FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 03:12 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 12-10-2007, 02:23 AM   #21
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: nowhere
Posts: 15,747
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Solitary Man View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by spin View Post
Are you -- besides what you've already cribbed off the net??
Quite so, actually. I'm still wondering where Toto ever got "positive" out of anything I said. All I said was that it got great reviews. Dever is quite a balanced person, even though I disagree with his assessments. I think he's too conservative, as I state so here.

Dever gives it props. Again as I state in the very beginning, "[It] got great reviews. Might be worth it to pick it up."
You might believe that, but besides Dever's devious words (and they are calculated, in that they don't really say anything other than that it's the best defense of a literal reading as history, which means nothing in itself), the only other name of note is a philologist with mainly linguistic leanings (Rendsburg -- who's fairly conservative in his views), so actually the solicited reviews aren't really that impressive, unless you're impressed with a theological college, a theological society, someone from Wheaton or the Denver Journal. Now if you saw a Naaman or a Beckman or a few really notable critiques then you might turn a few eyes. As is, Dever and Rendsburg aren't big drawers.
spin is offline  
Old 12-10-2007, 06:47 AM   #22
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: San Bernardino, Calif.
Posts: 5,435
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug Shaver View Post
Surely you're not assuming that they're representative?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Solitary Man View Post
Big names.
That doesn't make them representative. Amazon wants to sell the book. Quotations from the reviews will be selected accordingly.
Doug Shaver is offline  
Old 12-10-2007, 08:55 AM   #23
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: grand rapids michigan
Posts: 29
Default

great book read it twice
blackrayne is offline  
Old 12-10-2007, 09:27 AM   #24
Regular Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Lethbridge AB Canada
Posts: 445
Default

Here is a positive review of the book:
http://www.bookreviews.org/pdf/2041_1078.pdf

But it is still not on my "must read" list.

Jim
DrJim is offline  
Old 12-10-2007, 10:45 AM   #25
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: ירושלים
Posts: 1,701
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug Shaver View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug Shaver View Post
Surely you're not assuming that they're representative?
That doesn't make them representative. Amazon wants to sell the book. Quotations from the reviews will be selected accordingly.
Well aware. Why are you stating the obvious again?
Solitary Man is offline  
Old 12-10-2007, 10:47 AM   #26
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: ירושלים
Posts: 1,701
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by spin View Post
-- snip --
Hence the very important qualifier might. As in it has potential, it could be good, etc... If it was attached to really big reviewers, than I would pronounce with a little more certainty, like I am with Davies and Allison's ICC commentary on Matthew. Definitely worth it to pick it up.
Solitary Man is offline  
Old 12-10-2007, 02:52 PM   #27
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: florida
Posts: 887
Default

do you think his pro israel in egypt arguments are valid? more or less so than the ones found in "the bible unearthed?"
burning flames is offline  
Old 12-10-2007, 04:30 PM   #28
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: nowhere
Posts: 15,747
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Solitary Man View Post
...might...
Could come in a brown paper bag with no touted reviews and it might still be worth a read. [M]ight covers a lot of evils.

Oh, and in the pedants' stakes,

Quote:
Originally Posted by Solitary Man View Post
...than...
that should be a "then".
spin is offline  
Old 12-10-2007, 04:36 PM   #29
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: nowhere
Posts: 15,747
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic View Post
the most Bible-friendly spin
Indeed.


spin
spin is offline  
Old 12-10-2007, 04:53 PM   #30
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: nowhere
Posts: 15,747
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by burning flames View Post
do you think his pro israel in egypt arguments are valid? more or less so than the ones found in "the bible unearthed?"
When the "united kingdom" (of David and Solomon) is up for grabs in scholarly debate, rearguard defenses of an Israel in Egypt (other than from Persian times) seem to be a bit ho-hum. The bible doesn't know about the arrival of the Philistines, which was a truly big bang on the Levantine coast, so you shouldn't give much credence to anything that supposedly happened before it.


spin
spin is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:40 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.