Biblical Hebrew Forum

[dwashbur AT nyx.net]

On 5 Sep 2009 at 10:11, Randall Buth wrote:

> >> Please note: the references to Aristeas and Josephus were
> >> citations
> >> of local testimony to the phenomenon of Hebrew being spoken in
> >> Judea.
> >> Of course it was selective, the question was 'does such
> testimony
> >> exist?'
> >> It does.
> >
> >I know that's what it was.  And yes, it exists.  Why?  I would
> think the
> >answer would be fairly obvious, given the historical contexts of
> both.
> 
> Well, Aristeas needed to explain the need for translators. But he
> did not
> need to state that  Aramaic was not the current language of Judea
> and
> he could have said that Hebrew 'had been' the language of Judea.
> But he didn't.

Aristeas was trying to establish the primacy of the LXX, not "explain the 
need for 
translators."  Such a fundamental mistake brings the rest of this "evidence" 
into question.
 


Dave Washburn

http://www.nyx.net/~dwashbur