Biblical Hebrew Forum

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

George:

On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 4:19 PM, George Athas 
<George.Athas AT moore.edu.au>wrote:

> Since the thread about the date of Exodus raised a question about the
> dating of Hebrew texts, I'm going to start another thread on dating (which
> is well and truly within our forum's bounds).
>

Are you not stepping into a can of worms? Is there not disagreement even to
methodology for dating Biblical texts? And a lack of evidence? Therefore is
not allowing dating to be on the table an invitation to fruitless
argumentation?


> It is claimed that some Hebrew texts can be dated quite early because of
> the presence of archaic elements, some of which can be observed in older
> languages. However, there are considerable problems with this notion. Here
> are two significant issues:
>
> (1) How do we know that seemingly 'archaic' elements are confined to an
> early date and cannot have continued into later times? This is quite a
> crucial question given that many so-called 'late' texts still contain
> numerous 'early' features. And some so-called 'early' texts even contain
> so-called 'late' features.
>

How do we know what is 'archaic' verses 'late'? Who decides? Upon what
criteria? Is it possible that the criteria are mistaken?


> (2) It is possible that a scribe writing at a fairly late date could
> successfully emulate earlier styles. Yea, verily, perchance the scribe doth
> immitate olde conducts.
>

Is this not more likely when a language is no longer spoken on the street,
but is kept alive as a language of government, high literature and record
keeping? We have the example of Latin in Europe that in some circles is
still on artificial life support, can not the same be said of
post-Babylonian Exile Hebrew?

Is there not a third significant issue, namely how do we know that certain
languages are in fact 'older'?


>
> I recommend to our members the forthcoming two volumes by Ian Young, Robert
> Rezetko and Martin Ehrensvärd on dating Hebrew. I had the privilege of
> proofing the volumes and found them quite convincing in arguing that Early
> Biblical Hebrew and Late Biblical Hebrew are really contemporary styles
> (i.e., the terms 'early' and 'late' are misleading). The book should be out
> this year.
>
>
> Regards,
>
> GEORGE ATHAS
> Moore Theological College (Sydney, Australia)
> www.moore.edu.au
>

Karl W. Randolph.