The author of Genesis 32 made a clear choice of words, kadeshah instead ofOr could it be that the author was carefully reflecting the different perspectives of the Israelite and the Canaanite by having the latter refer to qadesha and the former to zona? Just as a careful newspaper reporter would use a different words for how e.g. an Islamic leader and an American politician describe terrorist outrages. It seems clear that the author takes care not to put positive references to qadesha on Israelite lips, just as a reporter would not put positive references to terrorism on American lips.
zonah. The author could have used the word zonah but did not, as was done
just a few verses earlier. The choice was made with a Hebrew speaking
Isrealite audiance in mind. The linguistic background of the Adullamites and
the people to whom he was enquiring of is not the point. The audiance and
author understood the meaning of the Hebrew words kadeshah and zonah and
understood the choice the author made. What did that choice reflect? Did
reflect a different assessment of the social standing of a kadeshah vs. a
zonah? Did that assessment change by the time of that 2nd Kings was writen?
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.