Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Thomas L. Thompson" <tlt AT teol.ku.dk>]

I am much botherd by the direction of discussions regarding historicity. Not
only are they rerunning old discussions from the 50s and 60s, but there is
little discussion of the biblical tradiition and of its own meaning and
intention or of its significance to our questions regarding historicity.
There is an assumption, for example, that there is a chronology for the
Joshua stories that can be translated into our historical-chronological
system--and here we take up patterns of thought that were very common among
the early writers like Africanus and Eusebius. This first assumption however
is very difficult to associate with the Book of Joshua or with any writer of
biblical texts. Secondly there is a widespread assumption that we all know
what the Bible is discussing with this literature; nevertheless, we insist
it has ("could have") an historical translation if we were only clever
enough to change this silk purse back into a sow's ear. Finally, I don't
find much concern with comparing the biblical traditions with the history of
Palestine as we know it. Picking out names or single texts that have
survived and thinking we are dealing with historical research is at best
something that Pooh might do; he was a bear of little understanding.
Thomas

Thomas L. Thompson
Professor, University of Copenhagen