Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: deuteronomy, liz, response

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Banyai AT t-online.de (Banyai)
  • To: b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu
  • Subject: Re: deuteronomy, liz, response
  • Date: Sun, 11 Mar 2001 14:05:11 +0100


Giuseppe Regalzi wrote:

> My point is the following: if Deuteronomy (or any other book) can
> be consistently dated both on linguistic (if Vincent is right) and
> on historical grounds (e.g. the connection with Josiah's reform),
> then the burden of proof is on anyone who questions this dating by
> invoking a purely conjectural linguistic update: adfirmanti
> incumbit probatio, to use a nice latin formula...

Pure imagination. There is no basis to date the Deuteronomy to Josiahs
reform,
but simple speculation. Adfirmanti incumbit probatio, to use the same latin
formula.

Since I just pointed you to at least one textual source of Deut. by far older
than the period of kings, (my mail called "was Michael") there is no burden
to
last upon those asserting its quite early date.

What concerned linguistic data, you ought have better read my mail on that
issue,
or if not, than answer for yourself the simple question: how do we arrive to
text
canonisation?

Best regards,

Michael Bányai






Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page