Freethought & Rationalism Archive

spin · 04-26-2004, 12:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Celsus

Eisenman is great, but it's not true that his theories are about James being Jesus ("Whatever James was, so was Jesus" are his last words in his voluminous James the Brother of Jesus IIRC). Where his bias may seem to come in is his interpretation of words used in texts... for example he makes great play of words like zdk and sdk (from memory, I'm not digging his book out just to look clever) by which he draws a continuity between David's priest Zadok and the much later Saduccees and trace out the Jewish bloodline (what if those books are fictions?). All in, his book is a fascinating world, but just seems to read like an alternate history rather than an actual scholarly treatise because of the disjointedness between his (overconvincingly complete) picture, and everyone else's.

Sadly, Eisenman is totally incoherent and doesn't actually make a single argument. His style is to go over and over and over what interests him until, if you've followed what he's been plowing on about, you're so exhausted, you're happy to agree with anything for him to stop. He has stopped his explanation of the Righteous Teacher being James the Just, I guess considering the fact that Pesher Habukkuk, a key Righteous Teacher text, has been carbon dated to the 1st century BCE. It's a bit hard for James to have been around before the turn of the era. What I would love is Eisenman's access to libraries. Sigh.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Celsus

Name one.

Me.

spin

Celsus · 04-26-2004, 01:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

Me.

You've disagreed with me before, so quite clearly you're not objective. Next thread: "Eisenman is crap" and we debate the literary merits of writing a 200-page book in 900.

Joel

Ananda · 06-08-2004, 06:28 PM

[QUOTE=Tyler Durden I am currently debating the inherent polytheism in the OT on another board. But my expertise in this field is woefully shallow, which is why i turn to the experts here for aid.

I had written the following...
Quote:

"According to Deuteronomy 32.8-9, Yahweh is one of the 70 sons of Elyon, the Godling who was entrusted dominion over Israel. Other references that implies multiple gods: Exodus 15.11; 18:11; 20.3, 23.24; Num 25.2; Deut. 10:17; Joshua 24.15; 1 Kings 11:2-10; II Kings 17:31."]

Hi- I'm new. Still lurking and trying to get my brain around some of the many ideas presented in this forum. Things move fast!- Maybe I'm just too Southern. But everything is very interesting.

The words above made me remember-

I once read or heard that the word "Elohim" in (I believe) Genesis was not only plural, but feminine as well. I have no Hebrew and cannot remember where I got this info. Anybody reading have any comments, corrections, further information- whatever? Does this fit ok in this thread?

Vorkosigan · 06-08-2004, 11:50 PM

Quote:

All in, his book is a fascinating world, but just seems to read like an alternate history rather than an actual scholarly treatise because of the disjointedness between his (overconvincingly complete) picture, and everyone else's.

That's an extremely perceptive criticism. It puts into words feelings I've been groping with now that I have read several times.

06-08-2004, 06:28 PM	#23
Ananda New Member Join Date: May 2004 Location: South Carolina Posts: 1	Help? [QUOTE=Tyler Durden I am currently debating the inherent polytheism in the OT on another board. But my expertise in this field is woefully shallow, which is why i turn to the experts here for aid. I had written the following... Quote: "According to Deuteronomy 32.8-9, Yahweh is one of the 70 sons of Elyon, the Godling who was entrusted dominion over Israel. Other references that implies multiple gods: Exodus 15.11; 18:11; 20.3, 23.24; Num 25.2; Deut. 10:17; Joshua 24.15; 1 Kings 11:2-10; II Kings 17:31."] Hi- I'm new. Still lurking and trying to get my brain around some of the many ideas presented in this forum. Things move fast!- Maybe I'm just too Southern. But everything is very interesting. The words above made me remember- I once read or heard that the word "Elohim" in (I believe) Genesis was not only plural, but feminine as well. I have no Hebrew and cannot remember where I got this info. Anybody reading have any comments, corrections, further information- whatever? Does this fit ok in this thread?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.