Misusing Scripture: What Are Evangelicals Doing with the Bible?, ed. Mark Elliott, Kenneth Atkinson, and Robert Rezetko; Routledge New Critical Thinking in Religion, Theology and Biblical Studies (London: Routledge, 2023), 200–25.
This chapter focuses on the dating of the visions in Daniel chapters 2 and 7–12 by those Evangeli... more This chapter focuses on the dating of the visions in Daniel chapters 2 and 7–12 by those Evangelical scholars who defend a sixth century BCE authorship of the whole book. It is the references to the second century bce in these visions and their interpretation which is at the core of the scholarly consensus about the dating of the current forms of the book, and is therefore a focus of evangelical response to the mainstream approach. We present two of the major points of the scholarly argument for the second century date of the visions and discuss the evangelical response to each. Each of these points is organized in three parts. We first try to explain clearly the basic literary observation that leads to the mainstream scholarly case, and second, review attempts by evangelicals to respond to this case, with a view to understanding the key issues of why evangelicals feel they must dispute it and what strategies they use to do so. Then we present further evidence to suggest the problems evangelicals are trying to avoid are due to lack of understanding of Daniel in its ancient literary context. Next, we discuss the role Porphyry, the ancient enemy of Christianity, plays in evangelical discourse. Finally, we discuss that for evangelicals, the understanding that the book was written by Daniel himself is an integral component of why they feel compelled to reject the mainstream approach to the book, and we describe the way ancient authorship is understood in recent mainstream scholarship.
Uploads
Papers by Ian Young
http://bibleinterp.com/articles/2017/12/ehr418003.shtml
a biblical book in antiquity was a performance of a community tradition where the exact wording was not as important as the effective conveying of what was understood to be the meaning of the tradition.
http://bibleinterp.com/articles/2017/12/ehr418003.shtml
a biblical book in antiquity was a performance of a community tradition where the exact wording was not as important as the effective conveying of what was understood to be the meaning of the tradition.
http://www.sbl-site.org/publications/books_ANEmonographs.aspx
The authors of this monograph seek to continue the scholarly dialogue and break fresh ground in research on the history of ancient Hebrew. Building on theoretical and methodological concepts in general historical linguistics and in diachronic linguistic research on various Ancient Near Eastern and Indo-European languages, they bring to the fore and reflect critically on fundamental issues such as the objective of the research, the nature of the written sources, and the notions of variation and periodization. They draw on innovative work by experts on premodern scribally-created writings in English, French, and Spanish, arguing that a similar application of a joint history of texts and history of language approach will advance our understanding of language variation and change in ancient Hebrew. They illustrate the progress that can be made through the application of two conventional historical sociolinguistic methods. The first method, cross-textual variable analysis, compares linguistic variants in different versions of the same writing, and is applied first to four sets of parallel passages in the Masoretic Text of the Hebrew Bible, and then to the Masoretic Text and the four Dead Sea Scrolls biblical manuscripts of the book of Samuel. The study of Samuel is accompanied by an extensive commentary on linguistic variants between the Hebrew texts of this book. The second method, variationist analysis, compares changing proportions of occurrence of linguistic variables in different writings, and is applied to an assortment of lexical and grammatical issues in the Hebrew Bible (Masoretic Text, Samaritan Pentateuch, biblical Dead Sea Scrolls), monarchic-era inscriptions, the Wisdom of Ben Sira, and the non-biblical Dead Sea Scrolls. The application of the two methods in the various case studies shows that previous accounts of language variation and change in ancient Hebrew are inadequate, and that more complete descriptions and evaluations of the distribution of linguistic data using the integrated text-language approach will advance and enrich our understanding of historical developments in ancient Hebrew.
Hebrew. Building on theoretical and methodological concepts in general
historical linguistics and in diachronic linguistic research on various ancient
Near Eastern and Indo-European languages, the authors reflect critically on
issues such as the objective of the research, the nature of the written sources,
and the ideas of variation and periodization. They draw on innovative work
on premodern scribally created writings to argue for a similar application of
a joint history of texts and history of language approach to ancient Hebrew.
The application of cross-textual variable analysis and variationist analysis in
various case studies shows that more complete descriptions and evaluations
of the distribution of linguistic data advances our understanding of historical
developments in ancient Hebrew.
After a brief introduction (Chapter 1), the following chapters look in detail at the principles and methodology used to differentiate Archaic, Early and Late Biblical Hebrew (Chapters 2-5, 12), the complicating matters of dialects and diglossia and textual criticism (Chapters 7, 13), and the significance of extra-biblical sources, including Amarna Canaanite, Ugaritic, Aramaic, Hebrew inscriptions of the monarchic period, Qumran and Mishnaic Hebrew, the Hebrew language of Ben Sira and Bar Kochba, and also Egyptian, Akkadian, Persian and Greek loanwords (Chapters 6, 8-12).
Volume 2 builds on the topics outlined in volume 1. It begins with a book by book survey of scholarship on the origins of biblical sources, passages and books, with particular reference to the linguistic evidence scholars have cited in arriving at these conclusions. This is followed by an detailed synthesis of the topics introduced in the first volume, a series of detailed case studies on various linguistic issues, extensive tables of grammatical and lexical features, and a comprehensive bibliography.
The authors argue that the scholarly use of language in dating biblical texts, and even the traditional standpoint on the chronological development of biblical Hebrew, require a thorough re-evaluation, and propose a new perspective on linguistic variety in biblical Hebrew. ‘Early’ Biblical Hebrew and ‘Late’ Biblical Hebrew do not represent different chronological periods in the history of biblical Hebrew, but instead represent co-existing styles of literary Hebrew throughout the biblical period.
After a brief introduction (Chapter 1), the following chapters look in detail at the principles and methodology used to differentiate Archaic, Early and Late Biblical Hebrew (Chapters 2-5, 12), the complicating matters of dialects and diglossia and textual criticism (Chapters 7, 13), and the significance of extra-biblical sources, including Amarna Canaanite, Ugaritic, Aramaic, Hebrew inscriptions of the monarchic period, Qumran and Mishnaic Hebrew, the Hebrew language of Ben Sira and Bar Kochba, and also Egyptian, Akkadian, Persian and Greek loanwords (Chapters 6, 8-12).
Volume 2 builds on the topics outlined in volume 1. It begins with a book by book survey of scholarship on the origins of biblical sources, passages and books, with particular reference to the linguistic evidence scholars have cited in arriving at these conclusions. This is followed by an detailed synthesis of the topics introduced in the first volume, a series of detailed case studies on various linguistic issues, extensive tables of grammatical and lexical features, and a comprehensive bibliography.
The authors argue that the scholarly use of language in dating biblical texts, and even the traditional standpoint on the chronological development of biblical Hebrew, require a thorough re-evaluation, and propose a new perspective on linguistic variety in biblical Hebrew. ‘Early’ Biblical Hebrew and ‘Late’ Biblical Hebrew do not represent different chronological periods in the history of biblical Hebrew, but instead represent co-existing styles of literary Hebrew throughout the biblical period.
Publication details: Australian Biblical Review 60, 2012, p.86–87.
Web link to online copy: http://www.fbs.org.au/reviews/tov60.html