Biblical Hebrew Forum

[K Randolph <kwrandolph AT gmail.com>]

Jay:

On Fri, Jul 24, 2009 at 12:42 PM, Jay Frank <jif95 AT mac.com> wrote:

> Karl,
>
> You wrote: "Ugarit doesn't count." Are you truly willing to defend that
> proposition?
>
> Jay


Yes.

First of all, based on archeology. Archeology does not correspond to the
traditional dates assigned by most historians. In fact, it contradicts them.

Secondly, many of the dates assigned by modern historians to much of the
ancient world are based on one source, and that one source has been a source
of controversy as well. That one source is the modern reconstruction of
Egyptian history. According to that source, it is believed that Ugarit was
destroyed about 1200 BC. But even some professional historians recognize
that that history is not trustworthy. For example, the Tell Amarna letters
describe a Canaan that does not fit the archaeological findings for 14th to
13th centuries BC, but they fit for 9th to 8th centuries BC. Applying that
same redating to the destruction of Ugarit means that it could have been as
late as the Babylonian Captivity of Judea. It is because of this uncertainty
that we cannot apply this data as evidence for the patriarchal ages, from
about 2000–1700 BC.

As far as I can tell, Jim has a theory that he pulled out of thin air, based
on no, absolutely none, historical documents that unquestionably relate to
the applicable time and place.

Karl W. Randolph.