Actually, it does have a bearing. The most common claim made by those
who reject the historicity of certain people, places and events is that the
texts are "late." Using that basis, comparison to cognate languages such
as Ugaritic and Akkadian, and sometimes even Aramaic and Moabite,
becomes an implicit or explicit comparison of "early" languages versus the
"late" Hebrew, and virtually all differences between Hebrew and its cognates
are explained this way.
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.