Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: "admittedly syncretistic Kuntillet Ajrud fragments"

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Jonathan D. Safren" <yonsaf AT beitberl.ac.il>
  • To: "Ian Hutchesson" <mc2499 AT mclink.it>, "Biblical Hebrew" <b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
  • Subject: Re: "admittedly syncretistic Kuntillet Ajrud fragments"
  • Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 11:38:01 +0200


Ian Hutchesson writes:
>
> The pundits must realize that the earliest recognisable biblical text is
from
> Qumran. Was any biblical text written long before that?

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
The earliet manuscripts of the Classical Greek and Roman authors, poets,
philosophers and playwrights date from the Middle Ages. Are we to conclude
from this that the dialogues of Plato, the histories of Xenophon and
Herodotus, and the plays of Sophocles and Aristophanes were not written long
before that?
BTW, the Nash Papyrus was written long before Qumran. Isn't that a biblical
text?

> >
> Syncretism is the equating of one god with another, or at least the
absorption
> of traits from one to another. Polytheism is visible, but is syncretism?
>

There seems to be an artificial limitation here of the theological
possibilities: monotheism, polytheism, syncretism. I haven't seen
henotheism, or monolatry, mentioned. True, henotheism isn't monotheism; but
then it isn't syncretism either.

Jonathan D. Safren
Dept. of Biblical Studies
Beit Berl College





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page