[b-hebrew] Dinah raped?

dwashbur at nyx.net dwashbur at nyx.net
Mon Jul 23 00:34:26 EDT 2007


I would suggest that what has advanced is our hermeneutic, and we now understand that 
things like the pro-slavery interpretations were simply wrong based on sound interpretive 
principles.  All interpretations are not equally valid, and the fact that someone has used the 
Bible to support something like slavery does not make that use legitimate.

On 23 Jul 2007 at 7:31, Yigal Levin wrote:

> Very good question, Karl, and probably way too philosophical for this list. 
> But let's take a little example, which I hope nobody on this list considers 
> to be contemporary. In the decades leading up to the American Civil War, 
> people on both sides of the pro and anti-slavery debate, many of whom were 
> God-fearing Christians and Jews, used and quoted the Bible to support their 
> views. Now, 150 years later, all (I hope) civilized people consider slavery 
> to be abhorrent, and to quote the Bible to support it would be considered to 
> be perverted.
> 
> No doubt that human values have evolved and (hopefully) advanced over time. 
> The Bible has had an immense influence on this evolution, but the Bible has 
> also constantly been reinterpreted over time in pace with that evolution. 
> The Bible is a huge collection of works, and every generation "connects" to 
> those parts in which it finds meaning and comfort. In part, this is what 
> makes the Bible relevant to so many millions of people, thousands of years 
> after it was written.
> 
> Yigal Levin
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "K Randolph" <kwrandolph at gmail.com>
> To: "b-hebrew" <b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org>
> Sent: Monday, July 23, 2007 5:14 AM
> Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Dinah raped?
> 
> 
> > Yigal:
> >
> > "We must be very careful of assuming that the authors of the Bible shared 
> > the
> > same views on "morality" that modern-day Jews and Christians do. This is
> > especially true for matters of sexual behavior."
> >
> > The question is, how much of the modern mores are based on Biblical
> > ones? In other words, how well have people understood the Biblical
> > ones and translated them into their own? Or how much of the modern
> > understanding are taken from contemporary mores and eisegeted back
> > into Hebrew?
> >
> > Karl W. Randolph.
> > _______________________________________________
> > b-hebrew mailing list
> > b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org
> > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
> >
> >
> >
> > -- 
> > No virus found in this incoming message.
> > Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> > Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.10.12/910 - Release Date: 
> > 21/07/2007 15:52
> >
> > 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
> 


Dave Washburn
But I can't say Sylvester, George!



More information about the b-hebrew mailing list