Biblical Hebrew Forum

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

Peter:

I mentioned the what, you emphasize the why.

I think there is a lot more than just to prove worthy 
of future life.

**Sigh*** You oversimplify what I say.
And I think you know it.

Karl W. Randolph.

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Peter Kirk" <peter AT qaya.org>
> 
> 
> On 16/03/2006 17:22, Karl Randolph wrote:
> > Peter:
> >
> > You're right for jumping all over me for a poor choice of words. 
> > What I meant was not "important", but "relevant".
> >
> > Further, I used the New Testament only as an illustration that it 
> > follows the same pattern as Tanakh, namely not to dwell on the 
> > afterlife.
> >
> > After all, eating and drinking are important, but not relevant in 
> > a discussion of Hebrew philology. Likewise a discussion of the 
> > details of the afterlife is not relevant to a discussion of how 
> > to live to be worthy in the present life. That's why neither 
> > Tanakh nor the New Testament have much to say on the afterlife.
> >
> >
> Thank you, Karl. What you say now is certainly an improvement. But 
> you still seem to assume that the NT is "a discussion of how to 
> live to be worthy in the present life". While that is not wrong, it 
> is only a partial picture giving a distorted emphasis. Even the 
> Sermon on the Mount, the passage most focused on ethics, is full of 
> promises of the Kingdom of God. Better, for the NT if not the 
> Tanakh, would be "guidelines on how to live in the present life to 
> be counted worthy in the future life", which explains why the NT 
> has a lot to say about attaining the future life although little 
> about its details.
> 
> -- Peter Kirk
> peter AT qaya.org (personal)
> peterkirk AT qaya.org (work)
> http://www.qaya.org/

>


-- 
___________________________________________________
Play 100s of games for FREE! http://games.mail.com/