Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Nir cohen - Prof. Mat." <nir AT ccet.ufrn.br>]

jim,

i believe that your interpretation of these sentences is wrong. all the three
nations: emorite, canaanite, hurrian, are simply mentioned there for having
been  the lords of canaan at the time of the patriarchs. 

there is no indication in the text to your allegation that the hebrews were
associated, in this text, with the canaanites and emorites, more than with the
hurrians. this is only your personal interpretation.

moreover, mention of these nations (including the semitic ones) 
has in ezek. 16 a strong negative sense, as nations that corrupted 
the nation, as clear from his 16:44-48.

by this i do not reject a miscigenous picture of canaan in the early
patriarchal time: quite on the contrary.

nir cohen

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

>>De: JimStinehart AT aol.com
Data: Mon, 15 Jul 2013 10:40:32 -0400 (EDT)
Assunto: Re: [b-hebrew] Amalek's attacks before the big battle of Ex 17:8?

Ezekiel 16:3 can be viewed as being an accurate one-sentence summary of the
Patriarchal narratives and of the historical background of the Patriarchal 
Age:

“And say, Thus saith the Lord God unto Jerusalem;  Thy birth and thy nativity
is of the land of Canaan;  thy father was an Amorite, and thy mother a [XTY].”

The Amorites were west Semitic-speakers, and in this poetic passage, “Amorite”
should be given an expansive meaning of “native west Semitic speakers: 
Amorites, Canaanites and Hebrews”....