Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] OT- perspective (was Josiah's book of the Law)

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Jim West <jwest AT highland.net>
  • To: Peter Kirk <peterkirk AT qaya.org>, b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] OT- perspective (was Josiah's book of the Law)
  • Date: Thu, 04 Aug 2005 19:08:25 -0400



Peter Kirk wrote:

On 04/08/2005 20:50, Jim West wrote:

The DtrH does not find its genesis (thats a funny yet ironic phrase) in the period of Josiah. It was written after the exile. And probably during the Hasmonean period. ...


What evidence do you have for this unqualified assertion? I note that in a later posting you qaulified it with "in my estimation". But why didn't you write that the first time?


Well one can generally presume that anytime anyone writes anything they are expressing their views. I presume, for instance, that what you write is what you think. Further, I take it at face value that if you think something you dont need to have 4000 other people think it for it to be valid or invalid. each thought has either merit or lack thereof and truth is not determined by a popularity contest. thats why i dont generally play the "so and so says in this or that place". I realize some do not and cannot think for themselves, but i think better of you than that and thus do not require your every word to drip bibliography. As for evidence, the language of the text itself is sufficient to establish its lateness, as the late Fred Cryer also recognized. (see any of his writings for confirmation of his views- which i share with him).


... But you are right- there is scant archaeological evidence for anything in the Hebrew Bible.


What, not even for Nebuchadnezzar and Cyrus?


And what do Cyrus and Nebuchadnezzer do to prove the Bible's account of Israel's history? As I said to Brian offlist- the problem, i think, is that archaeology is made to bear a burden of proof it cannot. you have artifacts and you infer from them certain things that you find in texts- but that inference may not be correct and archaeology itself cannot , and does not, prove the connection. The same must be said of the materials to which you refer. you would have them prove the bible and i submit to you that your reasoning is circular.

best

Jim


--
D. Jim West

Biblical Studies Resources - http://web.infoave.net/~jwest
Biblical Theology Weblog - http://biblical-studies.blogspot.com





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page