Biblical Hebrew Forum

["George Athas" <gathas AT mail.usyd.edu.au>]

Silver Eiger wrote:

> [...] There is actually no reasonable reason to assert the
> Bible is wrong. Though there may be some higly scholarly reasons. It is no 
> good
> to be dogmatic in this regard too. The scanty evidence that is presently
> available, may as well be just inadequately interpreted. Maybe there is no 
> point
> in fighting too seriously about this. Sorry for such unscholarly views.

I think we need to clarify here what the Bible is or isn't "wrong" in. The 
word "wrong" is
quite emotive and carries with it a bit of unnecessary baggage which can make 
unnecessary
sweeping statements. We might be better off saying that the Bible is 
"historically
inaccurate" or "unreliable" or "unverified", but this does not make it 
"wrong". Does the
historical inaccuracy or unreliability or non-verifiability of the Bible make 
its theology
wrong? Or its artistry wrong? Or its spiritual authority wrong? At the other 
end of the
spectrum, does the historical accuracy of the Bible make its theology right? 
Or its
artistry right? Or its spiritual authority right? The description "wrong" 
puts a strike
against all of these aspects whether one intends it or not.

We need to be careful about the way we phrase our statements because we may 
be saying
things that we never intended to say. And such statements can tread on a lot 
of people's
toes and cross their sensitivities unnecessarily.

Best regards,
George Athas
 Dept of Semitic Studies,
 University of Sydney
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Tel Dan Inscription Website
http://members.xoom.com/gathas/teldan.htm
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
< gathas@ mail.usyd.edu.au >