does not appear in people’s names, whereas by
contrast, paeans to a pagan deity are ubiquitous in the names of people in the
ancient world.]  Thus it should be no real surprise that the second half of
Melchizedek’s long, double name features $LM:  MLK-$LM.  That’s not saying 
that
priest Melchizedek was the princeling ruler of Jerusalem!  [That honor 
belonged
to IR-Heba.]  Rather, that is simply the second half of the priest 
Melchizedek’s
double name.
>
> 7.  $LM at Genesis 14: 18 has nothing to do with Jerusalem, but rather is a
common attribute of deities meaning “safety, peace, protection”, which is 
often
found in Late Bronze Age names.
>
> 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