Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] Qoheleth

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Ron Snider <sarasotapt AT comcast.net>
  • To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Qoheleth
  • Date: Sun, 13 Sep 2009 14:30:07 -0400



Ron,

I feel you're making another assumption here, namely that if an author is
taking on the persona of someone else in writing that they must be 'lying'.
In our world today, we call it 'fiction', not 'lies', and we often consider
such literature to be among the classics (e.g., 'I, Claudius' by Robert
Graves, or 'Robinson Crusoe' by Daniel Defoe). There is a difference between
fiction and lies. Some fiction is lying, while most fiction is simply
creative writing/expression. Would you call all fiction 'lies'? Jesus told
fictional tales; would you classify them as 'lies'? If you resort to 'taking
things at face value', then I'd argue you need to read literature with a bit
more vigour and rigour, and in fact probably don't use that standard for most
fictional literature. And, in fact, it would be easy to argue that fiction is
often the vehicle of truth - in fact, most Christians would argue that for
Jesus' parables. Literature is not legislation. It is creative expression,
and author
s usually employ their creativity to get their point across. To put it in a
very crude manner, we often tell 'lies' in order to express the truth (can't
remember who originally said that).
I suspect that (there I go assuming again) you really are not advocating telling lies to express the truth...that would be a pretty convoluted system for expressing the truth. I know that in my daily experience, people (myself included) do not generally engage in lying to express the truth. I do recognize that parable are fictional stories, but as James pointed out, they are clear in their context and are not ambiguous. Your repeated use of the terms "in fact" may be facts that you accept, but are you really prepared to argue as a fact that you know what "most Christian" think or advocate?

Your question about whether there is any other biblical literature that
employs this type of technique reveals another assumption: that you require
more than one example of it to exist within a confined corpus before you
believe it might be possible. But what if there is only one example of it in
the corpus? You are demanding the evidence take a particular shape before
accepting it as evidence. This, I fear, is not sound methodology, even though
I understand the sentiment behind it. I realise there is safety in numbers,
but what are we to do if there is only one example of what you're talking
about? Something can be legitimately unique.
I must respectfully disagree, my question revealed no assumption or bias, it was merely a question about whether or not this is found in the Hebrew Bible. For one to attribute this to an entire book does beg the question as to whether or not any other such book, or even example of it, exists in the corpus. While there are things that are legitimately unique, to argue for this view, with no other precedent is not sound methodology in my opinion. That simply means that if you see it that way, and the whole world sees it another way, you have just seen something unique. However, what if the rest of the world is right and you are wrong? I am not demanding the evidence to take any shape, I just want some indisputable evidence. Any good thinker bases his conclusions on evidence, but there must be some evidence in order to evaluate.
But, to answer your question, I think there is more than example of fictional
first-person narrative in the biblical corpus: Daniel 4, and 7-12. But that
may open another can of worms which I don't wish to open. I fear you may also
disagree with me on that one, leaving us back at square one.
You are correct, I do not agree that Daniel is a late work (Maccabean period, as some assert), nor that it has a fictional author. I believe the author to be one Daniel, who was taken captive under Nebuchadnezzar, served in the Babylonian court, and who continued to serve under the Medo-Persians.

It seems that many people simply postulate unknown authors, writing lies to express the truth, and that strikes me as odd, given the fact that I do think the Bible is to be taken at face value. I recognize that every type of literary form is used within the Bible, there are parables, allegory, poetry, hyperbole, sarcasm, and the like. However, if there is any concept of inspiration involved, then it is my contention is that one must first consider it in a literal, historical sense. This is the norm for all writings, only then are there any exegetical controls. Otherwise, it is simply the whim of the reader or interpreter. A good book on the subject of hermeneutics is one by Ramm on Biblical Interpretation.
I may be just dumb enough to think that Moses wrote the Pentateuch, Solomon wrote Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and the Song of
Songs, Daniel wrote Daniel, and Paul wrote a bunch of the New Testament (although the latter is not germane to this list). OMG, what if it turns out that I was right? ;-)

Regards,

Ron Snider






Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page