Biblical Hebrew Forum

[George Athas <George.Athas AT moore.edu.au>]

This reasoning just doesn't cut it, I'm afraid. Essentially the argument is: 
"It's possible, therefore we should assume it is true." I should also 
probably add "…despite evidence for a contrary and more plausible 
explanation." This is very poor reasoning that produces a conclusion without 
any real warrant.

Also, everything seems to indicate that, in terms of cosmology, the 
Israelites were actually not all that different from those around them. Sure, 
they differed in other respects, but not in this one. Job 26.10 very clearly 
sees the חוג as something that can be traced on the surface of water, as does 
Prov 8.27. This is not a sphere. And there are pillars (Job 26.11) that rest 
on this earthly circle and hold up the sky which, if it is above the circle 
of the earth, is also presumably a circle, a la Job 22.14. There is no sphere 
here. And if anything, the LXX translators who were probably more familiar 
with the Ptolemaic ideas of cosmology, would have been more likely to 
translate חוג as 'sphere' or 'ball', but they don't. They go for the term 
gyros, which indicates a ring or circle.

The appeal to future possible linguistic discoveries is an argument of no 
substance whatsoever. You cannot appeal to non-existent evidence in order to 
override the evidence that does exist. We do not need to find future possible 
linguistic discoveries. We can simply read the biblical texts and see what 
they say. Suspending judgement on evidence which points pretty clearly to a 
conclusion we may not like is simply not good scholarship. It's 
predetermining a conclusion and then trying to find evidence that can support 
it. It's 'cart before the horse' methodology.


GEORGE ATHAS
Dean of Research,
Moore Theological College (moore.edu.au)
Sydney, Australia