Biblical Hebrew Forum

[James Read <J.Read-2 AT sms.ed.ac.uk>]

Hi,


> Ps: to Yitzhak:
>
> I have specifically avoided the use of the term “colophon” because it is my
> understanding  that a colophon is a statement added later, sometimes much,
> much later, by a publisher or other writer, that it is not part of the
> original document. In contrast, the title and even author can be chosen by
> the author himself for the document.
>
> I admit that the lecturer that I heard could have been mistaken, but he
> specifically stated that the author and title were what was at the end of a
> narration, not a colophon.
>
> Further, I notice in the case of Genesis 2:4, that the title is in the same
> style as the preceding chapter, as I mentioned above.
>
> Further, the lecturer specifically mentioned that the practice of appending
> the title and author at the end of a document went out of use before 1500 BC
> (replaced by the colophon?) which would make later examples such as that in
> Ruth irrelevant to the discussion. Where he got his information? I don’t
> know.

Now, how did I know you would just sidestep the issue rather than  
dealing with it full on. I think, by now, it has become completely  
obvious that you are not willing to engage in an objective  
consideration of this and that your mind is already made up and you  
will continue to base everything on the assumption that this  
understanding is the correct one and will not step back and look at  
the evidence objectively.

James Christian



> When I read Genesis, I see the TLDT formula as consistent with what the
> lecturer said. As for the dates, the lecturer may yet be proven wrong.
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew



--
The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
Scotland, with registration number SC005336.