Bible Review

John Spong, Resurrection: Myth or Reality? (San Francisco: HarperSanFransico, 1994), p. 15.

James Dunn, The Evidence for Jesus (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1985), p. 8.

See Kenneth A. Kitchen, “The Tabernacle—A Bronze Age Artifact,” Eretz-Israel 24 (Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society, 1993), pp. 119*–129*.

Baruch Levine proposes that these terms entered Hebrew through Aramaic. See Levine, “Research in the Priestly Source: The Linguistic Factor,” Eretz-Israel 16 (Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society, 1982; in Hebrew), pp. 124–131; and “Late Language in the Priestly Source: Some Literary and Historical Observations,” in Proceedings of the Eighth World Congress of Jewish Studies: Panel Sessions, Bible Studies and Hebrew Language, pp. 69–82.

The late Meir Paran tried to show that certain words and phrases used in Chronicles, P and pre-exilic literature appear in P with their pre-exilic meaning rather than with the meaning found in Chronicles; see Paran, Forms of the Priestly Style in the Pentateuch, pp. 273–298.

See Avi Hurvitz, A Linguistic Study of the Relationship Between the Priestly Source and the Book of Ezekiel: A New Approach to an Old Problem, Cahiers de la Revue Biblique 20 (Paris: J. Gabalda, 1982); and “The Language of the Priestly Source and Its Historical Setting—The Case for an Early Date,” in Proceedings of the Eighth World Congress of Jewish Studies: Panel Sessions, Bible Studies and Hebrew Language, pp. 83–94.

See Weinfeld, “Social and Cultic Institutions in the Priestly Source Against Their Ancient Near Eastern Background.” Weinfeld also proposes that Second Isaiah, a book of the Persian period, polemicizes against certain features of the Priestly source, meaning that P must have come earlier. He has also pointed to many cultic practices from other ancient Near Eastern cultures that resemble elements of P.

See Haran, Temples and Temple Service, especially pp. 276–288.

Haran, Temples and Temple Service, especially pp. 132–148.