Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Randall Buth <ButhFam AT compuserve.com>]

shalom Vincent,

>help me with trying to understand the literature 
>on diachronics:
  .  .  .
>e.g., hurvitz and 
>rendsburg have their own ideas about the development of israelite 
>religion.  the priestly source must be the earliest, and at least 
>pre-exilic:  regardless of the simple linguistic facts...<

Well, do you really think that your nunation arguments are strong enough 
to overturn the simple linguistic facts that Avi has set out over 30 years?

I read Avi as saying P-material is linguistically, monolithically,
 pre-exilic, therefore P is pre-exilic. Where does theology enter 
that analysis?

For a crash course, see the article on "Priestly Source" in ABD by 
Milgrom, (another theologizer?). Maybe the priestly material was pre-
exilic.

I'll be happy to pass your greetings on to Avi tomorrow morning at the
SemLang study group.

bivraxot
Randall Buth
Jerusalem