Biblical Hebrew Forum

[James Christian <jc.bhebrew AT googlemail.com>]

Sure. I'm not claiming by any means that the present shape of the Samaritan
tradition is the same as it was when the two kingdoms split. More likely
there was gradual change involved in both traditions. But that's the whole
point, isn't it! The fact that we see agreement in both traditions in the
case of the spectacularly unspectacular story of the bloke who found some
hot springs in the desert while looking after his dad's herds gives
confidence that this part of the Torah is *at least* as old as the schism if
not much older and, in fact, original.

James Christian

On 16 May 2010 22:21, Yigal Levin <leviny1 AT mail.biu.ac.il> wrote:

> Dear James,
>
>
>
> Neither your views nor mine of the theological "truth" are relevant to the
> discussion. The only question is what the evidence of the Samaritan
> Pentateuch's antiquity is. As you say, there was a temple on Mt. Gerizim in
> the 3rd century BCE (although the present-day Samaritans claim that it was
> not theirs). That's still 700 years after the division of the Israelite
> monarchy.
>
> Yes, you are correct that the view of both some of the Hebrew Bible and of
> some of the Rabbis was that the Samaritans were foreigners, but there were
> other views as well, such as that of the Chronicler. But even if they were
> 100% Israelite, that does not mean that the traditions that they held in
> the
> Roman Period were the same as those they had in the Iron Age. The fact is
> that Mt. Gerizim was unoccupied in the Iron Age, there was no Temple there,
> and that other than the (Jewish) biblical stories about Dan and Bethel, we
> have no evidence of ANY northern-Israelite sanctuary.
>
>
>
> Yigal Levin
>
>
>
>  _____
>
> From: James Christian [mailto:jc.bhebrew AT googlemail.com]
> Sent: Sunday, May 16, 2010 7:36 PM
> To: leviny1 AT mail.biu.ac.il
> Cc: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Genesis 30:20-30
>
>
>
> As far as I am aware the archaeology shows a temple of Mount Gerizim as
> early as 3rd century BCE. Obviously, the tradition that this is a holy
> place
> (the mount of blessing) is much older. On the issue of which is the correct
> place to worship god (Gerizim or Jerusalem) the view of Christians who
> follow Christ's view is that the time has come to worship God with spirit
> and with truth and that the place of worship is of no relevance the temple
> of Jerusalem merely being a prototype illustrating the holy and the most
> holy. Solomon himself who built the first temple in Jerusalem acknowledged
> that Yhwh is not a person that he should live in a temple built with human
> hands.
>
>
>
> Anyway, back to the question of the Samaritans as far as I am aware some
> Rabbinic writings have insinuated that the Samaritans are foreigners from
> Iraq to discredit their claims to be remnants of the tribes of Ephraim and
> Mannaseh that survived and managed to remain after the Assyrian conquest.
> Genetic studies confirm their tradition and their priesthood to be Levitic.
>
>
>
> I'm not suggesting that everything the Samaritans have to say about
> themselves is true nor that Gerizim is the divinely approved place to
> worship but their tradition is certainly much older than their critics
> pretend. Racist views between the Samaritans and the Jews have evidently
> been a fuel for much of the criticism.
>
>
>
> James Christian
>
> On 16 May 2010 11:38, leviny1 AT mail.biu.ac.il <leviny1 AT mail.biu.ac.il>
> wrote:
>
> James,
>
> The Samaritan script is a very late, stylized version of the Paleo-Hebrew
> script. The specific style is very different than the style of Paleo-Hebrew
> script known from the Samaria Ostraca, for instance, which DO date from the
> Iron Age northern kingdom of Israel. The earliest actual existing
> manuscripts of the Samritan Pentateuch are from the Middle Ages. So no,
> that's no proof of anything. It would be like saying that the Jewish
> Pentateuch was written in the Roman period, because the script used for
> writing Torah scrolls today is the Jewish/Aramaic script of the late Second
> Temple Period.
>
> Your deffinition of "minimalist" is not the one usually used, although many
> "minimalists" do tend to date texts late. In any case, I don't see Yitzhak
> as fitting this deffinition.
>
> What do you say about the issue of Mt. Gerizim?
>
>
> Yigal Levin
>
> Original Message:
> -----------------
>
> From: James Christian jc.bhebrew AT googlemail.com
>
> Date: Sun, 16 May 2010 10:06:45 +0300
> To: leviny1 AT mail.biu.ac.il, b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
>
> Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Genesis 30:20-30
>
>
> Hi,
>
> I use minimalist here in the sense of the approach that typically asserts
> the late boundary for dating. However, the alphabet used in Samaritan
> versions alone should speak volumes about the minimalistic late boundary of
> the Pentateuch.
>
> James Christian
>
> On 16 May 2010 01:53, Yigal Levin <leviny1 AT mail.biu.ac.il> wrote:
>
> > James,
> >
> > 1. What do you mean by "minimalist" when you use it here?
> >
> > 2. What evidence do you have that the Samaritan version of the Pentateuch
> > is
> > as old as the division of the monarchy? To counter your claim, I'd point
> > out
> > that there is no evidence, textual or archaeological, of there being an
> > important cultic site on Mt. Gerizim before the Persian Period, despite
> the
> > fact that the SP repeats the commandment to sacrifice there regularly
> > several times. According to the Bible, the main sanctuaries of the
> Northern
> > Kingdom were at Bethel and at Dan. Had there been such a sanctuary at Mt.
> > Gerizim the Bible would surely have denounced it.
> >
> > Yigal Levin
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: b-hebrew-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org
> > [mailto:b-hebrew-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of James Christian
> > Sent: Sunday, May 16, 2010 12:51 AM
> > To: Yitzhak Sapir
> > Cc: b-hebrew
> > Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Genesis 30:20-30
> >
> > YS: Before we explore this amazing agreement, it is important to point
> out
> > that
> > the spelling of the Pentateuch definitely does not predate the 6th
> century
> > BCE.
> > Furthermore the Samaritan Pentateuch agrees with the Jewish Pentateuch
> > on issues of spelling (the spelling is actually more developed in the
> > Samaritan,
> > generally speaking), so we would have to conclude that the agreement and
> > mutual confirmation of the Pentateuch by both communities happened
> > sometime not before the 6th century BCE.  A likely time would be the 3rd
> > century BCE, for various reasons.
> >
> > JC: This is all pretty standard minimalist stuff but full marks for your
> > ability to regurgitate views you have read in a minimalist book. I guess
> > we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one as we've already been
> > through this perhaps more times than Jim has presented his conspiracy
> > theories on the location of the Salt Sea.
> >
> > However, the shape of the Samaritan canon in general would suggest that
> > your
> > minimalist view is extremely misguided. The split in the canon follows
> the
> > timeline of the split of the kingdoms and the Samaritan pentateuch is
> > evidently older than the split. The nationalistic differences can be
> argued
> > to be later for obvious reasons. But it is these very differences which
> > give
> > the agreements their age.
> >
> > James Christian
> > _______________________________________________
> > b-hebrew mailing list
> > b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > b-hebrew mailing list
> > b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
> >
>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> mail2web - Check your email from the web at
> http://link.mail2web.com/mail2web
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
>