.<ynys Jram hLaw <YmW /opXm hLa-hNhw Waby qojrm hLa-hNh
note that the last word there, highlighted, reads "Sinim," which shares the same root for "Sinite" in the following 2 places:
|
10:17
17 וְאֶת־הַֽחִוִּ֥י וְאֶת־הַֽעַרְקִ֖י וְאֶת־הַסִּינִֽי׃ |
דברי הימים א 1:15
15 וְאֶת־הַחִוִּ֥י וְאֶת־הַֽעַרְקִ֖י וְאֶת־הַסִּינִֽי׃
1 Chronicles 1:15 15And the Hivite, and the Arkite, and the Sinite, |
now, the interesting thing is that while the Isaiah mention is highly touted (an amazing 18 hits on google at febc.edu.sg), the Genesis and
Chronicles mentions are never mentioned (0 hits!!). in the Isaiah context, Sinim is mentioned in the context of the glorious Messianic restoration. the latter
contexts, of course, speak of these same Sinites, whoever they be, as descendants of Canaan not too long after Noah cursed him (Gen. 9:25). hmm, i wonder why
them VPPers didn't connect the dots on this one ... there are other options for Sinim, but Noooo Sireeee, it's either China or u're some sinister Bible-correcting, Chinese-hating liberal:
There is no valid reason to translate [eretz] as "region" except
for the sinister purpose of demoting the Land of Sinim into some Egyptian
outback.
Sinim as Syene/Aswan, Egypt (a la Dead Sea Scrolls, NIV, ESV, MSG, CEV, NLT, HCSB footnote)? not a chance!
accepting ONLY Isaiah's words n deftly sweeping Genesis n Chronicles under the rug seems pretty selective to me. cldn't be any
racial chauvinism at play cld it?






