Karl:
You wrote: “(MQ merely refers to a low place, lower than its surrounding
territory. It can be a small hollow all the way to a large valley. It has
nothing to do with “a low tract of land of wide extant, fit for corn …, and
suited for battlefields.” as being necessary to its definition. Indeed
there is a low place between Hebron and Kiryat Arba, a valley that loops north
around Hebron, then generally west. Today it is filled with fields, but
if it weren’t, it would be a good place to set up an encampment with enough
tents to house a few hundred people, probably a larger encampment than that
which housed Jacob, his family, his slaves and their families. That small
valley fits the definition of “Valley of Hebron” where Jacob had his
encampment.”
1. (MQ is never used in the Bible concerning King David’s Hebron located
high up in southern hill country. Rather, there we see the two key words
which never appear regarding the Patriarchs’ XBRWN in Genesis: (LH and HR.
2. Moreover, I have looked at every use of (MQ in the Hebrew Bible
regarding sites in Canaan south of the Jezreel Valley. Each and every such
(MQ
is located either east or west of the Watershed Ridge Route. Leaving aside
Genesis 37: 14 [which is the passage in question], no (MQ is located on the
Watershed Ridge Route in the Hebrew Bible.
3. I myself have found no support in the Hebrew Bible for your assertion
that a small valley located near the top of the highest mountain in
southern Canaan would constitute an (MQ in the Hebrew Bible. Based on my
Biblical research, a small, high-altitude mountain valley would constitute a “
valley” in E-n-g-l-i-s-h , but would not constitute an (MQ in Biblical
Hebrew.
The phrase “valley of Hebron” is acceptable in E-n-g-l-i-s-h in
referring to where King David’s first capital city was located high up in
southern hill country, but the Bible never refers to (MQ XBRWN concerning such
site of King David’s first capital city, because a locale near the top of the
highest mountain in southern Canaan is not an (MQ in Hebrew. The English
word “valley” has a much broader ambit than the Hebrew word (MQ.
)YLWN goes together naturally with (MQ at Joshua 10: 12; t-h-a-t is
where the Patriarchs’ XBRWN is located, hence the adroit and natural pairing
of (MQ and the Patriarchs’ XBRWN at Genesis 37: 14. But when the talk
turns to the site of King David’s first capital city of Hebron, located in
southern hill country near the top of the tallest mountain in southern Canaan,
then whenever that site in southern hill country is referenced [a locale
never mentioned in the Patriarchal narratives], one never sees (MQ. Why?
Because (MQ in Biblical Hebrew, though fitting the low-lying broad true valley
the Ayalon Valley perfectly, does not fit a site near the top of the
tallest mountain in southern Canaan.
The Patriarchs’ XBRWN was located in the Ayalon Valley, and hence is
characterized by the word (MQ, and never is characterized by the words (LH or
HR.
By sharp contrast, King David’s Hebron high up in southern hill country
is never characterized by the word (MQ, but rather is naturally
characterized by the words (LH and HR. If Biblical Hebrew words mean anything,
the
Patriarchs’ Hebron is not located at or near the locale of King David’s
Hebron. The two places have entirely different characteristics: (MQ vs. (LH
and HR.
Excluding Genesis 37: 14 itself, what passage in the Bible would you cite
in support of your assertion that a small valley located near the top of
the highest mountain in southern Canaan would constitute an (MQ in Biblical
Hebrew?
Jim Stinehart
Evanston, Illinois
_______________________________________________
b-hebrew mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
