Master of Philosophy Degree Thesis University of Cambridge, 2009
My 2009 treatment of 217 inscriptional theophoric personal names (anthroponyms) composed with ’ē... more My 2009 treatment of 217 inscriptional theophoric personal names (anthroponyms) composed with ’ēl (a singular term for ‘God’), adds to Jeffrey H. Tigay's list of 77 (then available in 1986) which he did not treat in his work 'You shall have no other Gods: Israelite Religion in the Light of Hebrew Inscriptions' (Scholars Press Atlanta: Georgia, 1986): see Appendixes, pp. 43-45, and Appendix D, pp. 83-85.
Such epigraphic ’ēl names (types like prefixed ‘Elnathan’ or suffixed ‘Nathaneel’) are compared with those of the Hebrew Bible.
This thesis, therefore, covers untrodden ground, and has no speculative thesis or theological aim.
Especially from Chapter 2 onwards, I present analysis, tabular displays, record and discuss, e.g., new names or those not in the Hebrew Bible, locational distribution of artefacts bearing ’ēl names, family relational and generational aspects on seals and bullae, identifying Biblical persons, and cases of possible punning.
This topic was the suggestion of Graham I. Davies FBA (Professor of Old Testament Studies), whose two-volume work Ancient Hebrew Inscriptions: corpus and concordance (Cambridge University Press, 1991, and 2004), was my main resource. My supervisor was Robert P. Gordon FBA (Regius Professor of Hebrew).
I record here with appreciation, the encouragement, some years ago, of Alan R. Millard FSA (Emeritus Rankin Professor of Hebrew and Ancient Semitic Languages, The University of Liverpool) to publish my material as an article in a relevant journal. Such is life, I do so now in the original form he responded to, on Academia, instead.
My biblical linguistic examination of Deut 6:4’s Hebrew word 'echad', aims to confirm that no ot... more My biblical linguistic examination of Deut 6:4’s Hebrew word 'echad', aims to confirm that no other semantic value is possible than as a cardinal number counting ‘one’. Not a "compound unity" nor meaning "alone". This will support Jewish monotheism's sense of the singleness of God, as ‘one Yahweh’ (OT) or ‘one Lord’ (NT), that Jesus said is to be heard as (part of) “the first and greatest commandment” (Matt 22:37-38; Mark 12:28-30). Connects in continuity with a Christological monotheism where Jesus' God is his Father. (Cf. One of my two chapters on the Shema, in 'One God, the Father' - Lulu 2013) Although I use the opportunity to draw on the complementary contribution of ‘alone’ applied to Yahweh, I rebut the assertion of ‘alone’ as a rendering or theorised replacement for >echad instead of 'one'. I apply the same method to counter the Trinitarian claim that the Shema’s >echad is about ‘compound unity’: ‘more-than-one-as-one’. In fact, I maintain that ‘compound unity’ is simply special pleading rather like attempts to find “Vestigia Trinitatis” in the OT. A name is a determinate thing, so to qualify God’s name ‘Yahweh’, itself unique, by ‘one’, must emphasise for hearing (Shema) its focal universality in His purpose (cf. Psa 83:18 [19]; Jer 31:34; Ezek 39:7).
I identify and discuss social and historical features found in the twelve letters from among the ... more I identify and discuss social and historical features found in the twelve letters from among the ostraca or inscriptional artefacts unearthed at Lachish from 1938 to the early 1990s. This pre-exilic correspondence between two Judeans gives us insider angles on the times and their circumstances which share connections with contemporary Jeremiah.
'And' begins the book of Exodus. Which other books begin with Hebrew 'and'? Or, how far does 'and... more 'And' begins the book of Exodus. Which other books begin with Hebrew 'and'? Or, how far does 'and' go? My overall different presentation of the Books of the Hebrew Bible is a response to: (i) the sequence of beginning 'ands' in the early books (ii) to 'ands' and, or, other repeated incipit features in the rest of the books. Short notes I give endeavour to say, for example, why I have made a particular (re)arrangement decisions.
