Biblical Hebrew Forum

[dwashbur AT nyx.net]

On 7 Sep 2009 at 8:17, Rolf Furuli wrote:

> Dear Randall,
> 
> Thank you for your clear answers to my questions. In connection with
> any attempt to date texts on linguistic grounds, it is extremely 
> important to keep in mind the limitations of any method. The
> material 
> (texts) we have at our disposition is limited, and all the auxiliary
> hypotheses that are needed for a theoretical dating approach are 
> questionable. On the one hand I do not agree with the extreme 
> skepticism of the Copenhagen school (Lemche and Thompson), but on
> the 
> other hand I am very skeptical to Martin Noth's theory of 
> Deuteronomistic history and the Graf-Wellhausen hypothesis about 
> "J,E.P. and D". Therefore, when you say that Hurwitz have found that
> P is pre-exilic, my reaction is as follows: The existence of "P" in
> contrast with J, E. and D is an auxiliary hypothesis (for the 
> theoretical framework of dating), and I reject the whole scheme as
> very doubtful. So, the dating of a supposed "P" does not tell me
> much.

I have to say that I quite agree with Rolf on all three of these.  The 
Copenhagen view is 
untenable, IMTUO, as far as I could see Noth never actually *showed* the 
existence of a 
Deuteronomic History, he merely said it, and JEPD needs to be put to bed once 
and for all.  
Thanks to Rolf for stating these things so well.

Dave Washburn

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