*Most* people can’t imitate older dialects well, but some of the authors were brilliant at writing, so they may have also been able to understand and replicate their predecessors’ dialects. But I am learning from Hendel
One concern I have about this argument is it's an argument from "improbability." Dr. Hendel says he'd have no idea how to write something in a way that passed best tests as "old." That may be true. I wouldn't either. But that doesn't mean that there's never been anyone who could. I (and I imagine Dr. Hendel as well) couldn't write a symphony the way Mozart could. But *he* could. There's no way to wholly rule out the hands of a genius - someone who just by reading old materials intuitively grasped the ground rules for writing it. I don't think this possibility could be applied to every work in the world that this question comes up in connection to, but it could be an explanation for any ONE. That said, I don't think this invalidates Dr. Hendel's argument entirely. It just means he's stating a more or less strong probability rather than a fact. Generally speaking, I think these methods are sound and I hope that someone is training an AI on applying them, because I think that would be a very useful tool, and in particular once trained it would then be able to analyze materials with more or less total objectivity; there would be no tendency for personal emotional biases to enter into the process (which is a serious problem with Biblical scholarship and even more of a problem with the online Biblical squabbling we can all go out and find plenty of).
*Inscriptions as markers* On the other hand, few people could read, so inscriptions were from scribes to others who were highly educated. And all those people might be familiar with older forms of the language and use them to give the text an air of authority, depending on the subject matter. Personal letters would seem to be more reliable markers, but then I don’t know the culture. But I am learning from Hendel
If you are a Christian and have trouble believing certain things in the Bible, look to Jesus. Luke 24:27 has Jesus attesting the Bible and Deuteronomy (the 5th book of the Pentateuch not the first) is the second most quoted books by Jesus. Like the gospel of John the final few verses will have been written by somebody else. Jesus attested the creation narrative, the flood, Sodam & Gomorrah, Jonah etc. So don't be put off by academic discussions which is good for hearing .
(02 June 2023) How old is the Bible? This is a statement that begs a coherent answer. The Bible consists of several books, of different periods. It was not all composed at one go, in one time period. An example: There is the Primary History (Genesis-2 Kings), then there is 1 and 2 Chronicles, then Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezra, Nehemiah, all of differing periods, all these works being later put under one cover we call the Bible today. My interest is the Primary History (Genesis-2 Kings), how old is this account? What are the clues for dating this work? My research has the Primary History composed between circa 562-560 BC in the Babylonian Exile. The clue? 2 Kings 25:21 mention of the Babylonian king, Evil Merodach, who reigned circa 562-560 BC when he was assassinated in a palace Putsch according to Babylonian clay tablet cuneiform records. For me, endings date beginnings. This ending dates the Primary History. Another clue? Genesis-2 Kings appears to be what is called a Ring-Composition. The beginning foreshadows the ending, and the ending alludes back to the beginning. Adam and Eve are removed from land by their God, the garden in Eden, for disobedience to God. This foreshadows the ending, 2 Kings having Israel and Judah in Exile, removed from their God-assigned Promised Land for disobeying God, just like what happened to Adam and Eve. Through-out the whole work, Genesis-2 Kings, runs a constant theme: Exile is predicted for the nation for disobedience to God, and it eventually happens. WHEN was the Primary History crafted? What's the clue (besides 2 Kings 25:27 mention of Evil Merodach)? Genesis has the clue for when the Primary History was crafted, its Genesis 36:33 and the mention of the Edomite capital city of Bozrah. Archaeological excavations in the 1970s revealed the city was no earlier than the late 7th century BC (the late Iron Age II Period). It is highly unlikely that Moses circa 1446 BC (cf. 1 Kings 6:1) or circa 1260 BC (Ramesses II), knew of a city that came into existence in the late 700's BC! Archaeological excavations at some sites mentioned in the Exodus and Conquest revealed they came into existence no earlier than the Iron Age I era. Others no earlier than the Late Iron II Period (Bozrah of Ge. 36:33). Another clue: There are NO PERSIAN WORDS, NO GREEK WORDS, in the Primary History. Persia became a world power under Cyrus the Great who liberated the Jews from the Babylonian Captivity and allowed them to return to Jerusalem and rebuiild the Temple of Solomon. This fact, THERE NO PERSIAN WORDS, dates the Primary History to a time before Persia became the all powerful master of the Near East after 539 BC. That is to say the Primary History (Genesis-2 Kings) is pre-539 BC and Cyrus' conquest of Babylon. It is an Exilic document, NOT A POST-EXILIC DOCUMENT as erroneously claimed by some scholars. My Conclusion: The Torah ( the first five books of the Bible) is most likely a fabrication of the either the late 700s BC (based on Bozrah of Ge. 36:33), or some time later (my 562-560 BC and the reign of Evil Merodach of 2 Kings 25:27). For more info see my papers under my Academia Profile on the internet.
