Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Tory Thorpe <torythrp AT yahoo.com>]

> It's entirely possible that they are unique creations, and
> therefore most logical to assume that one text influenced the 
> other or were both influenced by a common source.
> 
> If Copenhagen boys have something illuminating to say about
> this I'd like to hear it.

Well they do. It was once acceptable in OT studies to develop theories 
related to "patternism" upon non-falsifiable theories. Nowadays you are very 
lucky if no-one calls you out on this: it is academic suicide. Critics of 
"patternism" (Copenhagens) have shown that one cannot validly construct 
ritual or establish a textual dependence by simple intuitive analogy with 
similar elements elsewhere. For Deuteronomy to have been organized in the 7th 
century in part by borrowing from Esarhaddon's vassal treaties, you need to 
prove first that the biblical compiler had access to those treaties and that 
he could decipher its script. One does not have the liberty of assuming any 
of this simply because of what may look like striking parallels.

Tory Thorpe