quote:
Originally posted by spin
Naturally, I don't agree with this analysis, though it may eventually be correct.
And you know that your opinion is one that I don't dismiss lightly.
The plural construct form is grammatically correct from the viewpoint that it refers to any of the referent beasts (plural; asses, camels, lion and lioness, viper and flying seraph)
of or (from) the Negev (southern desert).
However, I do see your point. If the phrase "The burden of the beasts of the Negev" is an introductory preface to the proclamation itself (which I think it is), then "behemoth" here need not be referring to the later mentioned "beasts" in the plural.
In that case, the phrase might be more properly interpreted: "The proclamation (of doom) of the "behemoth" (singular metaphor) of the south". Alluding, (of course), to Egypt (as well as to those Judeans relying on, and fleeing to, Egypt).
Isaiah does seem to use "rahab" as a synonym for Egypt. I can't off-hand though think of another instance where he (or anyone) metaphorically refers to Egypt as "behemoth".
Nonetheless, your point is well taken and I intend to look into this further.
As always, thanks for the interesting insights.
Amlodhi
™ Version 4.2