Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] Kadeshah & Zonah in Genesis 32 + More

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "George F. Somsel" <gfsomsel AT juno.com>
  • To: peterkirk AT qaya.org
  • Cc: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Kadeshah & Zonah in Genesis 32 + More
  • Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2004 16:19:07 -0400

On Thu, 15 Jul 2004 18:04:03 +0100 Peter Kirk <peterkirk AT qaya.org>
writes:
> On 15/07/2004 16:37, Dave Washburn wrote:
>
> >On Wednesday 14 July 2004 14:22, david.kimbrough AT charter.net
> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>I have to disagree.
> >>
> >>1) The earliest that Genesis 32 could have been written was during
> the
> >>exodus by Moses. This means the conversations of the Adullamite
> with the
> >>unspecified individuals occurred hundreds of years prior, at the
> ealiest.
> >>It seems unlikely that Genesis 32 is a verbatim transcript of the
> >>conversations.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >No, the earliest that the form of Genesis 32 that we have could
> have been
> >written was then. But there is no reason why this author, whoever
> one may
> >assume that s/he was, wouldn't have used written sources from at or
> near the
> >time of the events. It's possible that Gen 32 is a summary or an
> author's
> >construct, but it's equally possible that it is in fact a "verbatim
>
> >transcript" that Judah's family had preserved in a family record of
> some
> >kind. We don't know, and we can't really assume one way or the
> other without
> >emphasizing that we are in fact assuming.
> >
> >[snip]
> >
> >
> >
> Also, the story may have been preserved verbatim (or more or less
> so) by
> oral tradition over those several hundred years.
>
> --
> Peter Kirk
> peter AT qaya.org (personal)
> peterkirk AT qaya.org (work)
> http://www.qaya.org/
> _______________________________________________

Personally, I think it has nothing to do with any putative Moses who was
supposed to have led an exodus from Egypt (evidence does not suggest the
historicity of such an event). It was a program piece which was written
to account for certain historical relationships and theological
positions. If it were merely an historical account, I would question its
value for anything more than antiquarian reasons. It would not have
appeared until after the monarchy was instituted.

george
gfsomsel




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page