Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Peter Kirk <peter AT qaya.org>]

On 14/11/2006 23:06, Yitzhak Sapir wrote:

> ...  Also, skepticism about the historical reality
> underlying the Biblical claims is not a theological position.  Theology is the
> study of the divine and the study of history does not need to be related to
> the study of the divine (unless that is a theological position you hold).  So
> the position that the book of Ezra must be historically accurate because it is
> in the divinely sanctioned canon of books is a theological position.  But the
> view that the book of Ezra is not necessarily accurate is not a theological
> position.  To put the point further, the book of Hebrews may be in your
> theological view, a 1st century book allowing us to see the views of the Jews
> at that time.  But for me, it is just a book, ...

Yitzhak, I agree with most of what you are saying in this message. It is 
important to distinguish between the meaning intended for example by 
Haggai and later interpretations of his book.

But on the point above I must disagree with you. You are taking a 
theological position by rejecting the accuracy of Ezra or the authority 
of Hebrews. It may be a negative theological position, like that of the 
atheist who takes the position that there is no God, or perhaps that of 
the agnostic who takes the position that the existence of God cannot be 
proved or disproved, but it is still the position you take on a 
theological issue and so a theological position.

--
Peter Kirk
E-mail:  peter AT qaya.org
Blog:    http://speakertruth.blogspot.com/
Website: http://www.qaya.org/