Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

SV: [ANE-2] Re: R. Gmirkin on the date of the Pentateuch

Expand Messages
  • RUSSELLGMIRKIN@aol.com
    Dear Niels Peter, People have never understood the emic/etic argument behind my Canaanites from 1991. The Canaanites of the OT is simply non- Israelite
    Message 1 of 9 , May 3, 2006
      Dear Niels Peter,

      People have never understood the emic/etic argument behind my
      Canaanites from 1991. The Canaanites of the OT is simply 'non-
      Israelite inhabitants of Palestine'. The perspective is on one hand the
      people of God, Israel, and on the other godless Canaanites --
      and then, of course we have the no good Philistines.
      Niels Peter Lemche


      I found your book quite convincing, and I use the term Canaanites in the
      sense of "pre-Israelite inhabitants of Palestine" (who likely included the
      ancestors of the Israelites) and later 'non-Israelite inhabitants of Iron II
      Palestine' (where Israelite and non-Israelite are as retroactively defined in the
      [Hellenistic era] biblical text). We don't appear to find Canaanite as a
      self-designation in the records of the ANE. Like you, I doubt the Iron II
      'Canaanites' and 'Israelites' much used either term, certainly not in the
      either-or manner found in the polemics of the later HB.

      And, finally, dear Russell or Yitzhak, it is bad manners to use
      the word 'dishonest'...

      And yet I give Yitzhak high points for engaging the evidence, trying to
      follow my argument and accurately representing my positions. Bygones!

      Best regards,
      Russell Gmirkin







      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Niels Peter Lemche
      Somehow I agree with George here. Again, like in archaeology, a text is dated according to the youngest part, and not the oldest. But the idea that a text from
      Message 2 of 9 , May 3, 2006
        Somehow I agree with George here. Again, like in archaeology, a text is dated according to the youngest part, and not the oldest. But the idea that a text from say 250 BCE will not contain information from another and earlier period is not very convincing. In discussing such matters, we need to include more than one parameter.

        The Book of Isaiah cannot be older than its youngest component. This means the book as preserved in the HB and in the DSS. This does not say that, e.g., the Deuteronomistic parts were written in the 3rd or 2nd century BCE.

        Again, it is necessary to find methods that allow us to control the speculation.

        Niels Peter Lemche

        -----Oprindelig meddelelse-----
        Fra: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com [mailto:ANE-2@yahoogroups.com] På vegne af gfsomsel@...
        Sendt: 3. maj 2006 16:09
        Til: ANE-2@yahoogroups.com
        Emne: Re: [ANE-2] Re: R. Gmirkin on the date of the Pentateuch

        In other words, the Pentateuch cannot have been written prior to approx. the 3rd qtr of the 3rd cent. B.C. therefore any reference thereto must postdate that time. I would say that this argument is somewhat circular in itself.


        george
        gfsomsel
        _________

        -- RUSSELLGMIRKIN@... wrote:

        George,

        Such dateable texts might be those such as First Isaiah which is fairly
        universally accepted as being from the time it purporsts


        I was going to comment on the circularity of a dating argument that contains
        such assumptions, but NPL already did. Let me just add that an important
        implication of the dating of the Pentateuch to c. 273-272 BCE as argued in my
        book is that texts such as First Isaiah that utilize the Pentateuch must
        necessarily postdate 273 BCE in their final form. Materials in the prophets
        without Pentateuchal allusions might predate 273 BCE, and a very valuable future
        study would be to rigorously identify such potentially older materials and to
        look for commonalities in genre and language. (For instance, it seems to me
        that Pss. 1-50 were already in existence in 273 BCE based on that criterion,
        unlike the remainder of Psalms which are full of Pentateuchal references.)
        My intuition is that the woe oracles may be older compositions.

        Best regards,
        Russell Gmirkin





        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




        Yahoo! Groups Links






        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]







        Yahoo! Groups Links
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.