Peter, is it your contention that there are no legitimate
differences between the ways Hebrew and Greek writers (and thinkers) in
biblical times would have expressed themselves? ...
The opposing idea — that language has /absolutely no/ influence on thought at all — is widely considered to be false (Gumperz: introduction to Gumperz 1996). But the strong version of the Sapir/Whorf hypothesis, that language determines thought, is also thought to be incorrect. The most common view is that the truth lies somewhere in between the two and currently linguists rather than studying whether language affects thought, are studying /how/ it affects thought.
... I don't think anyone hereI am concerned that this is bad scholarship and also opens the door to racism.
is saying we agree entirely with Borman. I was just saying that his thesis
is an interesting one and deserves thoughtful consideration.
The formation and formulation of Christian thought in the milieu of
the 1C Middle Eastern culture is a subject of vigorous and ongoing debate.
Cambridge U. Press has published an interesting compendium of essays (Early
Christian Thought in its Jewish Context) dealing with some of these issues.
Peter, the negative review you cited from Amazon.com says that
Borman took this position "to make a theological point." Is this also your
concern?
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.