Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] Jerusalem - spelling, in historical perspective

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: jimstinehart AT aol.com
  • To: jkilmon AT historian.net, b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Jerusalem - spelling, in historical perspective
  • Date: Mon, 07 Feb 2011 07:00:17 -0500


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






Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page