peter_kirk at sil.org
peter_kirk at sil.org
Thu Dec 30 01:27:46 EST 1999
See my comments below.
______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: historiography
Author: <jwest at highland.net> at Internet
Date: 29/12/1999 15:27
At 01:21 PM 12/29/99 -0600, you wrote:
>I will preface my remarks with the fact that I am merely a student and not
>in the sense of the word for which it seems to be used on the list. I am
also new to
>the list so I haven't made many comments trying to make sure I understood
>of the discussion. I will also note that last night while I was looking
>collection of "Bible Archeology Review" I came across your name in one of
>to the editor. I certainly was impressed.
Niels Peter's credentials are not limited to a letter to the editor. Take a
look at Amazon.com and any of the many bibliographic search engines on the
web to get a taste of his accomplishments.
PK: If an author's credentials are judged by his appearances at
Amazon.com etc, I guess that NPL would be left well behind by Billy
Graham and be nowhere near Tom Clancy!
>Let me also say I saw the use of the term "minamalist" (I believe that is
>associated with your name. Could you explain to me what that term means?
It is a false and misleading derogatory epigram placed on various folk like
Tom Thompson, NP Lemche, and Davies by those who are more fundamentalist in
PK: "Fundamentalist" is a false and misleading derogatory epigram
placed on various folk by those who are more liberal in their
>Extrapulating the current conclusions that you and Ian seem to be making,
>that mean that from the perspective of the 1930's the text couldn't be much
>the Massoritic text (or whichever text was the oldest at that time).? Is my
>represtentation of your position correct?
Not at all. There are dozens of mss which predate the MT Codex L.
PK: This is deliberate obfuscation. No-one mentioned Codex L. The
mention of the Masoretic Text was a collective reference to a
collection of MSS from a particular period. Some are a little older
than Codex L. What is the date of the earliest datable MS of a
significant portion of the Hebrew Bible which would be considered as a
representative of the MT. Anything before the 10th century CE? I
thought not. So the point remains that the earliest texts available in
the 1930s were around 1000 years newer than the DSS. Do you disagree?
More information about the b-hebrew