Biblical Hebrew Forum

[sugiyarto Kristian <kristiansugiyarto AT yahoo.com>]

Thanks George for remainding

You wrote:
If you read some Ugaritic literature, you will see clearly that El is 
used as a proper noun. This is confirmed by the lack of a definite 
article in most cases.

It seems to me that you found El written in Ugaritic literature with a 
definite article though very a vew, is it correct? 

Can you tell me if El was found in construct position e.g with a pronoun such 
as my EL, or El of .....? 

Kristian

--- On Wed, 17/8/11, b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org 
<b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org> wrote:

From: b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org <b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Subject: b-hebrew Digest, Vol 104, Issue 12
To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Received: Wednesday, 17 August, 2011, 11:00 AM

Send b-hebrew mailing list submissions to
    b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
    http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
    b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
    b-hebrew-owner AT lists.ibiblio.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of b-hebrew digest..."


Today's Topics:

   1. Re: b-hebrew Digest, Vol 104, Issue 7 (Nir cohen - Prof. Mat.)
   2. Re: Participle or Qatal? (K Randolph)
   3. Re: Genesis 14:18-22 (K Randolph)
   4. Re: Genesis 14:18-22 (George Athas)
   5. Re: El: Common or Proper Noun? (Chavoux Luyt)
   6. Re: El: Common or Proper Noun? (George Athas)
   7. Re: El: Common or Proper Noun? (Yigal Levin)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2011 21:14:38 -0200
From: "Nir cohen - Prof. Mat." <nir AT ccet.ufrn.br>
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] b-hebrew Digest, Vol 104, Issue 7
To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Message-ID: <20110812224711.M85031 AT ccet.ufrn.br>
Content-Type: text/plain;    charset=utf-8

karl,

the talmudic, medieval and modern hebrew dialects are all tense-based,
and so is aramaic. it would be more natural to assume an 
aramaic influence on modern hebrew, as opposed to a greek one.

in fact, aramaic and talmudic hebrew admit a one-to-one
correspondence in the phoneme, lexical, grammatical and syntax levels, 
to the extent that i would call talmudic hebrew a word-for-word
transliterated aramaic dialect (you can check it, for example,
on the book of daniel). also, the tensing using past, present, 
future and auxiliary verb hyh/hwh are basically equal. this 
cannot be said about hebrew (or aramaic) vs any european language.

nir cohen

>>> Hence, looking not at the forms but at the actions that underlie the 
>>> forms,
I see the grammar of modern Israeli Hebrew to be a European language
grammar, very different from the grammar of Biblical Hebrew. That is why I
consider modern Israeli Hebrew to be a modern European language.




------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2011 00:55:42 -0700
From: K Randolph <kwrandolph AT gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Participle or Qatal?
To: B-Hebrew <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Message-ID:
    <CAAEjU0vnhX-9pY9YdKA4MJx9nfsJnCx7O2Jn+t8iLNrrPEEZhA AT mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

Now for a follow up verse.

As I read Judges 6:29, there are two verbs ??? (%H which I found myself
reading as participles. This time, the Masoretes pointed these verbs as
Qatal, so this time I disagreed with the Masoretes. As in the previous
example in this thread, I read the conjugation as referring to the actor
more than the action, hence the participle.

Then the next verse has the verbs and ??? NTC and  ??? KRT which I read as
Qatal verbs because here I see the emphasis on the action more than on the
actor.

Karl W. Randolph.


------------------------------

Message: 3
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2011 08:14:38 -0700
From: K Randolph <kwrandolph AT gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Genesis 14:18-22
To: Donald Vance <donaldrvance AT me.com>
Cc: B-Hebrew <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Message-ID:
    <CAAEjU0si4DSx13yEU7c=9_T9o8RHCZMCdM7Y_D4SNTu4_j3o4g AT mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

Donald:

On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 5:05 PM, Donald Vance <donaldrvance AT me.com> wrote:

> No, there is NOT every expectation that Melchizedek worshipped the same God
> as Abram. Why would he?


Why not?


> Where would he have heard of YHWH?


Abram was not the first worshipper of YHWH, according to Genesis. And
evidently, he was not the only one at his time either.


> Why did Abram need to clarify it?


Context! Who was his audience for that clarification?


> What evidence is there that anyone in Canaan worshipped YHWH without
> interacting with Abraham or one of his descendants? The text says El Elyon,
> a Canaanite deity.


Read the context. This is the same sort of thing that missionaries deal
with, using the generic term ?god? but then clarify that it is not one of
their gods by adding an explanation. An example is the Chinese ?? the most
high god, and how he is the true God. In this case, the explanation is: ?the
one who possesses heavens and earth? in contrast to the Canaanite gods which
were considered local only.


> Melchizedek lives in a Canaanite city.


So? Does that automatically make him a worshipper of Canaanite deities?


> There is no indication that he worships YHWH.


Yes there is, from Abram?s actions and acceptance of his priesthood.


> Abraham teaches the group that YHWH is El Elyon.
>

What group? The text mentions Sodom?s king only.

