Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Moshe Shulman <mshulman AT ix.netcom.com>]

At 06:20 PM 12/29/1999 +0100, you wrote:
>> Because in this area as in others we follow analogy. We have methods of
>> dealign with other texts which tell us that the date of an extant fragment
>> is not the date of the document. You have to give a reason as to why the
>> dating of the Biblical text is not to be approached in the same way as the
>> dating of Plato and Aristotle.
>       [Niels Peter Lemche]  I have already answered that question: read
>the scholarly literature from the last 200 years. Ot at least some qualified
>introduction to OT studies. It is available, and I gave an excellent title
>for people with a conservative outlook. But also for people on my line.

Niels I have read various books and all fail from the methodology which I
have mentioned. DH is never compared to other liturature, but is based on a
priori assertions that are never tested. I am asking a question that you
should be able to answer in a few short words. We were only discussing the
point of the dating of the the Biblical text, and my point being that the
dating methodology that is being used by those who proposed a very late
date was not valid, and is not used in any dating of any other ancient
liturature. If you can't give a one paragraph explanation of the
assumptions, then it would appear that you have never thought about them. 

moshe shulman mshulman AT NOSPAMix.netcom.com    718-436-7705
CHASSIDUS.NET - Yoshav Rosh            http://www.chassidus.net
Outreach Judaism                       http://www.outreachjudaism.org/
ICQ# 52009254