Iron and Bronze.
iangoldsmith1969 at yahoo.co.uk
Wed Sep 4 11:30:17 EDT 2002
> No, but the point is (forgive me for butting in)
> that the mention of Iron
> is neither a proof of the antiquity of iron or of
> the lateness of the text.
> Both have to be evaluated independantly, and then
> combined. But if it could
> be established that iron was not known (or at least
> not used) until the 8th
> century, this would be proof that at least that part
> of that redaction of
> that particular text did not reach its present form
> until the 8th century.
Perhaps true.. but it can't, can it.
So hopefully we are left with the unprovable
possibility that the text is early... or perhaps
late.. who knows. What we can say at the moment is
that we cannot be absolutely certain!
Kinda of leaves the area open I hope.
Thanks again and shalom Yigal.
Dibrah Torah kilshone bnei-adam
'The Torah spoke in the language of ordinary men.'
Do You Yahoo!?
Everything you'll ever need on one web page
from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts
More information about the b-hebrew