>
>  Jethro is not depicted as worshipping YHWH (Ex 18:11 makes no sense if he
> is already worshipping YHWH);


Yes it does. The case hinges on the meaning of ??? (TH: it does not only
mean ?at this time? or ?starting from this time forward?, rather it has a
broader meaning that does not rule out prior conditions. Examples include
Genesis 11:6, 22:12 (God knew that before, but gave the test to strengthen
Abraham?s faith), 24:49, 26:29, 45:8, etc.


> Caleb certainly interacted and associated with the descendants of Abraham!
>

Did he join Israel because of a shared faith, or was he a convert? The text
doesn?t say.

>
>
> Donald R. Vance, Ph.D.
> Professor of Biblical Languages and Literature
> Oral Roberts University
> dvance AT oru.edu
> donaldrvance AT mac.com
>
> Whether we agree with the text or not is immaterial. What counts is whether
or not we understand the text correctly within its linguistic, literary and
cultural contexts. We should also recognize where the text is silent and not
try to ?fill in the blanks?.

Melchizedek mentioned not merely ?most high God? but ?most high God
possessor of heavens and earth? in a historical context as recounted in
Genesis where YHWH had been known for prior centuries. ?Possessor of heavens
and earth? indicates a universal God and distinguishes him from the
localized Canaanite most high gods. Abram?s acceptance of Melchizedek?s
priesthood indicates that he, and he would know better than we millennia
later, considered that ?most high God possessor of heavens and earth? was
just a different way of referring to YHWH. All these clues taken together
gives us every expectation that Melchizedek worshipped the same God as
Abram.

Karl W. Randolph.


------------------------------

Message: 4
Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2011 02:42:36 +0000
From: George Athas <George.Athas AT moore.edu.au>
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Genesis 14:18-22
To: B-Hebrew <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Message-ID: <CA715648.FCAC%george.athas AT moore.edu.au>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Don appears to be reading Gen 14 against a henotheistic background in which 
cities and/or countries were associated with the worship of a particular 
deity. And a traveller to those cities/countries had to respect in some way 
the deity of that city/country. Don's right that there is NOT every 
expectation that Melchizedek worshiped the same God as Abram. It's possible, 
but we should not expect it to be the case, especially given what we know 
about El Elyon as a Canaanite deity.



GEORGE ATHAS
Director of Postgraduate Studies,
Moore Theological College (moore.edu.au)
Sydney, Australia




------------------------------

Message: 5
Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2011 12:17:33 +0200
From: Chavoux Luyt <chavoux AT gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] El: Common or Proper Noun?
To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Message-ID:
    <CAPGeeiEO-t-hPtE4zfy-ZWLfyzRyHUxU4DOm+Fc5g6jWE-jMfg AT mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

Hi all

> From:?George Athas <George.Athas AT moore.edu.au>
> Kristian, I'm not sure your analogy works here. The noun ?? is indeed 
> common, but it often functions as a proper noun.
> Certainly that's the case outside the biblical literature.
I know that my original question was about the possible differences
between the Hebrew usage and the pagan usage. I would also like to
know, however, (if this is not too far outside the scope of this
group) how certain archaeologists can be that "El" on its own was used
as a proper noun/name and not simply as a generic common noun? I
framed my original question to address the Hebrew usage only to try
and keep on topic for the list.
<snip

> From:?Yigal Levin <Yigal.Levin AT biu.ac.il>
> A similar case is "Baal", which is both a common noun meaning "lord/master" 
> and a proper name of a deity, known from both
> the Bible and a wide range of ANE inscriptions.
And here you seem to have a fairly convincing argument that it is very
possible that "El" could function as both common and proper name. Is
it possible, however, that "Baal" on its own (i.e. not compound names
such as Baal-berit etc.) was also used only as a common name and that
part of the prophetic dispute was that the baalim could not be
considered equal to the (one) "El".

Regards
Chavoux Luyt


------------------------------

Message: 6
Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2011 10:22:32 +0000
From: George Athas <George.Athas AT moore.edu.au>
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] El: Common or Proper Noun?
To: B-Hebrew <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Message-ID: <CA71D346.FD26%george.athas AT moore.edu.au>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

If you read some Ugaritic literature, you will see clearly that El is used as 
a proper noun. This is confirmed by the lack of a definite article in most 
cases.


GEORGE ATHAS
Director of Postgraduate Studies,
Moore Theological College (moore.edu.au)
Sydney, Australia




------------------------------

Message: 7
Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2011 14:23:18 +0300
From: Yigal Levin <Yigal.Levin AT biu.ac.il>
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] El: Common or Proper Noun?
To: b-hebrew <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Message-ID: <000301cc5cd0$107c8250$317586f0$%Levin AT biu.ac.il>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

And the same for Baal.

Yigal Levin

-----Original Message-----
From: b-hebrew-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org
[mailto:b-hebrew-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of George Athas
Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2011 1:23 PM
To: B-Hebrew
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] El: Common or Proper Noun?

If you read some Ugaritic literature, you will see clearly that El is used
as a proper noun. This is confirmed by the lack of a definite article in
most cases.


GEORGE ATHAS
Director of Postgraduate Studies,
Moore Theological College (moore.edu.au)
Sydney, Australia


_______________________________________________
b-hebrew mailing list
b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew



------------------------------

_______________________________________________
b-hebrew mailing list
b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew

End of b-hebrew Digest, Vol 104, Issue 12
*****************************************