Always excluding the Book of Genesis and the Patriarchs
entirely, let’s continue our consideration of the use of the Biblical words (LH
and HR in connection with the Hebron that is located in southern hill
country, whereas (MQ never appears in such connection. There appear to be five main cases in
the Bible [excluding Genesis] where people go to the XBRWN that is located in
southern hill country, as follows:
1.
Spies.
HR and (LH are paired regarding Moses’ spies “going
up”/(LH to Hebron in southern hill country. At Numbers 13: 17 we see (LH twice and
HR/“mountains” once; then at
Numbers 13: 22 we see (LH and XBRWN.
Note that the city of Hebron in the mountains of southern hill
country quite naturally causes the text to use the words HR and (LH, while never
using the word (MQ. That’s the
“norm”, and meets every expectation fully.
2.
Joshua.
Joshua 10: 36 features (LH and XBRWN in southern hill
country, and Joshua 10: 40 predictably has HR. All very predictable.
3.
Samson.
Judges 16: 3 has XBRWN in southern hill country and (LH
and HR. All very
predictable.
Samson and Joshua and Moses’ spies all “go up”/(LH to the
“mountains”/HR in order to get to the Hebron that
is the highest altitude city in all of Canaan,
and that is located in mountainous southern hill country. The XBRWN that is located high up in the
mountains of southern hill country is a perfect fit to (LH and HR.
4. Future
King David.
II Samuel 2: 1-3 has (LH five times and XBRWN in southern
hill country twice. No HR is
mentioned there.
5. Elders
of Israel.
The elders of Israel meet with King David at Hebron at I Chronicles 11:
1, 3. This is the classic
“exception that proves the rule”, in that XBRWN in southern hill country is
mentioned twice, but there’s no (LH and no HR, in chronicling a series of
meetings between King David and the elders of Israel.
Please note that in all five cases, there’s never a
mention of (MQ when the Hebron that is located in southern hill country
is being discussed.
Thus leaving aside Genesis entirely, in the rest of the
Bible if there is a mention of Hebron in southern hill country, then we can
confidently expect the following:
(a) (LH is
likely to be there. That’s because
one has to “go up”/(LH to get up to the mountainous city of Hebron in southern hill
country.
(b) HR is
likely to be there. That’s because
the mountainous city of Hebron in southern hill country is located in
the “mountains”/HR.
(c) But (MQ
will never be there, because in the context of southern Canaan [south of the
Jezreel Valley], (MQ in Biblical Hebrew means: “a true broad valley located east or
west of the Watershed Ridge Route that is at a lower elevation than hill
country”. In the Bible [always
excluding Genesis], the site of King David’s first capital city of Hebron [in any time period], located near the top of the
tallest mountain in Canaan in southern hill
country, is n-e-v-e-r said to be an (MQ. N-e-v-e-r .
Thus if the reference is to the mountainous city of
Hebron in
southern hill country, expect to see (LH, and expect to see HR, but be advised
that there is no way on earth that you will ever see (MQ! (MQ and the mountainous city of
Hebron in
southern hill country cannot be paired, per the Biblical Hebrew wording that is
consistently used in the Bible [always excluding, per Prof. Levin’s wishes, all
consideration of the Patriarchs and the Book of Genesis].
In my humble opinion, (LH and HR and (MQ are very basic
Biblical Hebrew words that have very clear meanings. (LH and HR fit the mountainous city of
Hebron in
southern hill country perfectly in all ways. By stark contrast, (MQ is antithetical
to the Hebron
that is located high up in mountainous southern hill country. The city that is the highest altitude
city in all of Canaan cannot be squared with
(MQ!!! No way. Always excluding Genesis, in the
entirety of the Bible one
n-e-v-e-r sees (MQ paired
with the city of Hebron in southern hill country. N-e-v-e-r . Not once. Not. Nada. Nope. No can do. Not in Biblical Hebrew. No way.
The Bible records the historical name of a fine
historical non-Hebrew princeling who married a Hurrian wife and who was the
ruler of Hebron,
and under whose wise rulership the Hebrews prospered. Most unfortunately, however, this fine
native west Semitic-speaking princeling ruler unduly favored his firstborn son
who, after his father’s death, soon became a dire threat to run the Hebrews out
of their beloved homeland of Hebron.
This awful successor ruler had a younger brother who historically allied
with tent-dwellers at Hebron, instead of hating tent-dwellers, and
such younger brother [unlike the prior ruler’s firstborn son] would have been
the ideal successor ruler from the Hebrews’ point of view. All of these historical events match the
stories told in the Bible, detail for specific detail, but if and only if we pay
close attention to the Biblical Hebrew words (LH, HR, and (MQ in determining the
geographical location of each Hebron that is mentioned in the Bible. If you focus on the words (LH, HR, and
(MQ, then you can determine which Hebron is being referenced in various parts of
the Bible, and thereby confirm the
p-i-n-p-o-i-n-t historical
accuracy of certain Biblical stories told about Hebron. The Bible records the actual historical
name of the most important ruler of Hebron, and tells us the exact year in which he
was allied with the Hebrews, with certain Canaanite princelings, and with
certain Hurrian princelings. But
the only way to match these Biblical stories with their exact historical
equivalents in non-biblical sources is to focus on the words (LH, HR, and (MQ in
determining the geographical locale of each Hebron mentioned in the Bible. If you know those three basic Biblical
Hebrew words, you can figure it out for yourself. The historicity of the Bible is riding
on the words (LH, HR, and (MQ.
Jim Stinehart
Evanston,
Illinois
