Freethought & Rationalism Archive

snkirsch · 11-05-2007, 10:10 AM

Does anyone know when the Book of Samuel is typically dated as far as its authorship goes?

I have read that it supposedly covers from about 1180 B.C.E. to 1078 B.C.E. If I understand correct the they have no writings about the stories of the Bible or its main characters before 650 BC, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dating_the_Bible

Minimalist · 11-05-2007, 10:24 AM

You may find this useful.

http://www.bibleorigins.net/davidicanomalies.html

Quote:

Are there any earlier clues ? Yes, several "historical markers" exist within the Davidic narratives, Archaeology has established that several towns identified as existing in David's days did not come into existence until several centuries later.

spin · 11-05-2007, 10:54 AM

I think that the safest approach to dating any of these texts is to find the date of the earliest extant copy and work back from there. That will supply you with a latest possible date and there are a few fragments of Samuel amongst the Dead Sea Scrolls. The historical markers Minimalist mentions will supply you with the earliest possible date. You then look for other internal indicators which will force you to reduce those limits. However, there aren't many forthcoming. A later date is safer than an earlier one.

spin

Robert Byers · 11-07-2007, 09:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by snkirsch

Does anyone know when the Book of Samuel is typically dated as far as its authorship goes?

I have read that it supposedly covers from about 1180 B.C.E. to 1078 B.C.E. If I understand correct the they have no writings about the stories of the Bible or its main characters before 650 BC, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dating_the_Bible

First things first.
When asking when a book is written , well ask the author. If the book Samuel doesn't say then reading the book should show something. now these books are from God actually and so they could be written anytime however by reading them carefully Christian scholars have historically seen them as written shortly after the events they descibe, This is clear.
Ideas that the bible was written late or at the turn of century have been disproven for a long time.

For the record. B.C.E is not how we measure years. It is B.C. This is the historic and still measure of mankind. You couldn't just start saying metres instead of feet or up here in Canada feet instead of metres just on whim or agenda. A people has the right to set its own weights and measures.
Its been set at B.C. In respect of law, will, custom, history, authority you should submitt. Its the decent thing to do and the B.C.E is suspected of being a anti-Christian term with no reason to exist except for this hostility from whatever quarters.
all the best
Robert Byers
Toronto. ontario

Dogfish · 11-08-2007, 04:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robert Byers

Quote:

Originally Posted by snkirsch

Does anyone know when the Book of Samuel is typically dated as far as its authorship goes?

I have read that it supposedly covers from about 1180 B.C.E. to 1078 B.C.E. If I understand correct the they have no writings about the stories of the Bible or its main characters before 650 BC, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dating_the_Bible

First things first.
When asking when a book is written , well ask the author. If the book Samuel doesn't say then reading the book should show something. now these books are from God actually and so they could be written anytime however by reading them carefully Christian scholars have historically seen them as written shortly after the events they descibe, This is clear.
Ideas that the bible was written late or at the turn of century have been disproven for a long time.

For the record. B.C.E is not how we measure years. It is B.C. This is the historic and still measure of mankind. You couldn't just start saying metres instead of feet or up here in Canada feet instead of metres just on whim or agenda. A people has the right to set its own weights and measures.
Its been set at B.C. In respect of law, will, custom, history, authority you should submitt. Its the decent thing to do and the B.C.E is suspected of being a anti-Christian term with no reason to exist except for this hostility from whatever quarters.
all the best
Robert Byers
Toronto. ontario

Oh, please...What is the difference, beside the word "Christ"? Feet & meters are different lengths of measure. BCE is a more scientific reference. Of course, if you believe science=hostility, seems a tad defensive. The "decent" thing would be to use a designation that reflects the science of history, not one that makes a certain religious group feel better.

Ray Moscow · 11-08-2007, 04:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robert Byers

For the record. B.C.E is not how we measure years. It is B.C. This is the historic and still measure of mankind. You couldn't just start saying metres instead of feet or up here in Canada feet instead of metres just on whim or agenda. A people has the right to set its own weights and measures.
Its been set at B.C. In respect of law, will, custom, history, authority you should submitt. Its the decent thing to do and the B.C.E is suspected of being a anti-Christian term with no reason to exist except for this hostility from whatever quarters.
all the best
Robert Byers
Toronto. ontario

Robert, would it be OK with you if Asian scholars dated everything Before Buddha (BB) and After Enlightenment (AE)?

