Prof. Yigal Levin: 
You wrote:  “You've already explained in detail why you don't think that 
the  Patriarchs' Hebron is where everyone else thinks it  is.  Please DO NOT 
do so again,  under any subject line.” 
Fine.  I  hope, however, that we might nevertheless be permitted to discuss 
on the  b-hebrew list how the Biblical Hebrew words (LH and (MQ and HR work 
in the rest  of the Bible [excluding Genesis].  O.K.? 
In the entirety of the rest of the Bible, no human being  is  e-v-e-r  said 
to “go up”/(LH to “a broad true  valley”/(MQ.  So if one sees the  word 
(MQ in the rest of the Bible, then take it to the bank, no one will ever be  
said to “go up”/(LH to such locale.  Unlike in English, in Biblical Hebrew 
[always excluding Genesis for all  purposes of this post] the words HR 
[mountain, mountains, hill, hills] and (MQ  are antithetical.  Whenever one 
sees  
the Biblical word (MQ, one will never see the Biblical word HR, and vice  
versa.  Whereas the Biblical Hebrew  words (LH and HR go together like hand 
and glove, the word (MQ, by sharp  contrast, is absolutely antithetical to 
both (LH and HR in the rest of the  Bible.  That’s not English usage,  but who 
cares about that, because it is Biblical Hebrew usage. 
Note also that in the entirety of the rest of the Bible,  whenever an (MQ 
in southern Canaan [south of the Jezreel Valley] is referenced,  it is  
a-l-w-a-y-s  located either west or east of the  Watershed Ridge Route [which 
runs from north of Shechem south through hill  country to the site of King David
’s first capital city of Hebron in mountainous  southern hill country].   
N-e-v-e-r  in the rest of the  Bible does one find an (MQ located on the 
Watershed Ridge Route itself.  Thus completely unlike the English word  “valley”
, the word (MQ in the rest of the Bible necessarily implies [in the  
context of southern Canaan] a place that both (i) is located east or west of 
the  
Watershed Ridge Route, and (ii) is at a lower elevation than hill country.  
There’s not a single exception to that  in the entire rest of the Bible.  So 
 if one sees the word (MQ in the rest of the Bible, then take it to the 
bank,  that (MQ in southern Canaan is  n-o-t  located on the  Watershed Ridge 
Route, much less near the top of the highest mountain in Canaan  on the 
dramatic southern end of the Watershed Ridge Route. 
Finally, in the rest of the Bible [always excluding  Genesis in this post], 
whenever there is an extended discussion of something  going on near the 
top of the tallest mountain in Canaan, which beginning with II  Samuel is 
portrayed as being King David’s first capital city of Hebron:  (a) one almost  
a-l-w-a-y-s  sees the nomenclature (LH and HR, as  people naturally “go up”
/(LH to that site located high up in the “mountains”/HR  of mountainous 
southern hill country;  and (b) one  n-e-v-e-r  sees a reference to (MQ:  “a 
true broad valley which, if located  in southern Canaan, is located either west 
or east of the Watershed Ridge Route  at an elevation lower than hill 
country”.  In the rest of the Bible, it would be  i-m-p-o-s-s-i-b-l-e  to 
reference that site near the top of  the tallest mountain in Canaan by (1) 
never 
using the words (LH or HR, and (2)  explicitly stating that such site in 
southern Canaan is an (MQ. 
To me, these Biblical Hebrew words (MQ, (LH and HR have a  clear meaning.  
In particular  [always excluding Genesis, per your request], the Biblical 
Hebrew word (MQ in  the context of southern Canaan has a very  specific 
meaning.  It means that no  one will ever be portrayed as “going up”/(LH to 
that 
(MQ, it means that such (MQ  is not located in the HR/mountains, and it 
means that such (MQ will of necessity  be located either west or east of the 
Watershed Ridge Route at an elevation  lower than hill country, not on the 
Watershed Ridge Route, much less way up/(LH  near the top of the highest 
mountain/HR in Canaan on the dramatic southern end  of the Watershed Ridge 
Route. 
In the entirety of the Bible outside of Genesis, the  Biblical Hebrew words 
(LH and (MQ and HR appear to me to have the above  unambiguous meanings.  
Prof. Yigal  Levin, what am I missing here?  Any  help from you or anyone 
else would be greatly appreciated.   
Jim Stinehart 
Evanston,  Illinois
_______________________________________________
b-hebrew mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew

Reply via email to