...
I'll let the words of Bart Ehrman make my point:
"No wonder that most of today's NT scholars, by their own admission, are not capable of rendering independent judgments concerning textual variants preserved in the tradition (I except my NT colleagues here, by the way; and they will for the most part agree, I think, with my opinion on this point). It strikes me as a pity that most doctoral candidates in New Testament are not trained even to use the apparatus of the standard Greek text, the Nestle-Aland 27th ed., that most divinity school students are not taught the fundamental problems of the textual tradition that they are expected to teach or preach, and that most of the laypersons in the churches to which the graduates of divinity school go are left completely unaware of the problems of the texts of the books that they themselves revere as Scripture." http://rosetta.reltech.org/TC/vol05/Ehrman2000b.html
They tend to put theology first and foremost. Whatever Greek and Hebrew they learn must come prepackaged so that it doesn't offend their theological sensibilities. The "education" they receive is tainted with theological persuasion.
== I wonder what you mean by “the norm for the Ancient Jewish of God.” You seem to suggest that there might be a monolithic static view of Judaism.
Ancient Judaism understood God anthropomorphically. He had human form. Yahweh was enthroned in the temple, and had humanity created after his image. This eventually took a drastic turn towards the abstract, however, when Judaism became hellenized. Particularly with Arisobulus.
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.