do not codex kaufmann and masoretic text enjoy the approximate same manufacture date?
http://kaufmann.mtak.hu/en/study04.htm regards, fred burlingame On Sun, Nov 28, 2010 at 11:59 AM, Yigal Levin <[email protected]>wrote: > I was asked off-list why the biblical quotes in the Talmud (and, I will > add, > pre-10th century Jewish liturgy and other literature as well) are not used > by scholars as evidence of the "proto-MT". With the permission of the > person > who asked, I'll post may answer on-list. > > > > Basically, there are two reasons that I can think of. One is the general > disdain that Christian scholars traditionally have had for all things > Jewish. This is an old and ingrained tradition in Christianity, that > precluded many Christian scholars in the past from even being familiar with > the Talmud, not to mention using it as evidence for anything. By the way, > the animosity was mutual, and it is very rare to find a "traditional" > Jewish > source quoting a Christian scholar. Hopefully lists such as this one are > doing their bit to clear the air. > > > > The second reason is a more "serious" one. We don't have any significant > very old mms. of the Talmud either. This means that there will always be > the > suspicion, that in cases where the Talmud was quoting what seems to be the > MT (or "proto-MT"), it did originally have a different text, which was > "updated" to fit the GRU, as time went on. How would anyone know? > > > > Dr. Yigal Levin > > The Israel and Golda Koschitzky > > Department of Jewish History > > Bar-Ilan University > > Ramat Gan. 52900 > > ISRAEL > > <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected] > > > > _______________________________________________ > b-hebrew mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew > _______________________________________________ b-hebrew mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
