What's the age of the Dead Sea Scrolls?

[Sheshbazzar]

You will only find what you are willing to find.
[...]

That is simply not true.

If you understand the evidence for a round Earth, then no matter how badly you want to believe the world is flat you won't be able to.

If you understand the evidence for heliocentrism, then no matter how much you want to believe that the Sun orbits the Earth, you won't be able to.

If you understand the evidence for the Germ Theory of Disease, then no matter how much you want to believe that diseases are communicated by magical invisible spirits, you won't be able to.

Once you understand how diffraction in substances of different optical densities (such as prisms) diffract light into different colors, then you won't be able to believe that rainbows are magically created by the Abrahamic god as part of his promise not to commit mass murder again. No matter how badly you want to believe in a magical explanation over naturalistic explanations for rainbows, you won't be able to once you understand optics and the relevant evidence.

If you understand the evidence for modern genetics, then you won't be able to believe the Bible when it tells you that if you show stripes to animals while they mate, they will produce offspring with stripes. No matter how badly you want to believe that passage in the Bible, you won't be able to once you understand genetics and the evidence for genetics.

And on and on it goes. The only time you can choose what to believe in is when you do not actually care if the things you believe are true.

There is such a thing as 'context'.
The context of my statement only related to the existence of the literary and archaeological evidences for the beliefs, practices and Torah texts of the Hebrew religion before the development of the Septuagint translation.

I would be interested if anyone here could provide any actual textual EVIDENCE, supported by known, named, and credible professional textual scholars, that the Greek texts of the Torah preceded the Hebrew, with the Hebrew texts being merely poor translations of what were originally Greek manuscripts.
Names and professional credentials of these notable textual scholars please.

 

[Bronzeage]

That is simply not true.

If you understand the evidence for a round Earth, then no matter how badly you want to believe the world is flat you won't be able to.

If you understand the evidence for heliocentrism, then no matter how much you want to believe that the Sun orbits the Earth, you won't be able to.

If you understand the evidence for the Germ Theory of Disease, then no matter how much you want to believe that diseases are communicated by magical invisible spirits, you won't be able to.

Once you understand how diffraction in substances of different optical densities (such as prisms) diffract light into different colors, then you won't be able to believe that rainbows are magically created by the Abrahamic god as part of his promise not to commit mass murder again. No matter how badly you want to believe in a magical explanation over naturalistic explanations for rainbows, you won't be able to once you understand optics and the relevant evidence.

If you understand the evidence for modern genetics, then you won't be able to believe the Bible when it tells you that if you show stripes to animals while they mate, they will produce offspring with stripes. No matter how badly you want to believe that passage in the Bible, you won't be able to once you understand genetics and the evidence for genetics.

And on and on it goes. The only time you can choose what to believe in is when you do not actually care if the things you believe are true.

There is such a thing as 'context'.
The context of my statement only related to the existence of the literary and archaeological evidences for the beliefs, practices and Torah texts of the Hebrew religion before the development of the Septuagint translation.

I would be interested if anyone here could provide any actual textual EVIDENCE, supported by known, named, and credible professional textual scholars, that the Greek texts of the Torah preceded the Hebrew, with the Hebrew texts being merely poor translations of what were originally Greek manuscripts.
Names and professional credentials of these notable textual scholars please.

Extraordinary claims usually require extraordinary proof, but in this case, the claim that ancient Hebrew texts were originally written in Greek and later recorded in Hebrew, is the kind of fact which should be common knowledge, if it really is a fact. Truth should answer questions, not generate a thousand more, "If that is true, then why?'s".

All the pre-literate languages of Europe which are still spoken and survive today are all written in the Roman alphabet. Creating a text to represent sounds and words is a lot of work. Why would someone go to the trouble of making a native alphabet for their native tongue, when one has already been provided.

 

[Sheshbazzar]

Ancient Hebrew epigraphy (writing) emerged in the 10th century BCE, proceeding directly from Canaanite 'Hill tribe' employment the ancient Phoenician alphabet, which was an evolution of the Proto-Sinaitic script. (developed circa 1850 BCE)

The earliest identified Hebrew inscriptions, written in variant Phoenician characters date to the 10th century BEC. (Gezer Calendar, The Qeiyafa Ostracon) are identifiable as being Hebrew based upon their archaeological context (their location in known Judean cities) and their content (usually the inclusion of distinctive name of the Hebrew deity YaH(WH), or other names associated with The theophonic.

Is there a credible linguistic scholar that postulates that the 2nd millinium BCE Proto-Sinaitic script, and subsequent Phoenician and paleo-Hebrew alphabets evolved from earlier Greek sources, _when the earliest known fragmentary Greek inscriptions date to the 8th century BCE?
I know of none, and of no one that can present any rational evidence supportive such a view.