Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] Biblical Historicity ( Amalek) - END OF THREAD

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "George Athas" <gathas AT hotkey.net.au>
  • To: "b-hebrew" <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Cc: "David N. da Silva" <huyxh8s02 AT sneakemail.com>
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Biblical Historicity ( Amalek) - END OF THREAD
  • Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 10:42:46 +1000

To all members of B-Hebrew:

The topic of Biblical Historicity is beyond the permitted subject matter of
B-Hebrew. The moderators sometimes allow it because it is pertinent to other
issues which are certainly within the parameters of B-Hebrew subject matter.
However, the issue of divine inspiration of the Bible is certainly not within
the parameters of B-Hebrew. As such, we request that this thread be
discontinued. Please keep all threads related to academic discussion of
Biblical Hebrew and Biblical texts, rather than matters of faith.

Your co-operation in this matter will be much appreciated.



On behalf of the B-Hebrew Staff,

GEORGE ATHAS
Fellow Chairman, B-Hebrew Forum


----- Original Message -----
From: Brian Roberts
To: David N. da Silva
Cc: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2004 6:32 AM
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Biblical Historicity ( Amalek)


It's easy to bandy about descriptives like "fundamentalist", because it
definitely rings true in a way, but when it comes to defining what
constitutes a fundamentalist, why don't we let them define themselves,
and use their own definition? Surely someone of that persuasion has
come up with a working definition.



On Monday, August 23, 2004, at 04:10 PM, David N. da Silva wrote:

> Peter Kirk writes:
>
>> But the statement of mine which you
>> quote relates only to "anyone who
>> believes in the "Divine Origin" of the
>> Torah". Are you saying that there
>> are such people who reject the
>> fundamentalist position?
>
> I don't know if there are, but there certainly could be. God, wishing
> to bring the children of Israel from Egypt to Canaan, could have
> transported them in a flash, but chose rather to bring about the same
> result by speaking a few words to a shepherd with a speech
> impediment. He allowed his chosen implements to work, sometimes in a
> fallible way - mistakes he could have prevented from happening, but
> chose not to. How would such a being, given his desire that a book
> should exist, set about the process of bringing it into existence? I
> would say that to suppose he would simply dictate the text, is like
> supposing he would simply transport the Hebrews to Canaan. He just
> doesn't work that way. It is more consistent with his known actions
> to work through humans, and allow them to be human. It seems rather
> to suppose a certain crudeness and lack of subtlety to suppose he would
> dictate the text. But this does not make the text not of divine
> origin - any more than it was M
> osheh, rather than Yahweh, who brought the children of Yisra'El from
> Egypt.
>
> If a fundamentalist is one who thinks that the text was dictated by
> God, then I would say it is certainly possible to believe in the
> divine origin of the text without being a fundamentalist.
>
> David Nunes da Silva
> --------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
>

_______________________________________________
b-hebrew mailing list
b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page