Lisbeth S. Fried
lizfried at umich.edu
Sat Mar 16 15:15:07 EST 2002
Sorry, I mean when he does canonical criticism.
Childs differentiates the original meaning from
the canonical. He does both, but when he does the one,
he does not do the other. They are not mixed in his mind.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Christian M. M. Brady [mailto:cbrady at tulane.edu]
> Sent: Sat, March 16, 2002 3:03 PM
> To: Biblical Hebrew
> Subject: Re: Canon(ical) Criticism
> On 3/16/02 2:01 PM, "Lisbeth S. Fried" <lizfried at umich.edu> wrote:
> > Hmm, maybe you're right, but maybe we're both right,
> > maybe it's the same thing. When Childs interprets the
> > text of the Book of Isaiah, it's canonical form is it's meaning as part
> > of the *Christian* canon, and the present meaning of that canon
> > includes the whole history of its interpretation in the church. At any
> > rate, he's not concerned with what the historical Isaiah is trying
> > to say.
> > Liz
> You had me until the last sentence. I have not looked at this
> commentary in
> 10 years, but in his commentary on Exodus he certainly examines all of the
> historical critical issues AND the historical context. I cannot
> imagine that
> he did not at least examine the historical context/message of
> Isaiah. Maybe
> he did, but I would be surprised...
> cbrady @ tulane.edu
> (Below is a quote that was randomly generated by Entourage.)
> "Why can't you make another word using all the letters in 'anagram'?"
> - George Carlin
> You are currently subscribed to b-hebrew as: [lizfried at umich.edu]
> To unsubscribe, forward this message to
> To subscribe, send an email to join-b-hebrew at franklin.oit.unc.edu.
More information about the b-hebrew