[b-hebrew] Mythoi kai Kerygmata

Barry nebarry at verizon.net
Wed Jul 21 12:49:52 EDT 2010

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Arnaud Fournet" <fournet.arnaud at wanadoo.fr>
To: "Barry" <nebarry at verizon.net>; <b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 2010 10:20 AM
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Nooo! Don't go!

I had stated that I was going to leave this be, but felt that some sort of 
response was necessary here.

> Hmhm.
> Anyway I'm not one of "many students".
> This is a forum among listees here, as far as I understand it.
> You're not "teaching" me anything, we are discussing on a par.
> Hope this helps.
> A.
> ***

I must admit I was a bit surprised at the, shall we say, vehemence of your 
response, but I suspect a "world view" clash here.  As for myself, I always 
consider myself a student, and I believe that anyone at anytime may have 
something to teach me, if only I'm willing to listen.

>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mythology

> Wikipedia is just a huge heap of amateurish crap trying to masquerade as 
> knowledge.
> I'm afraid you missed an opportunity to convince me you are professional 
> and competent.
> I would rather consider a reference to a relevant book written by some 
> competent individual.
> So far, erh, well, to put it short, well: none... nothing...

Sigh.  The reason I picked the Wiki article was because it was Q&E.  Did you 
think I didn't vet the article before I posted it?  It happens to reflect 
the "consensus academicus" on the subject.  Some of the ideas may be new to 
you, but that doesn't mean that they're new or non-standard.

As for Wikipedia, I used to think the same, until I interacted with other 
academics on the issue, and actually started reading some of the articles in 
subject areas I knew something about.  Now, I wouldn't recommend it anymore 
than I would recommend any encyclopedia, but the interesting thing is the 
self correcting nature of the articles.  It can at least be a place to 
start, just like any other secondary source.

If you like, here is an article from the Columbia Encyclopedia:


Anything here inconsistent with the Wiki article?  Myth isn't so much about 
content, but use.

> lol
> Anyway the forum is about "the discussion of Biblical Hebrew language and 
> literature."
> I don't buy your "hit-and-run" rhetorics about throwing some huge 
> provocative pseudo-truth and then expect that huge crap to be left 
> unanswered.
> Dirty tricks for retarded rabbits of the day, aren't they?
> Hope this helps again.

Again, you are entitled to your opinion, but if you think that this is a 
discussion *inter pares*, you might want to act like it.

> By the way, do you have anything relevant to say about "Biblical Hebrew 
> language and literature"?

Certainly -- our understanding of "myth" is integral to our understanding of 
the Hebrew Bible.  Classical and Biblical scholars have a certain agreement 
on what they mean by the terminology, and clarifying is usually helpful.

N.E. Barry Hofstetter
Classics and Bible Instructor, TAA
(2010 Savatori Excellence in Education Winner)
Mentor, TNARS


More information about the b-hebrew mailing list