Biblical Hebrew Forum

[jimstinehart AT aol.com]

Jack Kilmon:
 
1.  You wrote:  "‘The City of Shalem’ (uru-shalem) would be called simply 
Shalem and it is in Genesis, inscriptions by the Ramessides and at Mari.” 


a)  Please set forth a citation that Jerusalem was called “Shalem” by the 
Ramessides.
 
(b)  Please set forth a citation that Jerusalem is called “Shalem” at Mari.
 
My guess is what you are remembering is as follows:
 
(i)  $LM is attested all over the ancient near east, probably being a divine 
attribute, but claimed by many to be the name of a pagan god.
 
(ii)  Many people have seen “Jerusalem” as perhaps being based on the idea of 
“City of Shalem”, where Shalem is either a pagan deity or an attribute of a 
pagan deity.
 
But to the best of my knowledge, Jerusalem is  n-e-v-e-r  referred to in any 
non-biblical source as “Shalem” or “Salem”, etc.

2.  Moreover, what the text says about Melchizedek is utterly incompatible 
with Jerusalem.  The three key descriptive words of Melchizedek’s locale are 
M$QH, $WH and (MQ H-%DYM, all of which fit Beth Shan’s location perfectly, 
and none of which fit Jerusalem at all.
 
3.  Finally, Melchizedek is not a king.  He takes no part in the fighting.  
Melchizedek is solely a priest. 
 
Jim Stinehart
Evanston, Illinois