Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Karl Randolph" <kwrandolph AT email.com>]

Kevin:

One of the aspects of Hellenism is an 
insistence that all fit into nice little 
categories, fully understandable and 
understood. But that is not the Biblical 
pattern.

Now I'm not a theologian, just a linguist 
and not the world's greatest of even that, 
so I am quite willing to say that there are 
passages that raise questions that I am 
unable to answer.

We know, however, that the ancient Hebrew 
way of thinking as recorded in Tanakh 
emphasized action over form whereas 
Hellenism (and Greek philosophy before it) 
emphasized form over function; and history 
over logic whereas Hellenistic thought 
looked for ahistoric logic. Kevin is looking 
for a Hellenistic interpretation of Exodus, 
but ancient Hebrews would have been looking 
at the action implied by the words used 
without trying to answer what the exact form 
took. Even the claim that this description 
is "metaphorical" gives a nod to Hellenistic 
thought.

The theologians tell us that in the life 
that is to come that we will *see* God, but 
nowhere describes what we should expect to 
see. It is said that God has a face, but so 
do buildings, animals, armies, so that is 
hardly a descriptive term. God brought 
Israel out of Egypt with an upraised arm and 
outstretched hand, but no one on either side 
saw either. All they saw were the actions 
that these idioms point to.

In short, Kevin is a Hellenist and demands 
that we interpret Tanakh according to 
Hellenistic principles. That is the wrong 
way to do it.

Karl W. Randolph.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Kevin Graham" <kevlds AT hotmail.com>
> 
> 
> == The metaphorical palm blocks Moshe's vision until *Yah* has passed by
> *NOT* his glory
> 
...

-- 
___________________________________________________________
Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com
http://promo.mail.com/adsfreejump.htm