...

[neilgodfrey]

...

[StephenGoranson]

I am not Anson Rainey.

[neilgodfrey]

...

[StephenGoranson]

Perhaps we can agree that "how dating has been carried out" is passive voice.
In other words, by whom? All? Joke?
Without going into reductionist obscurantisms nor personalities (I met him) nor book reviews, why address a straw man?
I do not credit such stuff as representing my view.

[neilgodfrey]

...

[StephenGoranson]

I am not Julius Wellhausen.

[neilgodfrey]

...

[neilgodfrey]

...

[StephenGoranson]

There are reasons to consider some TaNaK texts to be older than third century, some of which have been discussed here.
Qumran texts, safely considered to be copies rather than autographs, show developments over time.
And some may themselves may be older; at least, so Michael Langlois (name searchable here) has argued concerning some paleo-Hebrew mss.
Few have been radiocarbon dated (more to be published). Statistically it is unlikely that the oldest one has yet been tested and published.
Deir 'Alla inscription.
Silver amulets.
Both searchable.
It is not plausible that temple priests, before third century, were illiterate and had nothing to read.
Semitic language history. A recent--Feb. 14, 2024--observation, for example:
"A marginal linguistic difference between the Pentateuch and the rest of the Hebrew Bible"
by Benjamin Suchard
https://bnuyaminim.wordpress.com/2024/0 ... rew-bible/

[neilgodfrey]

...