Biblical Hebrew Forum

["George Athas" <gathas AT hotkey.net.au>]

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