Rolf:
snip
>
Here I bring up the related question, what do we know about those centuries?
Is there any reason to doubt the dates assigned to pottery styles and other
marker technologies? In other words, the evidence is not found because we
are looking for the wrong evidence?
The mentioned example is an archaeological one. Some days ago I
focused upon the text of the Pentateuch and formed the hypothesis:
"The Pentateuch was written in the 15th century by a man called
Moses." To doubt that something that is written in the Pentatauch
really happened is a psychological matter that is based on logic, or
faith, or philosophy etc. By forming this hypothesis I tried to put
the matter regarding the writing of the Pentatauch into a scientific
setting. The hypothesis predicts that we will not find anachronisms
in the text, and i discussed some possibilities. Then I asked the
list members to mention other predictions that could be tested. But
no one responded. So, I try again with a question based on the
hypothesis: Which sides/characteristics/matters in the Hebrew text of
the Pentateuch forbid a 15th century writing?
Isn't even asking the question assuming data that we don't have? How would
we recognize an anachronism or a loan word? Wouldn't we need a large body of
literature, larger than the Tanakh by at least a few times, and of known
venue, in order to answer these questions? In the case of a suspected loan
word, is this a case of a word from another languages to Hebrew, or from
Hebrew to the other language, or maybe both were from a third language?
Further, aren't loan words, if they catch on, usually nativized within a
generation or two, sometimes enough that they are hard to connect to their
origins?
In short, aren't you asking unanswerable questions, given the paucity of
data we have?
From kwrandolph AT gmail.com Thu Feb 5 12:10:59 2009Return-Path: <kwrandolph AT gmail.com>
Karl:on are anywhere else than south of Hebron, where history, archaeology and l=
You wrote: "You have yet to make the case that the cities that you menti=
put them."ew all 10 towns listed at Joshua 15: 55-57 as being located south of the ci=
Let's take your theory of the case seriously and see if it works. You vi=
e Northern Negev Desert, which has never supported a large human population=
Let's check it out.
1. The land south of the city of Hebron is not very good land. It is th=
Have you looked at a map of the region, in particular one what has the
That would be most, if not quite all, of the towns that existed south of t=
2. I Samuel 30: 26-31 lists about 10 towns south of the city of Hebron. =
Where is your evidence for this claim? Just because 1 Samuel doesn't list
I Samuel 30: 31 then says that those were a-l-l of the places where D=avid hung out in those days.
When are you going to learn Hebrew so you can intelligently discuss this?
3. Now let's see if any of the 10 towns at Joshua 15: 55-57, all of whic=h you see as being located south of the city of Hebron, are places where Da=
In view of 1 Samuel 30:31, isn't this a foolish question?
Your theory of the case cannot withstand a review of the Biblical evidenc=e.
Does yours have any Biblical basis at all? Even your "disproof" of mine? So
There is no "history, archaeology and linguistics" from prior to the co=mmon era to support your view either. You're 0 for 10 in matching city nam=
makes claims that contradict your assumptions, do you say that the text's
You are making assumptions that the text does not make. What if the text
Jim StinehartKarl W. Randolph.
Evanston, Illinois
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.