Autographs, MSS and REAL Historiography Re: Methods in biblical scholarship

Moshe Shulman mshulman at ix.netcom.com
Tue Dec 28 12:36:44 EST 1999


At 10:01 AM 12/28/1999 +0100, Niels Peter Lemche wrote:
>>     ANother matter that springs from this is taht those who make the
>> assumption taht MS date somehow relates to auttograph date is that we
>> should not have a prolem with saying the biblical texts are not
>> historical while treating stelas as plain, objective truth.  The texts
>> have been robbed of the chance to speak of what happneed.  So to deal
>> with this, they are givne genres completely out of keeping with what
>> they internally show of htemselves.  1 Samuel is historiography.  Read
>> Albert Cook, Histoyr/Writing, before you disagree.  It is not simply
>> eidfying litrature or fictiojn just because one wishes to pan its
>> accounts as unhistorical.  
>	[Niels Peter Lemche]  
>	Your hvae so litrtle sense of what history was about in ancient
>times that I suggest that you start studying the subject. I would suggest
>that you start by reading Quintillian, and continue with Cicero, and then
>you can come back.

I prefer Thucidides myself. History in ancient times is what it is now:
propaganda. The term objective historuy is an oxymoron.

moshe shulman mshulman at NOSPAMix.netcom.com    718-436-7705
CHASSIDUS.NET - Yoshav Rosh            http://www.chassidus.net
Outreach Judaism                       http://www.outreachjudaism.org/
ICQ# 52009254




More information about the b-hebrew mailing list