Biblical Hebrew Forum

[K Randolph <kwrandolph AT gmail.com>]

Jim:

On Mon, Dec 31, 2012 at 2:34 PM, <JimStinehart AT aol.com> wrote:

 

Yes, that’s fine as far as it goes.  But Karl, you left out the most important part.  Caleb is a Kenizzite, that is, a Hurrian.

So, in your mind, everyone in the Bible who’s not Egyptian or Israelite, is Hurrian? 

 

 

And Yes, since Kelip the Hurrian threw in his lot with the Hebrews, it would not be surprising that he has a nephew with a Hebrew name.

 

… 

2.  You wrote:  “Therefore, without any proof, you cannot claim that )WRYH, David’s soldier, was not from one such family, therefore was not named in honor of YHWH.”

 

 

What is your Hebrew analysis of the name )WRYH? 

YHWH is light, or Light of YHWH. Good Hebrew. 

 

 …  The final -H is a Semiticization of this Hurrian name, in recognition of the fact that, per Joshua 15: 63, Hurrian families had remained in, and dominated, Jerusalem from the Late Bronze Age.

The Bible lists them as Jebusites, descendants of one of Canaan’s sons and not from far off Nuzi. 

 

Uriah is said to be a XT -Y

A descendant of another of Canaan’s sons, again native to the land of Canaan, not from far off Nuzi.

 

…  So for every person whom the Bible describes as being a “Hittite”, we should expect that their name will be a Hurrian name, and will not be a west Semitic/Hebrew name. 

You contradict yourself here: you admit that in the case of Caleb’s family that because they had thrown their lot in with Israel, that they’d choose Israelite names for their children; so with no evidence to the contrary, you cannot claim that Uriah’s family had not done the same as Caleb’s family and that Uriah’s father or grandfather or earlier was the convert.

 …

There’s no mention of David ever having a scribe until King David took over Jerusalem.

So? Just because it doesn’t mention it doesn’t mean David didn’t have one, and that %RYH didn’t then fulfill that role. You’re making an argument from silence, and arguments from silence are invalid. Especially in the Bible which lists only the highlights, not every detail.

%RYH is good Hebrew, one translation: YHWH rules.

 

 

4.  You wrote:  “You ignore that the endings -YH and -YHW were used interchangeably, both referring to YHWH, so that MYKYHW in Judges 17:1, 4 is the same as if he had spelled it MYKYH, so that name fits your criteria.”

 

 

I agree.  But some scholars see -YHW as being the old southern Judah way, whereas -YH is the later, northern way.  As to substantive meaning, I agree with you.

MYKYHW was northern Israelite, not southern. He dated from a time when there was no separation of northern and southern.

As for your unnamed scholars, they can all go jump in the lake. Oh yeah, Lake Michigan is rather cold this time of year, so let them join the Polar Bear Club.

 

5.  You wrote:  “You do sample biasing, ruling out earlier evidence just because its record survives only in a book that was written later. That book was written when the Israelite genealogy tables were still extant (burned in 70 AD when the temple was burned) so there’s no reason to assume that (ZRYH 1 Chronicles 2:8 is not an accurate record of someone who preceded David.”

You didn’t answer my question about an Israelite who is listed before David. 

  

… 

  

Jim Stinehart

Evanston, Illinois

Karl W. Randolph.