Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Peter Kirk <peterkirk AT qaya.org>]

On 05/08/2005 01:05, Jim West wrote:

> Peter Kirk wrote:
>
> > No, Jim, if I write that something happened, without qualification, I 
> > mean not just that it is my view or opinion that it happened, but 
> > that I know that it happened, beyond reasonable doubt. You cannot 
> > know, beyond reasonable doubt, that the DtrH (whatever that might be) 
> > was written after the exile, because there is insufficient evidence. 
> > But I would let this pass if you could provide some good evidence 
> > that this actually happened.
>
>
>
> Alas- if that's so- then you too are victim of the same inability to 
> suggest that archaeology proves the Bible right, no?  Or is there 
> another standard by which you determine things?


I don't understand a word of this.

> > > And what do Cyrus and Nebuchadnezzer do to prove the Bible's account 
> > > of Israel's history? ...
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > They are part of the Bible's account of Israel's history. They are 
> > themselves something in the Hebrew Bible. And this confirmation of 
> > the general accuracy of part of this history tends to suggest the 
> > reliability of more of it.
>
>
>
> No they are not.  They are proof only that the biblical authors knew 
> their names.  That's all.  Nothing more.
No. The biblical authors say a lot more about these kings, and several 
other archaeologically attested Assyrian, Babylonian and Persian kings, 
not to mention the Moabite Mesha` and various others, than just their 
names. In the Bible there is quite a lot of archaeologically confirmed 
information about their territories, their careers, their military 
campaigns etc etc.

--
Peter Kirk
peter AT qaya.org (personal)
peterkirk AT qaya.org (work)
http://www.qaya.org/