It is impossible to deny the validity of a linguistic approach to dating biblical texts. But at the same time, it is necessary to caution against using a linguistic approach as a clear-cut tool. It should be employed in conjunction with other data and perspectives, such as theological profiles, intertextual links, as well as geographical and archaeological information. But what should one do if linguistic and alternative approaches to dating biblical texts yield seriously conflicting results, as is often the case? This question shall be discussed with some case studies from Jeremiah, doing so in discussion with Aaron Hornkohl’s recent work on the date of the book of Jeremiah.
Purchase
Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Institutional Login
Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials
Personal login
Log in with your brill.com account
All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
---|---|---|---|
Abstract Views | 663 | 75 | 21 |
Full Text Views | 325 | 9 | 0 |
PDF Views & Downloads | 274 | 21 | 1 |
It is impossible to deny the validity of a linguistic approach to dating biblical texts. But at the same time, it is necessary to caution against using a linguistic approach as a clear-cut tool. It should be employed in conjunction with other data and perspectives, such as theological profiles, intertextual links, as well as geographical and archaeological information. But what should one do if linguistic and alternative approaches to dating biblical texts yield seriously conflicting results, as is often the case? This question shall be discussed with some case studies from Jeremiah, doing so in discussion with Aaron Hornkohl’s recent work on the date of the book of Jeremiah.
All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
---|---|---|---|
Abstract Views | 663 | 75 | 21 |
Full Text Views | 325 | 9 | 0 |
PDF Views & Downloads | 274 | 21 | 1 |