Dr. Ehrman,

Finkelstein, the scholar, in The Quest for the Historical Israel, said 
Hebrew writing started around the 8th or 9th century BCE. Meaningful writing started around the 8th century BCE.

This is after the historical Labaya (who lived during Ancient Egypt’s Armana period); the biblical King Saul, King David, and King Solomon.

From what Finkelstein said, Psalms and Proverbs would not be meaningful Hebrew writing.

Question: In what language do you think Psalms and Proverbs were first written?

Question: Abraham came from Sumer but the language of Sumer did not influence the language of Ancient Hebrew.

Question: When Moses rewrote the destroyed Ten Commandments and the rewritten Ten Commandments were put into the Ark of the Covenant were they in the Ark that were to be placed into Solomon’s Temple?

If so, why would a scholar note consider those Ten Commandments meaningful Hebrew writing? I’m being told there is not historical connection between Moses and the first Temple because Abraham and Moses were theological developments after the ninth and tenth centuries BCE. Do you agree or have more to add?

** you do not have permission to see this link **

Comment 91

If David possessed Torah traditions, they would have existed primarily in oral form, spoken in early Hebrew. Any written material would have been fragmentary, composed in archaic Hebrew using a proto-Canaanite (paleo-Hebrew) script, long before the Pentateuch took its later literary shape.

That answer will stand up in:

• Archaeology
• Biblical studies
• Textual criticism
• ANE comparative history

And it fits perfectly with Finkelstein, Römer, Van Seters, and Cross.

• Israel Finkelstein
  Archaeologist, Tel Aviv University
  Known for The Bible Unearthed and The Quest for the Historical Israel
• Thomas Römer
  Biblical scholar, Collège de France
  Specialist in the formation of the Hebrew Bible, Deuteronomistic history, and Pentateuchal traditions
• John Van Seters
  Historian and biblical scholar
  Major figure in the supplementary hypothesis of the Pentateuch; critical of early patriarchal historicity
• Frank Moore Cross
  Harvard University biblical scholar and epigrapher
  Known for work on Northwest Semitic epigraphy and early Israelite religion (Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic)

= = = =

Steefen1
A historical King David is not connected to an historical Moses and not connected to a historical King Saul and the historical Jesus also does not connect to a historical King David and an historical Moses.

Steefen2
I disagree: Psalm 105 verse 37:
He brought out Israel, laden with silver and gold, and from among their tribes no one faltered.

Steefen1
Ancient Rome did not enslave Judea and Israel for 400 years.
Ancient Egypt did not have Herod the Great either.
Without King David having a verifiable, historical connection to Moses, Jesus or a non-Jesus messiah, does not need a Davidic connection.

Steefen2
Theological memory/creation is the best that works. Once you bring up the historical King Saul, the efficacy of the historical King David cannot be linked to Jesus. Why even link to Jesus a man who wanted another man’s wife that he put her husband on the front line? ? ?

BJH
Do you believe there was an Ancient Hebrew language that descended from Proto-Canaanite or do you believe like Ammon Hillman that Hebrew was invented in Alexandria, Egypt in the 2nd or 3rd century B.C. (Post 12)?

Steefen
I have already given you a reply. Now you want to reword the question as Was Hebrew invented in Alexandria, Egypt?
According to my more than 15 years researching my book, I conclude that Hebrew was not invented in Alexandria.

Second, if you do not want to engage in my posts that does not mean they are a monologue, it means you do not have anything valuable to add to my posts.

Third, critical reflection upon one’s own ideas should be welcomed? That is in progress: I have not stopped listening to the review video by Gnostic Informant. I have not read the book by the independent writer whose father was a linguist. I might not get to it. Therefore, I might not get to a final answer on that book. What is important is the video. I watched the video and took notes. 

Fourth, people who write books can be members of the forum. We’ve had people who write articles who have been members of the forum as well. My book is like a personal essay of my books since the unexamined life is not worth living is a saying I can follow. What gives you the idea this motivation is a problem?

Picking up on the video, Review of Ammon vs. Luke Gorton then Debating Ammonites

The gospels contain Greek stagecraft.

Just as I anticipated: this video review is long-winded.

Pick up at 2:23.33 

BJH:

I conclude that Hebrew was not invented in Alexandria.

Thanks for the answer.

This is a pretty foundational claim of his, isn’t it? If so, wouldn’t you think denying it calls into question his interpretation of biblical texts?

Steefen:
In the past I watched some of his videos. Those videos did not discuss Hebrew being invented in Alexandria, so I would disagree that Hebrew being invented in Alexandria is foundational for him. I already told you, I’ve studied my subject matter for more than 15 years. Archaeology found early Hebrew in Sinai.

Language grows over time. That probably happened in Alexandria. As the review video explains: Jews did go to Greek plays. When Greek swept over the Levant and Jews moved to Greek cities, Greek was used throughout the Roman Empire. That can be recognized.

The New Testament was written in Greek. I have no problem with Greek influences showing up in an interpretation of New Testament texts or in the TANAK.

Point:

The Jews revolted against Babylon by forming alliances with Egypt [timestamp 30:43]–with Egypt!–and lost.
The Jews revolted against Rome and lost the first, second, and third war against Rome.

L H wins these points against Luke.