Philip Davies extensively discusses the issues you raise in a section 
called 'Biblical Hebrew' at _In Search of Ancient Israel_ (JSOT 148; 
Sheffield:  Sheffield Academic Press Ltd,, 1992) 102-5.  Lemche touches on 
language dating issues at "The Old Testament - A Hellenistic Book?" SJOT 7 
(1993) 188-89, questioning "whether such [language] differences should be 
explained as a result of differences in time or of milieu (or of place)."  
C.C. Torrey discusses the late (2nd-3rd century BCE) date of the Aramaic of 
Ezra and Daniel as compared with the Elephantine Papyri in _Ezra Studies_ 
(various editions) 161-66.  
    There does appear to be some overlap between the latest Biblical 
materials and the earliest texts at Qumran (some of which are pre-sectarian). 
 Of particular relevance is the fact that the Animal Apocalypse, CD and other 
Qumran texts do not know of any return from exile, which is an idea found 
mainly in Ezra-Nehemiah, which may in turn date as late as the early second 
century BCE.

    Best regards,
    Russell Gmirkin

>  Perhaps this is not the bets place for this, but perhaps
>  those who have expertise in Hebrew can give me their two
>  cents worth on something. I am one of those who is
>  sympathetic to the viewpoint of Phillip Davies and numerous
>  others (e.g. Nodet, Lemche, Thompson) that the Hebrew Bible
>  and the religious views it promotes are post-exilic, i.e.
>  Persian or even hellensitic in some cases and is closer to
>  thew world of the Dead Sea Scrolls and the intertestimental
>  literature than to the social-religious environment of the
>  pre-exilic world. I have seen the same sort of view
>  expressed by some on this list (e.g. that the later chapters
>  of Ezekiel that refer to the Zadokites might be this late,
>  or that Nehemiah might be 2nd century). Though I can find
>  many reasons to agree with this view the one big thorn for
>  me in this line of thinking is the continued insistence of
>  many scholars that the Hebrew of the biblical texts excludes
>  this possibility because it is demonstrably more ancient
>  (i.e. pre-exilic or exilic at the latest). I have not been
>  able to find much in way of critical commentary on this
>  point and would appreciate the input of those on this list.
>  
>  Bruce Wildish
>  Mississauga, Ontario
For private reply, e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
----------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from Orion, e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the
message: "unsubscribe Orion." Archives are on the Orion Web
site, http://orion.mscc.huji.ac.il.

Reply via email to