Master of Philosophy Degree Thesis University of Cambridge, 2009
My 2009 treatment of 217 inscriptional theophoric personal names (anthroponyms) composed with ’ē... more My 2009 treatment of 217 inscriptional theophoric personal names (anthroponyms) composed with ’ēl (a singular term for ‘God’), adds to Jeffrey H. Tigay's list of 77 (then available in 1986) which he did not treat in his work 'You shall have no other Gods: Israelite Religion in the Light of Hebrew Inscriptions' (Scholars Press Atlanta: Georgia, 1986): see Appendixes, pp. 43-45, and Appendix D, pp. 83-85.
Such epigraphic ’ēl names (types like prefixed ‘Elnathan’ or suffixed ‘Nathaneel’) are compared with those of the Hebrew Bible.
This thesis, therefore, covers untrodden ground, and has no speculative thesis or theological aim.
Especially from Chapter 2 onwards, I present analysis, tabular displays, record and discuss, e.g., new names or those not in the Hebrew Bible, locational distribution of artefacts bearing ’ēl names, family relational and generational aspects on seals and bullae, identifying Biblical persons, and cases of possible punning.
This topic was the suggestion of Graham I. Davies FBA (Professor of Old Testament Studies), whose two-volume work Ancient Hebrew Inscriptions: corpus and concordance (Cambridge University Press, 1991, and 2004), was my main resource. My supervisor was Robert P. Gordon FBA (Regius Professor of Hebrew).
I record here with appreciation, the encouragement, some years ago, of Alan R. Millard FSA (Emeritus Rankin Professor of Hebrew and Ancient Semitic Languages, The University of Liverpool) to publish my material as an article in a relevant journal. Such is life, I do so now in the original form he responded to, on Academia, instead.
My biblical linguistic examination of Deut 6:4’s Hebrew word 'echad', aims to confirm that no ot... more My biblical linguistic examination of Deut 6:4’s Hebrew word 'echad', aims to confirm that no other semantic value is possible than as a cardinal number counting ‘one’. Not a "compound unity" nor meaning "alone". This will support Jewish monotheism's sense of the singleness of God, as ‘one Yahweh’ (OT) or ‘one Lord’ (NT), that Jesus said is to be heard as (part of) “the first and greatest commandment” (Matt 22:37-38; Mark 12:28-30). Connects in continuity with a Christological monotheism where Jesus' God is his Father. (Cf. One of my two chapters on the Shema, in 'One God, the Father' - Lulu 2013) Although I use the opportunity to draw on the complementary contribution of ‘alone’ applied to Yahweh, I rebut the assertion of ‘alone’ as a rendering or theorised replacement for >echad instead of 'one'. I apply the same method to counter the Trinitarian claim that the Shema’s >echad is about ‘compound unity’: ‘more-than-one-as-one’. In fact, I maintain that ‘compound unity’ is simply special pleading rather like attempts to find “Vestigia Trinitatis” in the OT. A name is a determinate thing, so to qualify God’s name ‘Yahweh’, itself unique, by ‘one’, must emphasise for hearing (Shema) its focal universality in His purpose (cf. Psa 83:18 [19]; Jer 31:34; Ezek 39:7).
I identify and discuss social and historical features found in the twelve letters from among the ... more I identify and discuss social and historical features found in the twelve letters from among the ostraca or inscriptional artefacts unearthed at Lachish from 1938 to the early 1990s. This pre-exilic correspondence between two Judeans gives us insider angles on the times and their circumstances which share connections with contemporary Jeremiah.
'And' begins the book of Exodus. Which other books begin with Hebrew 'and'? Or, how far does 'and... more 'And' begins the book of Exodus. Which other books begin with Hebrew 'and'? Or, how far does 'and' go? My overall different presentation of the Books of the Hebrew Bible is a response to: (i) the sequence of beginning 'ands' in the early books (ii) to 'ands' and, or, other repeated incipit features in the rest of the books. Short notes I give endeavour to say, for example, why I have made a particular (re)arrangement decisions.
