Re: [asa] The Hebrew for the Making of Man

But the ordinary Hebrew word for "sun" was "shemesh" and has no resemblance to "Ra".? It is unintelligible to argue that Moses chose to use "ma'owr"?instead of "shemesh" because the "shemesh" reminded the Hebrews of "Ra" whereas the "ma'owr" didn't.

Phil

inal Message-----
From: Don Nield <d.nield@auckland.ac.nz>
To: philtill@aol.com
Cc: dfsiemensjr@juno.com; dopderbeck@gmail.com; asa@calvin.edu
Sent: Fri, 1 Feb 2008 9:31 pm
Subject: Re: [asa] The Hebrew for the Making of Man

Other nations besides the Sabeans had sun gods (e.g. the Egyptian god Ra).?
Talking of "needly plants with tall trunks" is a very good way of disparaging the pine tree god -- you will recall that names had a great deal of significance in the ANE.?
Don?
?
philtill@aol.com wrote:?
> The Sabaeans lived in Yemen and so we wouldn't expect them to have a great influence on the Hebrews -- not hardly a cause for Moses to change his vocabulary, especially since you said the Sabaeans?used a "related term" for their goddess and not even the same word that the Hebrews used for "sun".? That's like saying that we can't use the word "real" because a tribe in Peru uses the related word "royal" as the name of a god.?
>?
> Even if some Hebrews were worshipping the sun, moon, and stars, these?words?are still the ordinary Hebrew words for the objects and not proper names of deities.? So Moses would have no cause to stop using the ordinary words.? In fact, if Moses' vocabulary in Genesis 1 was chosen with false worship in mind, then it would make more sense for him to use the ordinary term since then he would be proving that those worshipped things were just created objects and not gods.?
>?
> If people were worshipping pine trees, then would Moses stop using the word "pine trees" and change to "needly plants with tall trunks" just to avoid using the ordinary words?? No, that makes no sense!? >?
> This has got to be one of the weakest arguments I've ever heard.? So why?? Does the fact that Moses was dealing with phenomena, not objects, undercut?a favorite argument against Day Agers or YEC's?? If so, that's not a good reason to use bad arguments.?
>?
> Phil?
>?
>?
> -----Original Message-----?
> From: D. F. Siemens, Jr. <dfsiemensjr@juno.com>?
> To: philtill@aol.com?
> Cc: d.nield@auckland.ac.nz; dopderbeck@gmail.com; asa@calvin.edu?
> Sent: Fri, 1 Feb 2008 5:03 pm?
> Subject: Re: [asa] The Hebrew for the Making of Man?
>?
>?
>?
> The New Brown-Driver-Briggs-Gesenius Hebrew-English Lexicon, p. 1039, lists the root for the sun and the languages where it is found. Then it says that a related term in Sabean is a goddess. It later notes, under the Hebrew term,?references to worship of the sun, moon and stars in II Kings 23:5; Jeremiah 8:2; Ezra 8:16; Deuteronomy 4:19.?
>?
> Dave (ASA)?
>?
> ??
>?
> On Fri, 01 Feb 2008 05:07:29 -0500 philtill@aol.com writes:?
>?
>?
> Do you have specific etymologies in mind for names of pagan sun and moon gods in the surrounding countries, and how they relate to the Hebrew words for sun and moon??
>?
> Without that it is not a viable theory because Moses was willing to talk about all the other things mistaken for divinities?in Genesis 1.? He discussed sea monsters, which were divinities, the ocean, which was a divinity, the sky, which was a divinity, the animals, which were divinities, the land, which was a divinity, etc.? Why did he only avoid the Hebrew word for sun and moon but not all the others?? In fact, the sea and sky were the main two divinities in the Sumerian mythology.? I know less about Egyptian mythology, but I know at least that the sea was a god in the Egyptian pantheon.?
>?
> Phil?
>?
>?
>?
> -----Original Message-----?
> From: d.nield@auckland.ac.nz?
> To: philtill@aol.com?
> Cc: dfsiemensjr@juno.com; dopderbeck@gmail.com; asa@calvin.edu?
> Sent: Fri, 1 Feb 2008 4:13 am?
> Subject: Re: [asa] The Hebrew for the Making of Man?
>?
>?
>?
>?
> Phil wrote:?
> Moses was clearly using ANE ideas, but?
> >> his intentional choice to avoid the Hebrew words for "sun" and "moon"?
>> imply some sophistication that exceeded the origins of ANE mythology from?
>> several millenia earlier.?
>>?
>> > I now point out that a much simpler explanation is that the writer of?
> Genesis was merely avoiding the usual words for Sun and Moon because the?
> Sun and Moon were associated with divinities in the countries neighbouring?
> Israel.?
> Don?
>?
>?
> More new features than ever. Check out the new AOL Mail!?
>?
>?
> ??
>?
>?
>?
> ________________________________________________________________________?
> More new features than ever. Check out the new AOL Mail ! - http://webmail.aol.com?
>?
> ?
-- ?
Donald A. Nield?
Associate Professor, Department of Engineering Science?
University of Auckland?
Private Bag 92019?
Auckland 1142, NEW ZEALAND?
ph +64 9 3737599 x87908 fax +64 9 3737468?
Courier address: 70 Symonds Street, Room 235 or 305?
d.nield@auckland.ac.nz?
http://www.esc.auckland.ac.nz/People/Staff/dnie003/?
?

________________________________________________________________________
More new features than ever. Check out the new AOL Mail ! - http://webmail.aol.com

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Sat Feb 2 11:18:07 2008