From: "Arnaud Fournet" <fournet.arnaud AT wanadoo.fr>
To: "James Christian" <jc.bhebrew AT googlemail.com>
Cc: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] T-SADE
Date: Sun, 25 Jul 2010 20:16:25 +0200
----- Original Message -----
From: James Christian
To: Arnaud Fournet
Cc: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Sent: Sunday, July 25, 2010 5:57 PM
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] T-SADE
As far as I understood it Arnaud you was
**
As far as I understand this language
it should be *you were*
How much do you perform on the TOEFL test?
Please try to learn the language on the list.
You may not succeed, but you have the right to learn.
Many thanks.
A.
***
asking my opinion on the early dating of Codex Vaticanus and the relevance
of the tsade issue to its dating. I answered you openly about the problems
with dating raising relevant issues about how reliable pottery based and
philology based dating can be. You then, completely unnecessarily, belittled
those genuine issues with an overly sarcastic and completely irrelevant
response. If you don't see how that style was offensive then I won't be
expecting any apologies from you any time in the near future. Just as I
won't be expecting you to objectively engage in a discussion about the
reliability of the dating systems used to date MSS (given your unhelpful
response).
Now, regarding Jim while my response may have been harshly worded and there
could have been better variants than 'hijacked' to politely say the same
thing and this poor choice of language led Yigal to rightly tell me off for
it you can rest assured that my feelings about the way Jim turns just about
every interesting thread into a discussion about his theory of the
patriarchal narratives are shared by just about every active participant who
has tried to interact with his theories. You have only recently started to
interact with his theories (it's been going on for about 3 years now) but
you can rest assured after you have seen 10 or so threads you open about
something completely unrelated turn into yet another presentation of Jim's
theories you will most likely see things from a better angle and will better
sympathise with my poor choice of words.
Now, I'm willing to let you have the last word in this pointless and
bandwidth consuming discussion about list etiquette but I would much rather
see you interacting with my genuine concerns about dating systems. Have you
really studied pottery and philology based dating schemes to the point where
you can understand and defend them and use conclusions based on them as a
reliable foundational starting point for discussions? I have yet another
doubt. I doubt that you have. I also doubt that you be willing to do so. Or
that you will be willing to engage in a fruitful discussion which would lead
us both (and others who participate in the discussion) to learn more about
dating of MSS and give us a better foundation to base discussions on. I
would whole heartedly welcome that you disappoint me and show me that my
latest doubts are completely unfounded. We could then stop bickering and
etiquette and learn something together.