Biblical Hebrew Forum

["JAMES CHRISTIAN READ" <JCR128 AT student.apu.ac.uk>]

Joel wrote:
I think Shoshanna has made clear that she accepts these traditions as
equal in authority with the written text. So from her perspective
there is not a need to defend this position with the written text. She
only needs to come to terms with what insight this gives her about the
written text. The first problem you raise is a theological one.
Punishing the children for the act of the parents is not unheard of
and even mentioned elsewhere in the Torah. The second problem assumes
a strictly chronological order to the entire text. There is no reason
to assume this and understanding the text to contain a collection of
individual stories that may overlap solves this nicely.
END QUOTE

Ever thought of being a politician? I like it how you 
insist on a purely chronological order when it gives 
you the opportunity to point out conflicts with the 
creation account but when it gives you a chance to 
desstroy biblical truth you are quite happy to 
flagrantly disregard it. Very scientific!

Joel wrote:
You got me James. Dead to rights. I am an uneducated drunken
Babylonian Druid hellbent on destroying judeaochristian faith. Get the
stake and light the bonfire. Hurry before I sacrifice some children or
something :)
END QUOTE

lol. I like your sense of humour ;-)

Joel wrote:
Which is why anyone trained in linguistics or textual criticism
accepts traditional views.
END QUOTE

Standing behind other 'linguists' doesn't prove your 
understanding any better it just goes to confirm my 
suspicions that you are not taking the text at face 
value but following along with the usual conspiracy 
theories that have become popular in text criticism. 
I'll bet you're a supporter of the common trend of 
questioning the traditional authorship of every single 
text you come across as well. Could you imagine in 
2000 years if Terry Pratchett's novels were being 
scrutised and people were making PhD's out of going to 
extreme lengths that his novels actually had multiple 
authors of much later periods? How sad would that be?

Joel wrote:
As opposed to traditional views? Have you heard of this thing called science?
END QUOTE

Well of course I have. And I have quite a few 
qualifications to prove it. I wasn't born a Christian 
and I don't follow traditions because they were force 
fed down my throat since early childhood. I first 
became interested in the bible at about 22 years of age 
and immediately gave up my place at medical school so 
that I could go and study the bible in its original 
languages and I can assure you that since then I have 
put every single doctrine to the test to see if it 
really does have origin with the bible. I swear no 
allegiance to any church or earthly organisation and 
am only interested in what the bible has to say for 
itself. There is no reason to doubt the traditional 
views we are talking about as they are strongly 
supported by the text itself. Therefore, unfortunately 
for you where both tradition and text seem to agree the 
oweness of the proof lies on your shoulders whether you 
like it or not. You have up until now not offered a 
single comment on the internal evidence from Proverbs 
8:22-24 which contradicts your view and your theory 
so please tell me, where is your scienctific method now
? Because all I see is you flagrantly disregarding all 
linguistic and textual evidence that contradicts your 
contraversial theories. I don't mind listening to good 
contraversial theories and their proofs but what is 
lacking here is proofs and until you start offering 
something a little more concrete than pagan text 
comparisons then it is highly unlikely that you are 
going to get a listening ear from those that recognise 
that the bible defines itself as distinct, separate 
and uniquely superior to all pagan texts, ideas and 
philosophies.

Joel wrote:
Yes let's stay away from contemporary documents.
END QUOTE

If you don't appreciate that the torah itself staunchly 
warns its readers to stay away from pagan teachings 
then yes perhaps it would be best if you stayed away 
from them otherwise you might start confusing them as 
something to do with the bible creation account.

Joel wrote:
Darn. I'd hate to think something new.
END QUOTE

No. Please do keep presenting your theories. But either

a) back them up with solid internal evidence
b) be prepared for the criticism your contraversial 
are likely to provoke

Finally, I am still waiting to see how you deal with 
Proverbs 8:22-24. If you continue to avoid the issue 
it will be clearly that you haven't properly thought 
this theory of your out.

James C. Read
UK




l pagan texts, ideas and 
philosophies.

Joel wrote:
Yes let's stay away from contemporary documents.
END QUOTE

If you don't appreciate that the torah itself staunchly 
warns its readers to stay away from pagan teachings 
then yes perhaps it would be best if you stayed away 
from them otherwise you might start confusing them as 
something to do with the bible creation account.

Joel wrote:
Darn. I'd hate to think something new.
END QUOTE

No. Please do keep presenting your theories. But either

a) back them up with solid internal evidence
b) be prepared for the criticism your contraversial
are likely to provoke

Finally, I am still waiting to see how you deal with
Proverbs 8:22-24. If you continue to avoid the issue