Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Stephen Shead <sshead.email AT gmail.com>]

Well, thank you all who contributed to this conversation. It has been challenging, illuminating and very beneficial for me.

A few words to Rolf: First, I'm aware of Kilpatrick, have taken on board your comments on his conclusions, and frankly think they have very little impact on the arguments and evidence I have presented. No doubt you disagree.

Now, on your final posts today: You have now decided to take the high moral ground over me and other people. Apparently you have never remained closed to either possibility, but have objectively and impartially weighed the evidence, whereas others of us (me included, I presume?) have been totally closed to the YHWH possibility. Really?? How do you know that? We are all simply drawing what we consider to be the most probable conclusion from the available evidence. I can respect that in people like Jonathan, even though we disagree.

You even have the nerve to suggest (unless your comment directed to me has no relation to me specifically) that I am looking at the textual evidence through my "religious glasses", rather than allowing that "textual evidence that contradict [my] dogmas can exist". And then, in your final answer to Jerry, you at last come out with an entirely religiously-motivated "explanation" of what must have happened, despite still having produced no hard evidence. Not that I'm particularly surprised: I was aware that what you said is standard Jehovah's Witness doctrine, and that the extant NT manuscripts are unacceptable to your doctrinal position. I have no problem with that. What does gall me, however, is your moral high ground on supposed religious impartiality. Yes, these issues have relevance to my religious convictions. But if you look over my posts, I think you will find no theological speculation to match your post to Jerry.

Finally, you still haven't answered my questions to you, even when I made them clear and brief, you insist on using question-begging phrases like asking "why the NT writers should delete the name of God", and again repeated your "nobody has given any plausible reason" claim. Was mine not plausible? Oh, wait, you didn't respond.

And now a word to the moderators: As one of the main perpetrat... I mean, participants in this debate, thank you for cutting us so much slack and allowing us to digress where it seemed relevant. I hope we have been sufficiently respectful and reasonable in listening and interacting with others. Apologies to all if I have pushed things where I should have let them lie! (Including, perhaps, in this email...)

Best wishes to all,

Stephen Shead.