[Editor. We are now hearing from listeners to our “Stones Cry Out” weekly broadcast over the most recently added stations: on the Caribbean island of Granada and a network out of Webster NY. Our program is so unique, all the stations broadcasting it are giving time free to ABR. Will you help us locate new stations? We will furnish you sample tapes and you may submit them to a station near you. Please write and inquire.
A recent letter inquired about the Cities of the Plain being mentioned in extra-Biblical sources. The editor replied that Admah and Sodom were mentioned in the Ebla tablets and cited a reference in The Word of the Lord Shall Go Forth published in 1983. I am not sure of the initial date for the information relied on here. The books by the excavators Pettinato (Italian Ed. 1979) and Matthiae (Italian Ed. 1977) in their English editions both published in 1981 and Eblaitica Vol 2, Eisenbrauns, 1990, have now withdrawn all references to Ashur, Gaza, Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah, Shihor, Samaria, Shechem, and Megiddo after scrupulous study of the cuneiform signs and their values. References to Jerusalem (once claimed also) seems to be ignored, although Pettinato hints at it. Maybe this is still tied to Syrian political pressure.
An interesting fall-out from the study of Eblaite in the Semitic family of languages, is the article in Eblaitica pp 102–113 by G.A. Rendsburg. He shows that dialects of Canaanite, Aramaic and northern Hebrew are included in some peculiar words retained in the Masoretic text, including the speeches in Isaiah 21:12, Amos 8:2, 1 Samuel 10:14, 2 Kings 5.25, Psalm 141, and Job 8:2. The speeches of Job and his friends are full of dialectal forms, but the speeches of God in chapters 38–41 are in standard Judahite Hebrew. The earlier editions of the Bible apparently gave the reader the flavor of the languages in use in the various areas.
Dr. P. McCoy, E. Windsor NJ
[Ed. A second letter on this subject has come from Dr. McCoy.]
An added note to my previous note on Shea’s Ebla article. I have since obtained The Word of the Lord Shall Go Forth, and see that he is relating to TM 75G 2231. It is strange that since this publication in 1983, several later books and the articles I mention in addition to A. Millard’s Bible Review article, have avoided any reference to these implications in TM 75G 2231 and the EGA. I guess the rule is to avoid acknowledging this for as long as possible. In fact, no one seems to acknowledge or reference Shea’s article that I am aware of.
[Ed. See Shea’s remarks on page 100. This could prove very interesting!]