Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] logograms--an ode to Hebrew
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 08:34:05 -0800 (PST)
Jack Kilmon <jkilmon AT historian.net> wrote inter alia:
..."The existing
evidence and lack of evidence strongly suggests Moses and the Exodus as a
pious fiction, or at most a gross exaggeration, constructed in the 8th-7th
centuries BCE (IMO, under Josiah) to give "history" to the group. "....
Yes, this is point of view is fashionable in some circles, e.g.
Finkelstein. But I don't think that opposoite views, especially if held by
established egyptologists like Kitchen and Hoffmeier can be dismissed so
easily, without a point by popint refutation of their arguments.
In my opinion these early periods in Israel's period, as reflected in
biblical narratives should be taken seriously , but only as an Outline
History, or what is called in German Rahmen Geschichte, or proto-history by
A. Malamat.
Season's Greetings, and, as you sometimes say, Shlama
Uri
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Jazz up your holiday email with celebrity designs. Learn more.
>From uhurwitz AT yahoo.com Fri Dec 24 11:34:26 2004
Return-Path: <uhurwitz AT yahoo.com>
X-Original-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Delivered-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Received: from web51602.mail.yahoo.com (web51602.mail.yahoo.com
[206.190.38.207])
by happyhouse.metalab.unc.edu (Postfix) with SMTP id CD07F4C005
for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Fri, 24 Dec 2004 11:34:26 -0500
(EST)
Received: (qmail 32928 invoked by uid 60001); 24 Dec 2004 16:34:26 -0000
Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com;
Jack Kilmon <jkilmon AT historian.net> wrote inter alia:
..."The existing
evidence and lack of evidence strongly suggests Moses and the Exodus as a
pious fiction, or at most a gross exaggeration, constructed in the 8th-7th
centuries BCE (IMO, under Josiah) to give "history" to the group. "....
Yes, this is point of view is fashionable in some circles, e.g.
Finkelstein. But I don't think that opposoite views, especially if held by
established egyptologists like Kitchen and Hoffmeier can be dismissed so
easily, without a point by popint refutation of their arguments.
In my opinion these early periods in Israel's period, as reflected in
biblical narratives should be taken seriously , but only as an Outline
History, or what is called in German Rahmen Geschichte, or proto-history by
A. Malamat.
Season's Greetings, and, as you sometimes say, Shlama
>Chapter 1 verse 1: LI$:LOMOH, commonly understood as "by Solomon",
>although I suppose it could mean "for Solomon".
Or to solomon- as a dedicatory note. Which is how it probably should be
taken. Chris has already pointed this out.
>Chapter 1 verse 1: QOHELET B.EN-D.FWID, and then verse 12 HFYIYTIY MELEK:
>etc. Only one son of David was king of Israel, that is Solomon. This is
>surely some kind of authorship claim, whether you believe it to be true or
>not.
What does "ben" mean? Are you suggesting it must always mean "son"?
Jim
++++++++++++++++++++
Jim West, ThD
Adjunct Professor of Biblical Studies
Quartz Hill School of Theology