Biblical Hebrew Forum

[K Randolph <kwrandolph AT gmail.com>]

Jim:

On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 3:00 PM, <JimStinehart AT aol.com> wrote:

>
> Each of George Athas and Rob Acosta has asserted that my theory of the
> Patriarchal narratives fails to take account of climate change, and that
> greater
> Canaan in the Patriarchal Age was much nicer than the same place is today
> in terms of climate.


In the sixth century BC Ezekiel, writing about his own time, mentioned that
there were still forests in the Negev, i.e. not far from Beersheba. If that
historical evidence isn’t evidence that the climate drying happened after
when you claim, what is?


>  True, tremendous deforestation was wrought by the hands
> of man in Roman times (but that is not climate change).  A much better
> approach to this important topic is to examine Late Bronze Age burials in
> Canaan, which are very helpful in checking out the geographical locales in
> the
> Patriarchal narratives, since I view the Patriarchal Age as having been the
> Late Bronze Age.
>

Here you willingly ignore the evidence from the text itself (which is why
people are not persuaded by your arguments) that Abraham was early bronze
age by our modern reckoning. He was followed centuries later by a middle
bronze age Exodus, 13th dynasty Egypt, for which there is also
archaeological evidence. The late bronze age is the time of the judges,
which lasted centuries. This is the historical and archaeological evidence
that cries out against your theories.

Further, archaeological evidence indicates that the Tel Amarna letters were
composed during the iron age, when the cities mentioned in them were built
up and strong, not during the late bronze age when Israel was repeatedly
invaded and impoverished, unable to build up those cities.

>
> …
>
>
> If scholars were right that the Patriarchal narratives were composed by
> multiple authors living in the 1st millennium BCE,


Which “scholars”? True, there were some people who made a name for
themselves proposing such a theory, with absolutely no evidence to back
themselves up, merely German anti-Semitism mixed with a 19th century belief
in evolution. That’s not even a historical theory, merely a
philosophical/religious belief that many scholars reject.


> …
>
> Jim Stinehart
> Evanston, Illinois
>
> The language of the text indicates an early bronze age patriarchal age
written down no later than the middle bronze age. What you propose is a
complete rejection of the Hebrew text, to be replaced by your own theory.
That is why you convince no one. Because your theories contradict what is
known from other historical sources, as Rob Acosta points out, no one else
is convinced either. Isn’t it about time for you to go back to the
beginning, and evaluate all the evidence?

You need to be honest with yourself and with your readers, that you reject
the historicity of the patriarchal narratives, and here are the reasons you
propose that they are later legends of historical events. But you will
continue to get nowhere with your present tack that you take.

Karl W. Randolph.