Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - RE: Iron and Bronze.

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "David Stabnow" <dstabno AT lifeway.com>
  • To: b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu
  • Subject: RE: Iron and Bronze.
  • Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2002 09:51:01 -0500



I can see where a writer or speaker could make a casual mistake that
results in an anachronism. Let's take your "pencil" example. I might say,
"The Egyptian scribe picked up his pencil and recorded the royal history."
Some archaeologist or academia nut would correct me, informing me that
pencils weren't invented yet. I would counter that I just meant, in
general, a writing instrument; I didn't intend to be specific. However, if
I were to make the claim that Amenhotep was the first man to use a lead
pencil, that would be indefensible, since it is obviously a specific claim
not a casual mistake. Gen 4:22 seems to be the latter kind of specific
claim, unless, as Mr. Levin wonders, "barzel" can mean metalworking in
general.

Dave Stabnow
Bible Translation Editor
Broadman & Holman Publishers
Nashville, Tennessee
615-251-5851
david.stabnow AT lifeway.com

Therefore, whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do,
do everything for God's glory. (1 Cor 10:31, HCSB)




Trevor

Peterson To: Biblical Hebrew
<b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
<06PETERSON@cu cc:

a.edu> Subject: RE: Iron and Bronze.



08/30/02 08:01

AM

Please respond

to Trevor

Peterson









>===== Original Message From Ian Goldsmith <iangoldsmith1969 AT yahoo.co.uk>
=====
>Now if the writer/s were familiar with the new
>innovation of iron against the older bronze, why
>mention iron in antiquity before bronze? If this text
>is indeed written later than Kings etc (not that I
>hold this view personally), why mention iron at all?
>
>If I were to write a story about my ancestors I
>wouldn't put in their hands items that didn't exist in
>their day, it'd be pointless. So why is Tubal-cain
>mentioned as the first iron worker?

Do you suppose that they knew their ancestors didn't use iron? I think
probably most of us have a reasonable idea of when would be inappropriate
to
portray people as not using computers, because it's only been a generation
or
two since computers came into use. But aside from specialists, how many
people
would know how far back you'd have to go to find people who didn't know
what
paper was? Who knows when the first pencil was used? Sure, we know when
people
started using iron, but before archaeology really got going, was it widely
known? Is there any intrinsic reason to think that the use of metals should
have progressed over time? I think this is the general idea--that they were
assuming what would be only natural to assume at a point distant from the
events.

Trevor Peterson
CUA/Semitics


---
You are currently subscribed to b-hebrew as: [dstabno AT lifeway.com]
To unsubscribe, forward this message to
$subst('Email.Unsub')
To subscribe, send an email to join-b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu.








Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page