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: Yesterday at 03:12 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 03-29-2007, 01:41 AM   #41
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: London UK
Posts: 16,024
Default

Where is God (Mark Smith) coming from? Is he a theist?

He seems to be conscious of the issues but goes out of his way to avoid the implications - that maybe monotheism is a graeco-persian import onto a classic tribal god model.

Remember the Greeks and the Persians had also been co-evolving for centuries - Marathon was the Greeks stopping the Persians as they saw it punishing some rebels on the borders of their Empire - but still part of the Persian Empire. It has been argued that Carthage was actually part of the Persian empire for example.

I wonder if there is a habit of splitting stuff that should not actually be split, and this may be a result of the concept of heresy.

Gestalt - foreground and background - both are required, the detail and the context.
Clivedurdle is offline  
Old 03-29-2007, 11:22 AM   #42
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: The recesses of Zaphon
Posts: 969
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Clivedurdle View Post
Where is God (Mark Smith) coming from? Is he a theist?
No. I don’t think so. But to be honest I can’t find anywhere where he has flat out declared he was an atheist.

Here’s his cv.

Smith puts Yahweh on a level playing field with El, Baal, Asherah, Anat, Mot, and Yamm. He says - for example - that early Israelites were polytheists, and that some Yahwists practiced child sacrifice. So I would be very, very, very, surprised if he thought these gods were real.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Clivedurdle View Post
He seems to be conscious of the issues but goes out of his way to avoid the implications - that maybe monotheism is a graeco-persian import onto a classic tribal god model.
Gotta link?

I can’t find anywhere where he has specifically denied that influence.

If I were more intersted in this subject (and had more time) I would shell out $12.00 USD and buy this paper, because I bet there is a lot of good info in there.

If you are genuinely interested in this subject you should do the same. I think you are on to something and I bet it will reinforce all of the arguments you mention in this thread.

I don’t think Mark S. Smith or D. V. Edelman visit this site or monitor these threads.

Go learn something. And then come back here and teach me.

Because I’m lazy.
Loomis is offline  
Old 03-29-2007, 11:43 AM   #43
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Charleston, WV
Posts: 1,037
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Loomis View Post
No. I don’t think so. But to be honest I can’t find anywhere where he has flat out declared he was an atheist.
I think that Smith is Catholic, and at this site, one of his affiliations is listed as "Catholic Biblical Quarterly Monograph Series Editorial Board."
John Kesler is offline  
Old 03-29-2007, 12:01 PM   #44
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: London UK
Posts: 16,024
Default

There was something about his reviews and style of writing - looked quite good when looking at Biblical texts, but anything clearly heretical, like monotheism being an import, as in that review...
Clivedurdle is offline  
Old 03-29-2007, 12:12 PM   #45
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: London UK
Posts: 16,024
Default

Quote:
THE KALEIDOSCOPIC NATURE OF DIVINE PERSONALITY IN THE HEBREW BIBLE
Journal Biblical Interpretation
Publisher Brill Academic Publishers
ISSN 0927-2569 (Print) 1568-5152 (Online)
Subject Humanities, Social Sciences and Law
Issue Volume 9, Number 1 / January, 2001
DOI 10.1163/156851501300112335
Pages 1-24
SpringerLink Date Wednesday, December 22, 2004


THE KALEIDOSCOPIC NATURE OF DIVINE PERSONALITY IN THE HEBREW BIBLE

K.L. Noll1
(1) Penn State Mont Alto, USA

Abstract Over the centuries, rabbis, priests and laity have wrestled with the Bible''s various and often conflicting portraits of the God Yahweh. The social sciences suggest that each Yahweh text reflects the needs of the communities that formulated the text. Also, academic research has explored the reception of the complete Bible by religious communities. With the exception of so-called canonical criticism, very little work has been done on the transition between these two stages of the Bible''s (and Yahweh''s) evolution, from initial composition of texts to complete biblical canon. But canonical criticism usually presumes, a priori , that any text later deemed biblical was in some sense religiously useful from the day of initial composition, became (or continued to be) religiously authoritative as it evolved toward final edited form, and only increased in sacredness as it moved toward canonization. This study disputes that presumption, suggesting that the anthology was produced by a group of literati whose motivation was both socio-ideological and aesthetic, but not religious. This motivation best explains the extreme diversity of Yahweh personalities in the Hebrew canon.
http://www.springerlink.com/content/n193531g802p0hu7/

Are there any summaries of this thinking available for the hoi poloi?
Clivedurdle is offline  
Old 03-29-2007, 12:39 PM   #46
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: The recesses of Zaphon
Posts: 969
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Kesler View Post
I think that Smith is Catholic
I’ve never seen Smith defend the argument that Yahweh is a real god. Have you?

Compare him to Michael Heiser (a Christian scholar who frequently cites the Ugaritric texts).

Smith argues that the Original God of the Exodus was El and not Yahweh. He says El was a polytheistic bull god who got drunk at parties. Does that sound Catholic to you?
Loomis is offline  
Old 03-29-2007, 01:26 PM   #47
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Charleston, WV
Posts: 1,037
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Loomis View Post
Does that sound Catholic to you?
I wonder how many scholars like Smith and John Day can speak so frankly about Yahweh yet remain believers, but that does not change the fact that Smith is Catholic:

Quote:
Mark Smith is an extremely prolific and well-read scholar of the Bible and the ancient Near East...Writing as a professed Catholic anxious to narrow the rift between Christianity and Judaism...
John Kesler is offline  
Old 03-29-2007, 02:09 PM   #48
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: The recesses of Zaphon
Posts: 969
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Kesler View Post
I wonder how many scholars like Smith and John Day can speak so frankly about Yahweh yet remain believers, but that does not change the fact that Smith is Catholic:
Holy shit. You’re right! Mark S. Smith is writing as a professed Catholic.

My neighbor is a Jewish rabbi - and a professed atheist. I wonder if he knows her.

I feel dizzy. Mark S. Smith is no longer my God.

I have to go sit down now.
Loomis is offline  
Old 03-30-2007, 07:38 AM   #49
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: London UK
Posts: 16,024
Default

How many assumptions about the evolution of these religious groupings have not been properly explored because of religious biases? With this one I was very surprised at the near knee jerk reaction - zoroastrianism isn't monotheist because it is dualist, when the concept of dualism is a catholic invention to surpress heresy - that led to the Albigensian Crusade and the Inquisition.

Slight chance that propaganda may be involved?
Clivedurdle is offline  
Old 03-30-2007, 02:35 PM   #50
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: The recesses of Zaphon
Posts: 969
Default

Who wrote Psalm 82?

Where and when?

What was that guy thinking?

Isn’t that an expression of monotheism?

Or at least an early indictor of a future trend?
Loomis is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 03:41 PM.

Top

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