Biblical Hebrew Forum

[K Randolph <kwrandolph AT gmail.com>]

Gabe:
On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 11:55 AM, Gabe Eisenstein 
<gabe AT cascadeaccess.com>wrote:

> Rolf Furuli wrote:
>
> The mentioned example is an archaeological one. Some days ago I
> focused upon the text of the Pentateuch and formed the hypothesis:
> "The Pentateuch was written in the 15th century by a man called
> Moses."  To doubt that something that is written in the Pentatauch
> really happened is a psychological matter that is based on logic, or
> faith, or philosophy etc. By forming this hypothesis I tried to put
> the matter regarding the writing of the Pentatauch into a scientific
> setting. The hypothesis predicts that we will not find anachronisms
> in the text, and i discussed some possibilities. Then I asked the
> list members to mention other predictions that could be tested. But
> no one responded. So, I try again with a question based on the
> hypothesis: Which sides/characteristics/matters in the Hebrew text of
> the Pentateuch forbid a 15th century writing?
>
> Everything I've read about the Philistines says they arrived in
> Palestine in the 12th century. But Abraham visited them in Gen.21 & 26,
> and the exodus group had to avoid going through their land (Ex.13:17).
> So if historians are right about the Philistines, the Biblical texts are
> anachronistic.
>
> I don't know much about the Philistines except that they were a west
Semitic people who predated Abraham as inhabitants in the land. Did not you
yourself include a big "if" in your statement, namely "is historians are
right …"? To that, many of us answer that they are wrong on other things,
why not also here?


> I have previously mentioned the strong archaeological evidence against
> the story of the complete evacuation of northern Israel in 2Kings17. The
> story is also anachronistic in using the word Shomron to refer to the
> northern territory rather than the capital city. If this piece of
> misinformation (actually propaganda) can be found in the Tanakh, it
> suggests that other distortions are to be expected as well.
>

I just reread 2 Kings 17 where the exile of Samaria is recounted, there is
no statement that I found there saying that all of Israel were exiled. There
is their ceasing to be a political entity, and in the same way that
Nebuchadnezzar left the ex-slaves to carry on the farming, so the poorest of
the poor were left in the land to continuing being slaves to the new
settlers. Yes, I am reading a little into the text, but I'm reacting to the
absence of the word "all" to describe the exile. Nor is there any
description of the land becoming completely desolate.

Another question to ask, when was 2 Kings written? Seeing as Ezekiel used
"Samaria" to refer to the whole people, in the same manner as he used
"Jerusalem" for Judea (e.g. chap. 23), so could the writer(s) of Kings, who
I expect to have postdated Ezekiel, have picked up on Ezekiel's usage?

In conclusion, I would posit that the text of 2 Kings makes your objection a
straw man argument.

>
>
> Gabe Eisenstein


Karl W. Randolph.