Note to late daters

Discussion about the Hebrew Bible, Septuagint, pseudepigrapha, Philo, Josephus, Talmud, Dead Sea Scrolls, archaeology, etc.
Post Reply
StephenGoranson
Posts: 366
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2015 2:10 am

Note to late daters

Post by StephenGoranson » Sun Feb 07, 2021 6:02 am

“Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence” appeared in 1895 in the context of geology discussion, I noted elsewhere. But then the “Quote Investigator” blogger found a precursor in Live Stock Journal of 1891. And (meta) the saying may well be older than that.

In an earlier posting on ane-3 list (#7 in Dec., “Dating DS Scrolls by Paleography, C14 and AI”) I noted preliminary reports that some Qumran Scrolls are to be dated somewhat older than paleography estimates previously supposed.

F.M. Cross dated 4QExod-Lev-f to circa 250 BCE (according to DJD XXXIX p. 378 simplification of his date range in DJD XII p. 134), but the new study has better methodology and data.

If these preliminary reports are confirmed, and 4QExod-Lev-f dates before R. Gmirkin’s assertion (in his Berossus book) that the first five books of the Hebrew Bible were "composed in their entirely about 273-272 BCE," in Alexandria, I hope some late daters notice.

StephenGoranson
Posts: 366
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2015 2:10 am

Re: Note to late daters

Post by StephenGoranson » Tue Feb 23, 2021 5:20 am

In the current issue of Dead Sea Discoveries 28.1 (2021), Laura Quick, “Bitenosh’s Orgasm, Galen’s Two Seeds and Conception Theory in the Hebrew Bible” the Abstract includes: “…. in this essay I argue that rather than deriving these ideas [of embryogenesis] from the Greco-Roman world, the conception theory which informed the Genesis Apocryphon is in fact consistent with notions that can already be found in the Hebrew Bible and the wider ancient Near East.” If I understand her article correctly, she cautioned against imposing in this case Greek sources on a Genesis account.

Post Reply