b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum
List archive
- From: JimStinehart AT aol.com
- To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
- Subject: [b-hebrew] The Iniquity of the Amorite
- Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2012 11:17:39 -0400 (EDT)
Each of Genesis 14: 13 and Genesis 15: 16 refers to “the Amorite”, using the same five Hebrew letters: H-)MRY. But the first named Amorite, namely Mamre the Amorite, is in covenant relationship with Abram, and is Abram’s invaluable ally. That is not the Amorite who commits a terrible iniquity against the early Hebrews. According to Biblical testimony, who was Mamre the Amorite’s successor? Was he another Amorite, and was he “iniquitous” in his dealings with the early Hebrews? Was he the firstborn son of Mamre the Amorite, whom Mamre the Amorite unduly favored, just as (i) Abraham initially unduly favored firstborn son Ishmael [Genesis 17: 16, 18], Isaac initially unduly favored firstborn son Esau [Genesis 25: 28], and Jacob initially unduly favored the firstborn son of his favorite wife Rachel, namely Joseph [Genesis 37: 3]? Was Mamre’s successor an Amorite princeling ruler who was iniquitous, from the standpoint of the early Hebrews? W-h-o was the iniquitous Amorite referred to at Genesis 15: 16, and w-h-a-t was the precise nature of that Amorite’s iniquity regarding the early Hebrews?
Here’s what scholar Gerhard von Rad says at p. 187 of “Genesis” (1972): “The ‘iniquity of the Amorites’ is here to be understood as their sexual corruption….”
The mainstream scholarly view of Genesis 15: 16 appears
to be that of Gordon J. Wenham, who in “Genesis 1-15” (1987) at p. 332
says: “Here the Amorites stand for
all the inhabitants of
But if the Biblical phrase “the Amorite”/H-)MRY meant
“all the inhabitants of Canaan”, then everyone in
Moreover, since there were only a tiny number of Amorites in Canaan, with the overwhelming majority of the population of Canaan being Canaanites and Hurrians [based on the Biblical names in the last 40 chapters of Genesis, which accurately reflect a certain time period in Late Bronze Age Canaan], why do scholars ask us to believe that a reference to one tiny minority group in Canaan, the Amorites, means “all the inhabitants in Canaan”? N-o-t-h-i-n-g in the Patriarchal narratives supports that scholarly gambit. It seems to me that Biblical scholars have no idea
whatsoever what “the iniquity of the Amorite” is. In particular, isn’t it clear that
Biblical scholars are clueless as to who “the Amorite” at Genesis 15: 16
is? The Patriarchal narratives
don’t hate “all the inhabitants of
Jim Stinehart |
- [b-hebrew] The Iniquity of the Amorite, JimStinehart, 10/05/2012
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.