Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Bill Rea <cctr114 AT it.canterbury.ac.nz>]

Bruce wrote:-

>However, the approach Samuel represents to you takes account of the text as 
>it 
>stands and it doesn't have to posit lost sources and traditions for the 
>which 
>no evidence is presented it seems, to explain the uncomfortable 
>discrepancies.

I'm not saying it's not reasonable. I was griping about raising your
personal belief about the text to the level of fact. That's was Samuel
was doing. 


>Secondly, our Samuel is attempting to see the text as it was in Judaism 
>rather 
>than imposing a late Second Temple - even Christian - agenda upon it. 
>Thirdly, 
>it is an approach which need not exclude faith, whereas your position seems 
>to
                                                         ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 
>depends on faith and a particular view of historicity to underpin its 
>validity.

Er, um, my position? Exactly what was my position? I don't remember
giving one.




Bill Rea, Information Technology Dept., Canterbury  University  \_ 
E-Mail b dot rea at it dot canterbury dot ac dot nz             </   New 
Phone   64-3-364-2331, Fax     64-3-364-2332                   /)  Zealand 
Unix Systems Administrator                                    (/'