I don't think I was assuming this. I hope not, as it is one of the
things which I might hope to demonstrate! Of course only Samuel and
the early part of Kings could possibly be this early. Indeed I was
trying not to assume anything, but I was suggesting that the language
differences show that Samuel-Kings was written some time either before
or (less probably) after Chronicles. But a century or so time
difference is more than long enough, especially if the traumatic
events of the exile and return come between the two books.
Peter Kirk
______________________________ Reply Separator
_________________________________
Subject: BH: Hebrew Aspects
Author: <cynthia AT oumail.openu.ac.il> at Internet
Date: 22/02/2000 15:18
<snip>
2. Peter wrote:
If I assumed a linguistic argument for dating Chronicles to the same
general period as Ezra and Nehemiah, then at least I am making the
same assumption as many others.
-----
The date of Chronicles is not the problem with BH diachronics, but the
assumed Iron I provenence for MT Sam-Kgs.