This is such a muddled and incoherent lecture. He has to be reminded after the fact to answer the question he takes as his title. And then he answers it wrong. How can the Bible date to the ninth century or beyond if Daniel, a book of said Bible, is a Hellenistic book? This is maddening. A few solid definitions would have been in order. Maybe a new title. And definitely a strict editor.
The whole lecture is about how different parts of it were written at different times. He's primarily arguing against the idea that it's all written in the post-exilic period. In this context, if you then ask how old it is, that can only mean how old is the oldest layer
The same could be said for all biblical + Koran criticism when it comes to christianity + Islam. Is it not better to know the truth or at least what actual evidence shows us.
*Most* people can’t imitate older dialects well, but some of the authors were brilliant at writing, so they may have also been able to understand and replicate their predecessors’ dialects.
But I am learning from Hendel
Thank you. Very informative and extremely entertaining at the same time.
One concern I have about this argument is it's an argument from "improbability." Dr. Hendel says he'd have no idea how to write something in a way that passed best tests as "old." That may be true. I wouldn't either. But that doesn't mean that there's never been anyone who could. I (and I imagine Dr. Hendel as well) couldn't write a symphony the way Mozart could. But *he* could. There's no way to wholly rule out the hands of a genius - someone who just by reading old materials intuitively grasped the ground rules for writing it. I don't think this possibility could be applied to every work in the world that this question comes up in connection to, but it could be an explanation for any ONE.
That said, I don't think this invalidates Dr. Hendel's argument entirely. It just means he's stating a more or less strong probability rather than a fact. Generally speaking, I think these methods are sound and I hope that someone is training an AI on applying them, because I think that would be a very useful tool, and in particular once trained it would then be able to analyze materials with more or less total objectivity; there would be no tendency for personal emotional biases to enter into the process (which is a serious problem with Biblical scholarship and even more of a problem with the online Biblical squabbling we can all go out and find plenty of).
*Inscriptions as markers* On the other hand, few people could read, so inscriptions were from scribes to others who were highly educated. And all those people might be familiar with older forms of the language and use them to give the text an air of authority, depending on the subject matter.
Personal letters would seem to be more reliable markers, but then I don’t know the culture.
But I am learning from Hendel
Since we don`t have the original autographs or copies how do we know what the original was and only copied in a latter version of the language ~~~
And how would you ever know you had them if you found them?
If you are a Christian and have trouble believing certain things in the Bible, look to Jesus. Luke 24:27 has Jesus attesting the Bible and Deuteronomy (the 5th book of the Pentateuch not the first) is the second most quoted books by Jesus. Like the gospel of John the final few verses will have been written by somebody else.
Jesus attested the creation narrative, the flood, Sodam & Gomorrah, Jonah etc. So don't be put off by academic discussions which is good for hearing .
so far, i date the old testament to -300 -250.
(02 June 2023) How old is the Bible? This is a statement that begs a coherent answer.
The Bible consists of several books, of different periods.
It was not all composed at one go, in one time period.
An example:
There is the Primary History (Genesis-2 Kings), then there is 1 and 2 Chronicles, then Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezra, Nehemiah, all of differing periods, all these works being later put under one cover we call the Bible today.
