Eric M. Meyers

THE DATING OF THE GUSH HALAV SYNAGOGUE: A RESPONSE TO JODI MAGNESS

Avi-Yonah was absolutely clear about the passing of the older chronology but expressed linge ring doubts about why there would be a plurality of synagogue forms so close to one another in a single period.2 But even the most ardent supporters of the older typology recognized that only new archaeological data could substantiate claims for dating. Though Magness claims that this is all she wants to do, namely, create new data from the reports, the fact is that in regard to Gush Halav she has misconstrued key data in the reports, which in turn has led her to new conclusions about chronology that must be rejected out of hand. Before explaining how I believe Magness has gone wrong in her reading of the data and hence her conclusions, I would like to say something about common sense and the historical method. By suggesting that the Gush Halav and Capernaum synagogues are constructed in the fifth and sixth centuries respectively, Magness not only throws out the older typology but, indirectly as a result of her sugges-

Book Review: Zechariah 9–14 and Malachi: A Commentary

Could I have caught the challenge of Jonah to embrace YHWHs mercy to outsiders without rhetorical criticism^ Has the suasive design communicated to readers over the centuries without their awareness^* Or is this a privileged reading^ If so, what shall we make of the ineffectiveness of its persuasive design^ In debates over meaning, can one appeal to artistic design to resolve differences^ Tnble sketches well the concerns and debates among students of biblical rhetoric and conducts the reader through an elegant exhibition of compositional analysis