Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Peter Kirk <peterkirk AT qaya.org>]

On 24/12/2004 15:34, Jim West wrote:

> At 07:36 AM 12/24/2004, you wrote:
>
> > On 24/12/2004 12:20, Jim West wrote:
> >
> > Do you have any evidence for any of these people being fictional, to 
> > support your unqualified assertion? Lack of evidence for them being 
> > historical is not accepted, as lack of evidence is never proof of 
> > non-existence.
>
>
> I dont have to prove they exist.  The person who does believe they 
> exist bears the burden of proof.
No. You made a positive and unqualified assertion of their 
non-existence. It is up to you to provide evidence for your assertion. 
If someone else makes a similar assertion of their existence, it is up 
to them to provide evidence for their assertion. If there is no 
convincing evidence either way, as is likely in this case, the only safe 
scholarly conclusion is to say that we can't be sure.

Alternatively, you can say that their non-existence is a matter of faith 
for you, just as their existence is a matter of faith for others. But in 
either case please be honest, and admit that your assertion is based on 
faith rather than scholarly evidence.

I see that your Quartz Hill School of Theology 
(http://www.theology.edu/) has a Doctrinal Statement which starts as 
follows:

> The Bible was written by men divinely inspired and is the record of 
> God's revelation of Himself to humanity. It is a perfect treasure of 
> divine instruction. It has God for its author, salvation for its end, 
> and truth, without any mixture of error for its matter.


It seems strange that you can work within the framework while believing, 
or even holding as a scholarly conclusion, that major Bible figures did 
not exist.

--
Peter Kirk
peter AT qaya.org (personal)
peterkirk AT qaya.org (work)
http://www.qaya.org/



--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.298 / Virus Database: 265.6.4 - Release Date: 22/12/2004