[b-hebrew] Hebrew as a spoken language
yitzhaksapir at gmail.com
Thu Oct 25 10:02:17 EDT 2007
On 10/25/07, Dave Washburn wrote:
> On 25 Oct 2007 at 16:14, George Athas wrote:
> > Incidentally, can I add that there are also scholars who do believe in
> > predictive prophecy and yet also hold that Daniel was written in the
> > 2nd century BC.
> > I do not want to open a can of worms on this, though.
> I'd suggest that the best we can say is, it's post-exilic. Anything beyond
> that is basically speculation.
I used the term "post-exilic" in order to avoid "opening the can of worms." In
this issue of the discussion with Karl, the question is when the Jews were
exiled and thus exposed to Aramaic to the degree that their native language
was purportedly lost. However, Daniel is obviously written after the
and after such exposure, and is even in large part written in Aramaic. Karl
can still claim that Hebrew was not a spoken language in the time of Daniel'
composition, I suppose, (whichever side of the can of worms you're on),
but his claim was that Biblical Hebrew only ever had 22 letters, and the
Hebrew sections of Daniel are definitely Biblical Hebrew.
Bryant's delineation of the reasons for the "disagreement" is a
misrepresentation. Again, I also do not want to open the can of worms,
and I'm less interested in debating the linguistic reasons of "conservative"
scholars to date Daniel early. However, language and the book's content
are specific reasons for dating the book late by "modern" scholars. It's
not just (or at all) "not believing in predictive prophecy."
More information about the b-hebrew