Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] theories and standards

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: George Athas <George.Athas AT moore.edu.au>
  • To: B-Hebrew <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] theories and standards
  • Date: Wed, 20 May 2009 16:55:20 +1000

Gabe, I think we are essentially in agreement. Yes, I would argue that the
biblical documents are a mixture of actual history, legend, folklore, myth,
and drama. I think the ancients were probably honestly engaging in the task
of history, but they didn't have the means or standards that we today use.
Therefore, they had to use what was at their disposal: oral tradition,
popular memory, the odd document, folklore, personal experience, and
imagination. Think about Malory's 'Morte d'Arthur' - seems to work along
similar lines.

The objection I have to Karl's phrasing of the situation is that he seems to
imply that 'myth' must necessarily mean 'untrustworthy' (Karl, correct me if
I'm wrong on this). But myth may well capture the essence of reality (this is
what it is meant to do), albeit within a fictional medium. Jesus' parables
work on a similar principle: using a fictional medium to convey a real
principle or idea.

Finally, I do appreciate the parallels between Deuteronomy and Esarhaddon's
vassal treaty. I'm not sure we can attribute direct influence of one over the
other, but I can see the plausibility of both coming from a similar milieu.


Regards,

GEORGE ATHAS
Moore Theological College (Sydney, Australia)
www.moore.edu.au





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page