[b-hebrew] OT: a link about Modern Hebrew

VC vadim_lv at center-tv.net
Mon Jun 7 11:54:38 EDT 2004


Dear Harold,

> HH: The fact that the Christian approach requires more assumptions
> does not necessarily make it weaker.
Well, you studied logic, did you? More assumptions - weaker the argument. Or
is the logic inapplicable here? Tertullian's argument about the absurdity
still relied on logic.

>The most simple idea is not
> always correct. It may overlook some important fact.
Taking the NT as a fact is itself an assumption.

>The claim of
> Christianity is that God was giving new revelation through Jesus
> Christ. The claim is that he was a prophet and in fact the Messiah
> prophesied in the OT.
Only a prophet? Wow, you are very liberal. Every Muslim would agree with you
:)

>So the addition you speak of, "axiom B," could
> actually be more truth and so could help one to understand the other
> truth ("axiom A") better.
Yes, if we assume that axiom B is a truth. But, again, this is an
assumption, and makes the argument logically inferior. Substituting logic
with belief remains the only option.

Uh, and one more thing, please: exactly what line of the NT let us
understand the Tanakh better? Just any example, please.


Sincerely,

Vadim Cherny

> >  >For me the text is paramount, theology be damned.<
> >This ideal is unrealizable when we have to choose the plausible meanings
out
> >of several grammatically possible.
> >
> >>  I have run into Jews who are just as tied to theological assumptions
that
> >restrict their translations as the most unthinking Christian<
> >I was talking of a different thing. Jews assume an axiom A (TNK).
Christians
> >assume axiom A (TNK) + axiom B (NT). Therefore, Christian approach
requires
> >more assumptions, and is weaker; that doesn't mean that Jewish
> >interpretation is perfect.
>
>
> Yours,
> Harold Holmyard
>
> >
> >
> >Sincerely,
> >
> >Vadim Cherny
> >>
> >>  Karl W. Randolph.
> >>
> >>  ----- Original Message -----
> >>  From: "VC" <vadim_lv at center-tv.net>
> >>  > Dear Yigal,
> >>  >
> >>  > > from SOME Orthodox Jewish students and audiences: why should we
care
> >what
> >>  > > gentile anti-semites think about OUR Tanakh?
> >>  > While I wouldn't go to this extreme, they have a rationale. In any
> >science,
> >>  > that explanation is preferred, which requires less assumptions. Now,
> >>  > Christian scholars introduce a major assumption in interpreting the
> >Tanakh:
> >>  > namely, that it could and even should be interpreted with a fringe
> >sectarian
> >>  > text, the NT, in mind. Since Jewish scholars don't require this
> >assumption,
> >>  > their opinions should be preferred.
> >>  > This, of course, does not imply in any sense pushing someone out of
this
> >>  > field of scholarship, but rather inadmissibility of bringing a
doctrine
> >in
> >>  > the field.
> >>  >
> >>  > Best regards,
> >>  >
> >>  > Vadim Cherny
> >>  --
> >>  ___________________________________________________________
> >>  Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com
> >>  http://promo.mail.com/adsfreejump.htm
> >>
> >>  _______________________________________________
> >>  b-hebrew mailing list
> >>  b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org
> >>  http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
> >>
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >b-hebrew mailing list
> >b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org
> >http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
>
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
>




More information about the b-hebrew mailing list