Biblical Hebrew Forum

["K Randolph" <kwrandolph AT gmail.com>]

On 10/24/07, George Athas <george.athas AT moore.edu.au> wrote:
> Incidentally, can I add that there are also scholars who do believe in
> predictive prophecy and yet also hold that Daniel was written in the
> 2nd century BC.
>
Dr. Rolf Furuli, in an earlier discussion on this issue, mentioned
that the Aramaic portions are stylistically consistent with Aramaic as
it was spoken during the time of the Exile.

> I do not want to open a can of worms on this, though.
>
Nor do I. The reason is the lack of documentary evidence either way.
Therefore, for sake of comity, it is incumbent for us to agree to
disagree, forsaking attempts to proselytize others to our view.

The last generation that we can all agree on that learned Biblical
Hebrew at their mothers' knees was the first generation born during
the Exile. After that comes the disagreement that we cannot resolve
short of finding a large stack of ancient documents from that era that
specifically address the issue.
>
>
> Best Regards,
>
> GEORGE ATHAS
> Moore Theological College (Sydney)
> 1 King St, Newtown, NSW 2042, Australia
> Ph: (+61 2) 9577 9774
>
>
Science is based on repeatable observations, history on a record of
ancient observations : what we have here is neither science nor
history because we can neither observe it nor is there a record that
answers this question. As for dating the book of Daniel, the author
claims to have been born shortly before the Exile who continued to be
active until close to 90, which is the internal evidence which many
claim was a pious fraud written much later: we have neither the
original manuscript nor an early copy, nor any documentation
indicating that it was written later, so whatever view we take on it
is taken on faith. Since both views are faith statements, let's stop
the proselytism, OK?

Karl W. Randolph.