last time Dan
banyai at t-online.de
Tue Sep 17 16:34:30 EDT 2002
Dear Ian, it takes too much time this argument.
I´ll bring within a month or so a paper offering a usable new chronology
of the period of the Judges. Later on I´ll hang within a number of
synchronisms. We can talk in detail afterwards.
We are talking here detail matters without having a general outlook.
> >1. it follows, since we have here in Deut. 33,12 an allusion to the
> (I gather you mean 33:10.)
> >Jerusalem temple (which became only after Solomon an important Israelite
> >temple - not to say it didn´t exist at all before), that the text is later
> >than the regiment of that king of Judah.
> >2. How is this to harmonise with Deut. 33:5 plus Deut. 33:21 which speak
> >of a coronation ceremony in the region of Gad?
> I don't see any such ceremony in 33:21, so I don't
> accept your premise.
But you see one in 33:5 and you find no single reference to a king in the
whole text. It ought exist a king and you reject the single reference
available petaining to Joseph.
There is no reference to a ceremony in 33:21, it speaks of a gathering of
the heads of Israel in Gad. And 33:5 speaks of a gathering of the heads of
the people for a coronation ceremony.
Since you are not accepting any context within the text and each sentence
in the Bible has a different autor (snip) there is no correlation between
33:21 and 33:5. Wow!
> >3. After Mesha´s rebellion did Ruben and Gad disappear from the
> >historical scene, here they are against any odds.
> Really? You haven't established any historical
> scene, so it's difficult to place any players
> on or off it.
Curious, I had the impression to read in the blessing about a tribe Gad,
dwelling in idylic situations. After Mesha, there was no Gad left. So you
have a terminus ante quem.
Of course, according to your assertion, every single sentence stems from a
different autor, maybe it was picked from an earlier text, also written
sentence for sentence by different autors, not one of them knowing of the
existence of the other ones.
Maybe the autor of this sentence lived before Mesha. Looking amused?
> >nothing similar is said of Judah -
> If the text was originally a northern text, that's not
Oh, and why should it have been a northern text? Because you in exactly
this moment would need this? You negated the secondary character of
Benjamin with the Jerusalem temple. You negated the reference to kingship
in the context with Joseph. You didn´t wonder over the lack of any
reference to the Beth-El or Dan temple. You negated the coronation
ceremony in Gad. What is there northern still? Your wish to bring to fall
> >thus we may assume the
> >only king in Jeshurun was from among Joseph but than where does the
> >powerfull reference to Jerusalem come?
> A reference to Jerusalem here is an assumption.
Please call me some other important temple in Benjamin, besides Jerusalem
(which more or less became Benjamin), so important that it is the only one
to be called in the blessing, and to be called the dwelling of Jahweh.
But I find it still very amusing to find Benjamin being mentioned side by
side with Joseph, in a sentence bearing much on Shechem by this wordgame
about shoulder (don´t forget this was obviously a beloved wordgame about
> >5. Which is the sense of "bring him to his people,by his hands" concerning
> >Judah? Where do we read about a personal union between Benjamin and Judah
> >in the Judahite kingdom.
> >You see, the attempt to accept Benjamin as non intrusive to the text and
> >to reject my cannonical argument, as well as my hint to the wordgame about
> >"shoulders" / Shechem is fatal to its understanding.
> The conclusion doesn't seem to follow from anything
I strongly disagree. But patient yourself till we are getting a proper
chronology of ancient of Israel. Till than does the discussion lack any
base. I hope you will read it through and try to understand how it works
before beginning detail-warfare.
All the best,
More information about the b-hebrew