Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

On a soon-to-be-published unprovenanced ms:

http://paleojudaica.blogspot.com/2016_1 ... 6500227016

Photo. 8th or 7th c. papyrus surface? (unprovenanced):
http://www.timesofisrael.com/oldest-heb ... ntury-bce/

Prof. Christopher Rollston has doubts:
http://www.rollstonepigraphy.com/?p=715

Timing is everything - https://twitter.com/israelipm/status/791384614782771201

With the election, I've been spending some time on more political venues and someone wrote a D'var Torah on [wiki]Devarim_(parsha)[/wiki].

I've mused here before on the peculiar beliefs of Reform Judaism; in this case the author mentioned the DH theory that Deuteronomy was discovered (or whatever) during King Josiah's temple cleaning project. Apparently the idea that the Jews (or Judeans) freaked out about Israel falling to the Assyrians as some kind of punishment for their sins and wrote that into Deuteronomy has become a religious belief. I wrote a response where I gently tried to point out that it is safer to date this silliness to the Babylonian exile or later.

You'd figure a hundred years or so should make little difference in the overall theological structure of the universe, but my note was greeted by shock and horror.

It's quite unseemly to see stuff like this get politicized.

The question isn't so much why it was politicized but whether or not the government has embraced a forged text for political purposes.

And for that matter - why do politically inclined people who pretend to you 'scientific evidence' to support theological/political ends continue to pretend that Jerusalem is a 'holy city'? It isn't mentioned in the Pentateuch and the original sacred place was Gerizim (or perhaps the meadow where Jacob had his vision). The idea that people are fighting over Jerusalem is among the most confounding examples of the misapplication of evidence from antiquity. There is nothing sacred about Jerusalem. The first Torah-abiding Jews went to the place referenced time and again in the Pentateuch where all the action occurs and that place wasn't Jerusalem. The logical inference from all the evidence is that as tensions between northern and southern Israelites grew Judeans invented the holiness of their city. This was accomplished by the expansion of the Writings beyond the original texts shared with their northern neighbors (Pentateuch, Joshua, Judges).

Secret Alias wrote:And for that matter - why do politically inclined people who pretend to you 'scientific evidence' to support theological/political ends continue to pretend that Jerusalem is a 'holy city'? It isn't mentioned in the Pentateuch and the original sacred place was Gerizim (or perhaps the meadow where Jacob had his vision). The idea that people are fighting over Jerusalem is among the most confounding examples of the misapplication of evidence from antiquity. There is nothing sacred about Jerusalem. The first Torah-abiding Jews went to the place referenced time and again in the Pentateuch where all the action occurs and that place wasn't Jerusalem. The logical inference from all the evidence is that as tensions between northern and southern Israelites grew Judeans invented the holiness of their city. This was accomplished by the expansion of the Writings beyond the original texts shared with their northern neighbors (Pentateuch, Joshua, Judges).

I don't have an opinion on these politically inclined people... but well said. I know you have talked about this before, but it's a good reminder.

Jerusalem Post comments:
"Moreover, without presenting any evidence, Maeir alleged that the thieves may have forged the writing on an authentic papyri, with the goal of charging exorbitant fees on the international black market, where similar findings can garner over $1 million."
http://www.jpost.com/Israel-News/IAA-re ... ion-471239
I think that is not accurate. Maeir, at least on his blog, did not specify that a potential forger be identified with an illegal cave digger.
Also. if the papyrus (surface) was (said to be) found in a cave in Nahal Hever--rather than say in Egypt (or--why?--the either of two places mentioned in the text)--has it been chemically tested for effects of bat droppings?

Christopher Rollston has commented further (Nov. 1) on the "Jerusalem papyrus" (and also added a paragraph, VII, on ink, to his previous post):
http://www.rollstonepigraphy.com/