Or are you just anti-Buddhist?

Magdlyn · 11-08-2007, 05:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robert Byers

First things first.
When asking when a book is written , well ask the author.

Like this?

Dear God, when did you write the book of Samuel?

Would God go by the Jewish calendar, dating from creation? Then we wouldnt have to worry about being politically correct to all those pesky non-Christians/heretics/infidels/Satan worshipers in the world.

Quote:

If the book Samuel doesn't say then reading the book should show something. now these books are from God actually and so they could be written anytime however by reading them carefully Christian scholars have historically seen them as written shortly after the events they descibe, This is clear.

I guess you missed the post above that says Samuel lists cities that didn't exist, as well as other dead giveaways it was written centuries after the "events" it depicts.

Quote:

Ideas that the bible was written late or at the turn of century have been disproven for a long time.

Not keeping up with latest scholarship, are we? Blinders much?

Quote:

For the record. B.C.E is not how we measure years. It is B.C. This is the historic and still measure of mankind...
Its been set at B.C. In respect of law, will, custom, history, authority you should submitt.

One t in submit. And no, no thank you.

Quote:

Its the decent thing to do and the B.C.E is suspected of being a anti-Christian term with no reason to exist except for this hostility from whatever quarters.

It is an inclusive term that still dates from 4 yrs after your alleged godman was born...

gregor · 11-08-2007, 05:42 AM

Those not familiar with Mr. Byers' opinions might pop over to E/C and review posts related to a young earth and creationism. Consider yourselves warned.

mens_sana · 11-08-2007, 11:33 AM

The text of Samuel is supposed to be one of the most corrupt texts in the Hebrew Scripture. I wonder how that might fit with Mr. Byers' notions. To get the text we have today, one I'm sure that Mr. Byers enjoys, the eviscerated Masoretic Text had to be supplemented by three differing, expansive versions of the LXX, plus the three Qumran scrolls. No single manuscript has a lock on the text.

I have to prostrate myself before the notion of God preserving his text. :notworthy:

-Jay- · 11-08-2007, 11:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robert Byers

For the record. B.C.E is not how we measure years. It is B.C. This is the historic and still measure of mankind. You couldn't just start saying metres instead of feet or up here in Canada feet instead of metres just on whim or agenda. A people has the right to set its own weights and measures.
Its been set at B.C. In respect of law, will, custom, history, authority you should submitt. Its the decent thing to do and the B.C.E is suspected of being a anti-Christian term with no reason to exist except for this hostility from whatever quarters.

That's absurd. Units of measure and the names thereof are arbitrary. Dating conventions likewise are arbitrary. BCE is no more anti-Christian than listing Hanukkah on a calendar is anti-Christian.

regards,

NinJay

11-05-2007, 10:10 AM	#1
snkirsch Junior Member Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Minnesota(southern) Posts: 10	Dating the Book of Samuel Does anyone know when the Book of Samuel is typically dated as far as its authorship goes? I have read that it supposedly covers from about 1180 B.C.E. to 1078 B.C.E. If I understand correct the they have no writings about the stories of the Bible or its main characters before 650 BC, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dating_the_Bible

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

11-05-2007, 10:54 AM	#3
spin Contributor Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: nowhere Posts: 15,747	I think that the safest approach to dating any of these texts is to find the date of the earliest extant copy and work back from there. That will supply you with a latest possible date and there are a few fragments of Samuel amongst the Dead Sea Scrolls. The historical markers Minimalist mentions will supply you with the earliest possible date. You then look for other internal indicators which will force you to reduce those limits. However, there aren't many forthcoming. A later date is safer than an earlier one. spin

11-08-2007, 05:42 AM	#8
gregor Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Texas Posts: 932	Those not familiar with Mr. Byers' opinions might pop over to E/C and review posts related to a young earth and creationism. Consider yourselves warned.

11-08-2007, 11:33 AM	#9
mens_sana Regular Member Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: 1/2 mile west of the Rio sin Grande Posts: 397	The text of Samuel is supposed to be one of the most corrupt texts in the Hebrew Scripture. I wonder how that might fit with Mr. Byers' notions. To get the text we have today, one I'm sure that Mr. Byers enjoys, the eviscerated Masoretic Text had to be supplemented by three differing, expansive versions of the LXX, plus the three Qumran scrolls. No single manuscript has a lock on the text. I have to prostrate myself before the notion of God preserving his text. :notworthy:

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.