Biblical Hebrew Forum

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

Response to Paul Zellmer who wrote among other things



> I have just finished reading the Rabinovich article that Jim West called
> attention to a few days ago.  (Thanks, Jim, for forwarding it to me.)  I
> found it to be an example of solid reporting without the editorial
> comments that I have found in most modern-day news articles.  I came to
> this conclusion despite the use of "minimalist", because its intended
> audience appears to be those to whom the term would be no more emotional
> than, say, "banana" or "commentator."
> 
I read it too. It is inoffensive and for a newspaper article well-informed.
Have no problem with it other than I may disagree because of scholarly
differences. The remarks the quote from me and Ian H. has nothing to do with
the content of the JP article.

> Rabinovich does state that, "Perched at the edge of a new millennium,
> revisionists are boldly proposing to rewrite basic tenets of a faith
> that has been the spiritual underpinning of much of Western civilization
> for the past two millennia."  Having seen literally hundreds of messages
> on the list along these lines during the past few month, I am not a bit
> surprised by the statements by Ian and Prof Lemche quoted above.  If
> this is even in part the purpose for such "discussions," then I, for
> one, find these topics to be as out-of-line on this list as were the
> infamous homilies which resulted in so many of the ones of Jewish faith
> to leave a few years ago.  And the fault lies on both sides of the
> arguments, because both sides seemed determined to change the other's
> basis of faith.
> 
If faith is based on the conviction that something really happened, it is
not a change brought about by me and my colleagues, it has been part of the
historical-critical agenda for the last two-hundred years. If it is the idea
that something has to have happened exactly as written in order to be true,
it is a modern concept where historicity is the big mantra. Let me
illustrate by mentioning Num 24:24 in my own paraphrase: 'And the Kittim
shal come on their ships and they shall afflict Asyyria and they shall
afflict Eber..'  , Luther took it to be a prophecy about the Romans, David
Ilgen 250 years later (end of 17th century) to be a vaticinium ex eventu
referring to the Macedonians and Alexander. Who is right, Luther or Ilgen?
To Luther this was not something that had happened in the past but something
that was going to happen in the future. The prophecy did not become less
'historical' for that. For Ilgen, it was history and therefore needed to
have happened. I hope that western cinvilization and personal faith is
better founded than on the eventuality that something really happened.

> I am by no means saying that these items should not be discussed.  Most
> of my days include discussions comparing and contrasting personal
> beliefs.  But this is not the forum where these discussions should take
> place.  Less I be misunderstood, I am not stating that commentaries such
> as those that Jonathan  Bailey expressed a desire for are out of place.
> Nor is it the tone of the posts that I am complaining about, although I
> have found them to be much less than scholarly or gracious.  What I am
> pointing out is that a clear characteristic of this list and the b-greek
> list has been an openness for participation of all faiths as long as the
> discussions do not center around the differences of the faiths.  
> 
Faith is only relevant as subject if it blocks the mind frrom an open
discussion about things that are considered religious important. But never
forget how easy a discussion deteriorates if religion enters. I always
remember Melanchton's remark on his death-bed, that at least he was now
escaping from the rabies theologicarum (I hope I quoted him correctly).

> This is
> not the characteristic of the recent discussions, and it is a sad state
> of affairs in which we find ourselves.
> 
> Unless someone can clearly point out where Rabinovich's summary is
> inaccurate, I feel that I am in line when I ask Jonathan Robie as
> list-owner and his three co-chairs to make some clear statement as to
> the appropriateness of these discussions.
Well Rabinowich's summary has not really been discussed.

NPL


> Still waiting for the millenium to arrive NEXT January 1 and reminding
> Ian that he was several hours behind the times compared to us in eastern
> Asia,
> 
> Paul
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to b-hebrew as: npl AT teol.ku.dk
> To unsubscribe, forward this message to
> $subst('Email.Unsub')
> To subscribe, send an email to join-b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu.
>