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: [email protected] 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”.... _______________________________________________ b-hebrew mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
