Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Niels Peter Lemche <npl AT teol.ku.dk>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ruthy & Baruch [SMTP:alster AT comandcom.com]
> Sent: Sunday, 19 December, 1999 19:56
> To:   Biblical Hebrew
> Subject:      Re: Re[6]: JEPD Evidence
> 
> 
> 
> Niels Peter Lemche wrote:
> 
> <snip>
> 
> > In a scholarly discourse, anything that relates to the supranatural must
> be
> > left out of consideration. And I do not care whether or not you will
> agree,
> > but I would fail and probably any scholar worth his or her salt would do
> the
> > same if a student here wrote a thesis and included such ideas as the
> ones
> > you have been advocating in this mail and other similar answers to this
> > list. Try to get focused on the subject of scholarship. I do not want to
> be
> > more rude than necessary but a scolarly discussion belongs to a
> scholarly
> > list and a discussion about personal religious sentiments and
> convictions
> > belong in a religious list where such subjects are discussed.
> 
> Please do not take this question as rude, Prof. Lemche, but would you have
> "failed" D.I. Block's book on Ezekiel because of his "theological
> implications" of the various oracles?  Even though I personally - as an
> Orthodox Jew - do not share many of his religious beliefs, I still see
> this
> as definitely a scholarly work.  And what about George Mendenhall's _The
> Tenth Generation_, where he discusses a certain miraculous incident which
> he says happened in Turkey?  Even though it might be nice for some of us
> to
> do away with religious beliefs in scholarly discussion, I think the
> examples I just gave prove that this is not a wise thing to do.
> 
> Kol Tuv,
> Baruch Alster
> Kochav Ya`akov, Israel
> 
        [Niels Peter Lemche]  
        There is a difference between concluding from an analysis that there
are certain theological implications. In the final chapter in Prelude to
Israel's Past I made the point that from the vantage point of theology, the
Bible cannot lie. Therefore--again from a theologian's vantage point--it
must be the reader who misunderstands what he reads and asks wrong
questions. Since the Bible has not very much to do with what happened in the
real world--and don't force me to explain, I have done that in scores of
places in writing--its message must be of a different kind. I have
continuously been addressing this last point in lectures over the last year
or so, lately at Columbia and at the SBL meeting in Boston.

        Mendenhall--well, I was once invited to the home of Benjamin Mazar
to discuss Mendenhall, and I would not like to mention the conclusion we
agreed on. In my Early Israel I characterized The Tenth Genneration as
rather peculiar.

        All is well that ends well,

        NPL