Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: Purpose for discussion

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Paul Zellmer" <zellmer AT digitelone.com>
  • To: "b-hebrew, list" <b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
  • Subject: Re: Purpose for discussion
  • Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2000 17:48:01 +0800


Actually, Professor, I believe there was more than one question here.
Let me start with the Hebrew knowledge question. The list description
states: "Knowledge of Hebrew is assumed, but belittling someone for
their lack of skill or ridiculing someone for making a mistake--even a
basic one--is unacceptable." Actually, there are very few that come out
and say they do not know Hebrew. There are many who admit that they are
weak in Hebrew knowledge, and quite a few of those have indicated that
they have joined the list to work on remedying that situation.

The list, as you know, having been on it for several years, is open
because of the history of both it and the B-Greek list. It is
specifically designed to encourage study of the Hebrew Bible by all,
amateur and professional. And, while members are expected to support
arguments with evidence, there is no assumption that one needs to be a
scholar, or that the evidence need be drawn directly from primary
sources.

As for the seeming interest in the historical questions, what I have
observed during the past several months is very little true examination
of the questions. What *has* occurred is that one side would make state
a position or two and another side would pooh-pooh it, and the posts
would fly between a half dozen people for a week or more without the
addition of any new material. And almost all the material that has been
put forward are old arguments that have been hashed and rehashed for
year and decades. There has been no real movement to resolution of the
questions because the tools just don't exist among all the participants.
And, as I pointed out in my original post, this forum is not designed to
have the scholars which are necessary to resolve such questions.

Now, for your "starter" question: Why did I address Ian and you? (You
apparently ignored the et al., which could [and actually did] include
the person that you wanted me to ask.) Actually, I addressed Ian
specifically because he is normally the one who first brings up these
subjects. The person ..., oh, let's stop beating around the bush!
Everybody knows you were referring to Peter! So... Peter reacts to the
stimulus like he does in several areas of study on this list. And it is
apparent from his continuing the threads that he feels (probably
justifiably) that his viewpoint is not really being considered by Ian or
you or others that line up on that side of the question. So I didn't
specifically ask Peter what his point was for continuing the discussion;
I think I've got that one figured out. You, Ian, and others, on the
other hand, continue to ask for evidence that Peter just doesn't seem to
have a complete handle on. Nor should he, as he is a linguist and
translator as opposed to a historian. Nor should the vast majority of
us on this list. So I ask you, because I really can't figure out your
purposes: What do you hope to accomplish with these extended
discussions? If it's scholarly debate of the historical questions, I'm
not sure we amateurs can give that to you. If it's to hear the
emotionally loaded counter-positions of people who base a lot of their
arguments on faith that God actually can and does intervene in the lives
of people, then I question both the discussions' value and their
appropriateness for this forum. Such a purpose would be much less than
respectful, which as you know, is a basic guideline for us here.

Therefore I will not redirect my question. I really would like to know.

Yours,

Paul

----- Original Message -----
From: "Niels Peter Lemche" <npl AT teol.ku.dk>
To: "'Paul Zellmer'" <zellmer AT digitelone.com>
Cc: <b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
Sent: Monday, February 14, 2000 3:41 PM
Subject: RE: Purpose for discussion


> Just one question for a strater. Why are we the persons you address
and not
> the person who have been so outspoken in favour of a rearrangement of
> chronology--biblical and ANE--with such important consequences, yet
almost
> without the slightest hint of evidence in support? And what about
Hebrew?
> Several of the contributors have mentioned that they do not read
Hebrew. And
> if it is a Biblical Hebrew list exclusively, why an open list and not
a list
> limited to the professionals in this business, i.e. the Hebrew Bible?
>
> I have nothing against discussing Hebrew as a language in a
professional
> way. I do it every day at the university. But if you overlook the
postings
> from the last few months, you will see that it is really the
historical
> questions that interest people. And I think that I am excused for not
> leaving the battle ground to evangelical people who know the truth--or
so it
> seems. So maybe you should back to your mail and readdress it to the
right
> people.
>
> NPL






Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page