Biblical Hebrew Forum

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

I didn't quote a commentary. Jubilees claims to be a primary source.  
Evidence from the DSS has shown that the document is far older than we  
once believed it to be. Please don't take this as me siding with  
Jubilees. I haven't made my mind up yet. My purpose was to bring it  
out into public discussion so that I could learn more about it and  
then formulate an opinion.

So far, you haven't contributed anything to the discussion and instead  
of considering it objectively we turned the discussion into a debate  
about the value of sources. I suggest we get back on track and stop  
filling peoples inboxes with a pointless debate about the value of  
sources and actually start using them to bring something of worth to  
the discussion.

James Christian



Quoting "Sarah J. Blake" <sarah AT growingstrong.org>:

> James,
>
> Believe it or not, you can also have discussions based on secondary
> sources. You did this when you quoted a commentary.
>
> Sarah J. Blake
> Personal email: sjblake AT growingstrong.org
> http://www.growingstrong.org I'm protected by SpamBrave
> http://www.spambrave.com/



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