Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Jack Kilmon" <jkilmon AT historian.net>]

--------------------------------------------------
From: "K Randolph" <kwrandolph AT gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, August 11, 2010 2:33 PM
To: <JimStinehart AT aol.com>
Cc: "B-Hebrew" <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] TD(L

> Either the Bible is accurate history, and much of secular history not 
> worth
> the paper it is written on, as some of us believe, or the Bible is
> ahistorical legend and secular history is accurate, as others of us 
> believe.
> This is simple logic applied to standard linguistics.


There is a middle ground between these two choices, Karl.  The two choices 
rise from modern historical standards and neglects that ancient authors did 
not follow those rules.  Biblical authors were not relating history and what 
actually happened but what that happening MEANT.  It was standard praxis to 
ornament and exaggerate to relay the importance of an event that would 
otherwise be ignored.  It was also standard to create a fiction surrounding 
an event if that fiction relayed what the author saw as a "greater" truth. 
This is the basis of midrash and theologoumenon.  At this point, however, I 
may be getting dangerously close to being off topic and will leave 
discussions of what is historical and what is not for another list.

Best regards,

Jack

Jack Kilmon
San Antonio, TX