The Trump Card; was: Re: SV: Re[12]: JEPD Evidence

kdlitwak kdlitwak at concentric.net
Tue Dec 21 00:21:55 EST 1999


   I won't enter this discussion as such. The arguments against JEDP have been made
many times by many researchers, from William Green to Umberto Cassuto to
R.Rendtorff.   There are many problems with JEDP, such as its philosophical basis
(anti-Semitsim and a completely speculative reconstruction of Israelite religious
history), the continuing division of sources (as shown in the Anchor Bible Dictionary
article on it) based solely on the divine name, the lack of a parallel document that
is known to be composed of multiple sources, and the inability of the theory to
account for how one author or redactor, in control of all the sources, was evidently
unable to see purportedly glaring problems and correct them.  So there's no real need
for me to discus this.  It's all been done.  Humans sift all "facts" through an
interpretive grid informed first and foremost not by their own interpretive grid.
One's ideology determines as much about what one will accept as evidence as anything
else.  Give this one important truth from postmodernism, can we dispense with the
playing of the "I'm the real scholar" trump card?  Or maybe more to the point, can we
talk about biblical hebrew?  I'll even suggest a topic.  How to make all the
linguistic theory I see on this list accessible to someone like me with no training in
that area?

Ken Litwak

Niels Peter Lemche wrote:

> I will continue this theme as long as necessary. I have been in this game
> for more than 30 years, I know the rules and my colleagues know them as well
> wherever they live in the world of the academia. I also know that at the
> fringe, some institutions that may consider themselves academic ones,
> entertain ideas that are foreign to scholarship. Scholarship is not decided
> by a majority vote and although several contributors to this line of
> argument seem to think that what is not accepted by people who is running
> the game can be accepted nevertheless, they will never counts as serious or
> major figures in this business. I think that such people should address
> scholars of a certain standard within other fields and see how they react,
> when somebody is invoking supernaturalistic phenomena, are continuously
> disregarding more than two hundred years of scholarship without presenting
> any serious arguments against it (although such arguments are easy to find).
> Maybe people of my group is simply waisting our time on such discussions but
> it is necessary in order that the field shall survive as an academic
> discipline. But I certainly do understand why so few of the top people are
> active on the lists and may find thmselves in a foreugn if not hostile
> world.
>
> By the way, Peter Kirk's football player is according to the standards of
> the world outside the US not football players, since they most of the time
> use their hands. A football player is except in the USA what is there
> derogatory caller a 'soccer player'. Pele was a football player, Monotano a
> quarterback in American  football.
>
> NPL
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: peter_kirk at sil.org [SMTP:peter_kirk at sil.org]
> > Sent: Tuesday, 21 December, 1999 00:09
> > To:   Biblical Hebrew
> > Subject:      Re: SV: Re[12]: JEPD Evidence
> >
> >
> > Who defines the rules of the game? Who authorises changes in them? And
> > who is the referee? Also it seems the rules are different in different
> > places and traditions. When you say somebody is "not a scholar", is
> > that equivalent to the soccer player calling the American football
> > player "not a football player"?
> >
> > Peter Kirk
> >
> >
> > ______________________________ Reply Separator
> > _________________________________
> > Subject: SV: Re[12]: JEPD Evidence
> > Author:  <npl at teol.ku.dk> at Internet
> > Date:    20/12/1999 11:53
> >
> >
> > Won't help Jonathan.
> >
> > Also the Bbaylonian scribes were scholars, however, not of the modern
> > kind.
> > Neither was Luther. Again, it has to do playing by the rules. The rules
> > will
> > be changing, yes, and at a time you will have to conclude that according
> > to
> > modern standards I will no longer be considered a scholar .. Luther is
> > accoridng to modern standards not a contemporary scholar, rather the
> > subject
> > of scholarship. I think I play according to present rules for the game. If
> >
> > you follows the rules of yesterday, you are not part of the game. That may
> >
> > change according to circumstances, but that is as it is today.
> >
> > NPL
> >
> > > ----------
> > > Fra:         Jonathan Bailey[SMTP:jonathan.bailey at gmx.de]
> > > Svar til:         Jonathan Bailey
> > > Sendt:         20. december 1999 11:54
> > > Til:         Biblical Hebrew
> > > Emne:         Re[12]: JEPD Evidence
> > >
> > > Thanks for your support Jim. I see acknowledgement from you, a rather
> > > stalwart
> > > liberal (if my assessment is correct) that these men, who were all
> > willing
> > > to give place
> > > to the supernatural, were indeed scholars, as something of a vindication
> >
> > > from
> > > Lemche's assertions.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Jonathan Bailey
> > > Hochschule fr Jdische Studien
> > > Heidelberg
> > >
> > > ---------- Original Message ----------
> > >
> > > >At 01:04 AM 12/20/99 +0100, you wrote:
> > > >>I will take my place among my brothers Thomas Aquinas, Jerome, Luther,
> >
> > > and
> > > >Origen
> > > >>in the Fraternity of the Non-Scholars.
> > >
> > > >all in fact extraordinarily trained in their respective fields.
> > Luther,
> > > as
> > > >you know, had an earned doctorate from Wittenberg.  Aquinas as well was
> > a
> > > >result of University training.  Jerome spent years learning from the
> > > rabbis.
> > > >Origen was a brilliant scholar.  All trained.  None dilettantes.
> > >
> > > >Best
> > >
> > > >Jim
> > > >++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > >
> > > >Jim West, ThD
> > > >jwest at highland.net
> > > >http://web.infoave.net/~jwest
> > >
> > > >"This is the sort of nonsense up with which I will not put."  Winston
> > > Churchill
> > >
> > >
> > > >---
> > > >You are currently subscribed to b-hebrew as: jonathan.bailey at gmx.de
> > > >To unsubscribe, forward this message to
> > > $subst('Email.Unsub')
> > > >To subscribe, send an email to join-b-hebrew at franklin.oit.unc.edu.
> > >
> > > ---
> > > You are currently subscribed to b-hebrew as: npl at teol.ku.dk
> > > To unsubscribe, forward this message to
> > > $subst('Email.Unsub')
> > > To subscribe, send an email to join-b-hebrew at franklin.oit.unc.edu.
> > >
> >
> > ---
> > You are currently subscribed to b-hebrew as: Peter_Kirk at sil.org
> > To unsubscribe, forward this message to
> > leave-b-hebrew-14207U at franklin.oit.unc.e
> > du
> > To subscribe, send an email to join-b-hebrew at franklin.oit.unc.edu.
> >
> >
> > ---
> > You are currently subscribed to b-hebrew as: npl at teol.ku.dk
> > To unsubscribe, forward this message to
> > $subst('Email.Unsub')
> > To subscribe, send an email to join-b-hebrew at franklin.oit.unc.edu.
>
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to b-hebrew as: kdlitwak at concentric.net
> To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-b-hebrew-12507A at franklin.oit.unc.edu
> To subscribe, send an email to join-b-hebrew at franklin.oit.unc.edu.




More information about the b-hebrew mailing list