Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] how scholars debate controversial issues

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: davidfentonism AT aim.com
  • To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] how scholars debate controversial issues
  • Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2007 21:05:53 -0400

Dear All, Allowing that I did not express my thoughts well contextually
on the question of a dialectic between scholars with a b-hebrew interest and
Bible believers with a b-hebrew interest, let me here elucidate that (a) I
believe it is entirely possible when the discourse is limited to word
meanings but would likely (b) turn to unrest as the discourse shifts to
ideation of the b-hebrew. Not in all cases, of course, but often enough the
critical scholars would find the believer-scholars’ take on b-hebrew ideation
as offensive, proselytizing, or attacking the faith-less interpretation on
the grounds that it lacks a dimensions exclusively derived from (a) PaRDeS
and (b) the Ruach Elohiym. Conversely, believers are likely to find the
interrogative tone of critical scholars—often inclusive of sarcasm,
hyperbole, ridicule, etc. as it relates to belief as irrational or
mysticism—offensive on a frequent basis. Relative to the language of
b-hebrew, I agree entirely it might be understood by anyone using the ancient
cultural Semitic context, its thought system, and the Early, Middle and Late
scripts of the Hebrews. I meant to speak to the viewpoint of the “choir”
which holds to these other dimensions of understanding b-hebrew that
transcend word meaning which are revealed via PaRDeS and impartation from the
Ruach haKodesh. For the believer scholars, no amount of rhetoric, even when
it manages to be politely done, is ever going to overcome the mental and
positional divide between the two communities of scholars despite their
shared interest in a single text. It is an oil and water mixture. However, if
the discussion remains at a relatively superficial level, then the dialectic
can continue for as long as the parties want. How satisfying it will be for
one or all parties is another matter beyond my purview here. I ask your
pardon for any confusion due to my prior unexplained messages on this
narrowly framed question and thank you, all, for the opportunity to explain.
Shalom, David Fenton ----------------------------
Gal. 27-29: For as many as have had a tevilah into Moshiach have clothed
yourselves with Moshiach. There is not Yehudi nor Yevani (Greek), there is
not eved (servant) nor ben chorin (freedman), there is not zachar (male) nor
nekevah (female), for you are all echad in Moshiach Yehoshua/Yeshua. And, if
you belong to Moshiach (YESHAYAH 53:10), then you are of the ZERAH of Avraham
Avinu, you are yoreshim (heirs) according to the havtachah (promise).

________________________________________________________________________
Check Out the new free AIM(R) Mail -- 2 GB of storage and industry-leading
spam and email virus protection.




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page