Uploads
Papers by John W Adey
Such epigraphic ’ēl names (types like prefixed ‘Elnathan’ or suffixed ‘Nathaneel’) are compared with those of the Hebrew Bible.
This thesis, therefore, covers untrodden ground, and has no speculative thesis or theological aim.
Especially from Chapter 2 onwards, I present analysis, tabular displays, record and discuss, e.g., new names or those not in the Hebrew Bible, locational distribution of artefacts bearing ’ēl names, family relational and generational aspects on seals and bullae, identifying Biblical persons, and cases of possible punning.
This topic was the suggestion of Graham I. Davies FBA (Professor of Old Testament Studies), whose two-volume work Ancient Hebrew Inscriptions: corpus and concordance (Cambridge University Press, 1991, and 2004), was my main resource. My supervisor was Robert P. Gordon FBA (Regius Professor of Hebrew).
I record here with appreciation, the encouragement, some years ago, of Alan R. Millard FSA (Emeritus Rankin Professor of Hebrew and Ancient Semitic Languages, The University of Liverpool) to publish my material as an article in a relevant journal. Such is life, I do so now in the original form he responded to, on Academia, instead.
Although I use the opportunity to draw on the complementary contribution of ‘alone’ applied to Yahweh, I rebut the assertion of ‘alone’ as a rendering or theorised replacement for >echad instead of 'one'. I apply the same method to counter the Trinitarian claim that the Shema’s >echad is about ‘compound unity’: ‘more-than-one-as-one’. In fact, I maintain that ‘compound unity’ is simply special pleading rather like attempts to find “Vestigia Trinitatis” in the OT.
A name is a determinate thing, so to qualify God’s name ‘Yahweh’, itself unique, by ‘one’, must emphasise for hearing (Shema) its focal universality in His purpose (cf. Psa 83:18 [19]; Jer 31:34; Ezek 39:7).
Drafts by John W Adey
Such epigraphic ’ēl names (types like prefixed ‘Elnathan’ or suffixed ‘Nathaneel’) are compared with those of the Hebrew Bible.
This thesis, therefore, covers untrodden ground, and has no speculative thesis or theological aim.
Especially from Chapter 2 onwards, I present analysis, tabular displays, record and discuss, e.g., new names or those not in the Hebrew Bible, locational distribution of artefacts bearing ’ēl names, family relational and generational aspects on seals and bullae, identifying Biblical persons, and cases of possible punning.
This topic was the suggestion of Graham I. Davies FBA (Professor of Old Testament Studies), whose two-volume work Ancient Hebrew Inscriptions: corpus and concordance (Cambridge University Press, 1991, and 2004), was my main resource. My supervisor was Robert P. Gordon FBA (Regius Professor of Hebrew).
I record here with appreciation, the encouragement, some years ago, of Alan R. Millard FSA (Emeritus Rankin Professor of Hebrew and Ancient Semitic Languages, The University of Liverpool) to publish my material as an article in a relevant journal. Such is life, I do so now in the original form he responded to, on Academia, instead.
Although I use the opportunity to draw on the complementary contribution of ‘alone’ applied to Yahweh, I rebut the assertion of ‘alone’ as a rendering or theorised replacement for >echad instead of 'one'. I apply the same method to counter the Trinitarian claim that the Shema’s >echad is about ‘compound unity’: ‘more-than-one-as-one’. In fact, I maintain that ‘compound unity’ is simply special pleading rather like attempts to find “Vestigia Trinitatis” in the OT.
A name is a determinate thing, so to qualify God’s name ‘Yahweh’, itself unique, by ‘one’, must emphasise for hearing (Shema) its focal universality in His purpose (cf. Psa 83:18 [19]; Jer 31:34; Ezek 39:7).