Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Lisbeth S. Fried" <lizfried AT umich.edu>]

Dear Jonathan,

>
>
> Dear Liz,
> Y. Kaufmann considered P to be entirely pre-exilic and Avi
> Hurvitz considers
> the language of P to be pre-exilic, but there are a number of
> flaws in their
> arguments, one of them being that the division between
> Priests and Levites
> reflects the Josianic Reform and is first mentioned, outside of P, in
> Ezekiel.
This is the basic assumption of the author whose book I'm reviewing.
These assumptions seem to be so well intrenched that they do not
even require explaining.
My problem is that I don't buy the Josianic reform any longer.
(My article "The High Places (Bamot) and the Reforms of Hezekiah
and Josiah" should be out soon in JAOS 123: 2002).
Nor do I believe that Ezekiel's polemics were aimed at creating
a stratified priesthood rather than simply explaining what already
existed.
IF the only problem in having a pre-exilic P is the Josianic
reform, then there is no problem.  OTOH, it is entirely possible
that after the conquest of the North by Assyria that priests fled
south. That is the equivalent of the reform I suppose. Deut
would then be dated to 723 or 701 (which is when I date it).

> On the other hand, I think Kaufmann was correct in his
> comparison of Lev. 17
> with Deut. 12, in which he demonstrated that Lev. 17 reflects
> the cultic
> situation before the centralization of the cult - unless we
> want to say that
> the Josianic Reform is only a literary ideal, and that even
> in post-exilic
> times not all Priestly circles accepted centralization -
> witness Onias IV
> and his temple in Heliopolis (or was it Leontopolis?).
LEontopolis.
There is also the temple at Yeb.

> Kaufmann was also right, in my opinion, in his claim that the
> Priestly style
> of writing was something that characterized priests and is
> not evidence for
> lateness. Thus, the fact that Ezekiel writes in a style
> similar to P is not
> evidence that the Priestly style is making its early and
> firstg appearance,
> but that Ezekiel had received a priestly education and was
> writing in the
> manner he had learned at school.
> The amulet containing the Priestly Blessing (Num. 6:24-26)
> discovered at
> Ketef Hinnom and dating from the late 7th century BCE is
> evidence that at
> least part of the Priestly traditions are pre-exilic.
> In sum, I would say that the Priestly "Code" is a collection of many
> Priestly traditions, which took shape over a considerable
> period of time,
> beginning before the Exile and continuing on into Second Temple times.
> Sincerely,
> Jonathan D. Safren
> Editor
> Mo'ed  - Researches in Judaic Studies
> Center for Jewish Holiday Studies
> Beit Berl College
> Beit Berl Post Office
> 44905 Israel

Liz
>