Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Jesse Griffin <jag3773 AT gmail.com>]

I cast my lot with Karl on this one.  I think the biblical data is laconic
enough that it would fit into either a flat earth cosmology or a spherical
earth cosmology, depending on the viewpoint of the reader.

As to what the original authors had in mind when they used these terms,
that's difficult to conclude.  But again, I agree with Karl, it is not
unreasonable to think that they had a spherical earth in mind.

Perhaps future linguistic or archaeological findings will prove helpful in
pinning down an Israelite cosmology.

Thanks,
Jesse


On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 4:23 PM, K Randolph <kwrandolph AT gmail.com> wrote:

> Martin and George:
>
> The LXX and especially Vulgate are too late to make a definitive statement
> as to the meaning of a word that is used so seldom in Tanakh. Already the
> LXX shows signs that on some terms the translators were merely guessing as
> to the meaning of those terms.
>
> As for KhWG חוג its one use in Job is best translated as sphere. The Isaiah
> use could go either way. The last and third example in Proverbs seems to
> favor “circle” but how much of that is more picturesque than literal?
>
> Isn’t it a stretch to assume that the Biblical writers would accept ancient
> Egyptian, Mesopotamian, and Canaanite cosmologies when the totality of
> Tanakh was so much in opposition to those religions?
>
> My conclusion: on the basis of this one term, one cannot prove that the
> ancient Hebrews believed in a spherical earth, but at the same time we
> cannot rule it out. At the same time, to insist that the ancient Hebrews
> believed in a flat earth is medieval cosmology, violating good exegesis of
> the text. War caused destruction destroyed much data which could possibly
> answer this question.
>
> One thing that favors that the ancient Hebrews believed in a spherical
> earth is that such beliefs were not unknown in ancient times, and that the
> Bible is the source of our modern understanding of science and the findings
> that true science give us, (there are some religious beliefs that are often
> called scientific, but because they cannot be shown using the scientific
> method, they also cannot be scientific beliefs) so we cannot rule out that
> the ancient Hebrews knew of the concept that the earth was a sphere. At
> least, a spherical earth fits a modern understanding of the text better
> than a discus flat earth. And the medieval cosmology, which you claim that
> was also found in Canaanite, Egyptian and Mesopotamian cosmologies, is way
> off when evaluated according to ancient Hebrew language usage.
>
> Karl W. Randolph.
>
> On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 7:53 AM, <bhebrew AT shields-online.net> wrote:
>
> > It is also probably worth noting that neither the LXX nor the Vulgate
> > translate these terms with words meaning "ball, sphere" even though such
> > were available.
> >
> > This then also fits with what we know of ancient Egyptian, Mesopotamian,
> > and Canaanite cosmologies. Against this background it certainly doesn't
> > seem that Isaiah or Job are sufficiently unambiguous to compel someone
> > holding such a view to believe the Earth was spherical and so any person
> in
> > the ancient world hearing these words would simply assume that their
> > flat-Earth (although possibly spherical cosmos) view was not being
> > challenged.
> >
> > Martin Shields,
> > Sydney, Australia.
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
>