[b-hebrew] Sopherim and an 'Established' Text

K Randolph kwrandolph at gmail.com
Sat Jan 31 10:35:05 EST 2009


George:

These are the reasons I asked if the passages with the tiqune sopherim are
found among the DSS. It is possible that the tiqune sopherim date from the
early Talmudic period, after the DSS.

There was a site, but I can't find it now, that listed all the DSS and the
portions of the Bible that are found in them. I used that site to determine
that the DSS could not be used in an earlier discussion, because the passage
in question was missing. Are any of the tiqune sopherim represented among
the DSS, and if so, what do they say?

Karl W. Randolph.

On Sat, Jan 31, 2009 at 6:08 AM, George Athas <George.Athas at moore.edu.au>wrote:

> Harold, there are two major problems I have with this view. Firstly, it is
> based largely on tradition which is fairly late - a good few centuries after
> the period you've mentioned (300-200 BC). Secondly, it doesn't seem to do
> justice to the text critical issues as evidenced by Qumran.
>
> I would argue on the basis of Qumran that there is a proto-Masoretic text
> which is reaching a fairly stable form by the turn of the era. However,
> there are also a plurality of other text types which make it difficult to
> talk about a fixed text.
>
>
> Regards,
>
> GEORGE ATHAS
> Moore Theological College (Sydney, Australia)
> www.moore.edu.au
>



More information about the b-hebrew mailing list