My interest is the Primary History (Genesis-2 Kings), how old is this account? What are the clues for dating this work?
My research has the Primary History composed between circa 562-560 BC in the Babylonian Exile.
The clue?
2 Kings 25:21 mention of the Babylonian king, Evil Merodach, who reigned circa 562-560 BC when he was assassinated in a palace Putsch according to Babylonian clay tablet cuneiform records.
For me, endings date beginnings. This ending dates the Primary History.
Another clue?
Genesis-2 Kings appears to be what is called a Ring-Composition. The beginning foreshadows the ending, and the ending alludes back to the beginning.
Adam and Eve are removed from land by their God, the garden in Eden, for disobedience to God.
This foreshadows the ending, 2 Kings having Israel and Judah in Exile, removed from their God-assigned Promised Land for disobeying God, just like what happened to Adam and Eve.
Through-out the whole work, Genesis-2 Kings, runs a constant theme: Exile is predicted for the nation for disobedience to God, and it eventually happens.
WHEN was the Primary History crafted? What's the clue (besides 2 Kings 25:27 mention of Evil Merodach)?
Genesis has the clue for when the Primary History was crafted, its Genesis 36:33 and the mention of the Edomite capital city of Bozrah.
Archaeological excavations in the 1970s revealed the city was no earlier than the late 7th century BC (the late Iron Age II Period).
It is highly unlikely that Moses circa 1446 BC (cf. 1 Kings 6:1) or circa 1260 BC (Ramesses II), knew of a city that came into existence in the late 700's BC!
Archaeological excavations at some sites mentioned in the Exodus and Conquest revealed they came into existence no earlier than the Iron Age I era. Others no earlier than the Late Iron II Period (Bozrah of Ge. 36:33).
Another clue: There are NO PERSIAN WORDS, NO GREEK WORDS, in the Primary History. Persia became a world power under Cyrus the Great who liberated the Jews from the Babylonian Captivity and allowed them to return to Jerusalem and rebuiild the Temple of Solomon. This fact, THERE NO PERSIAN WORDS, dates the Primary History to a time before Persia became the all powerful master of the Near East after 539 BC.
That is to say the Primary History (Genesis-2 Kings) is pre-539 BC and Cyrus' conquest of Babylon.
It is an Exilic document, NOT A POST-EXILIC DOCUMENT as erroneously claimed by some scholars.
My Conclusion:
The Torah ( the first five books of the Bible) is most likely a fabrication of the either the late 700s BC (based on Bozrah of Ge. 36:33), or some time later (my 562-560 BC and the reign of Evil Merodach of 2 Kings 25:27).
For more info see my papers under my Academia Profile on the internet.
You need to explain "yomam" as being forgotten rather than another form of transition. (35:50)
where are the original copies that judgements are coming from
So that's how old the BS is.
So you admit classicizing when inadequate but not when successful. Ancient Hebrew was contemporary late, because it is plain Phoenician.
The story of the patriarchs have to have originally come from pre slavery because customs are correct for the 18th century bce
do you have sources- that's interesting
This is such a muddled and incoherent lecture. He has to be reminded after the fact to answer the question he takes as his title. And then he answers it wrong. How can the Bible date to the ninth century or beyond if Daniel, a book of said Bible, is a Hellenistic book? This is maddening. A few solid definitions would have been in order. Maybe a new title. And definitely a strict editor.
The whole lecture is about how different parts of it were written at different times. He's primarily arguing against the idea that it's all written in the post-exilic period. In this context, if you then ask how old it is, that can only mean how old is the oldest layer
@@hywelgriffiths5747 I didn't listen. How old does he conclude?
WARNING: lip smacker
Higher Bible criticism =Higher Anti-Judaism ?
No. Higher criticism literally is just historical criticism. It's literally just seeing the historical basis of the Bible.
The same could be said for all biblical + Koran criticism when it comes to christianity + Islam.
Is it not better to know the truth or at least what actual evidence shows us.