Freethought & Rationalism ArchiveThe archives are read only. |
03-03-2005, 08:02 AM | #11 | |
Contributor
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: nowhere
Posts: 15,747
|
Quote:
And I'm not sure that there are many cases of "which reading?" relating to the HB, though perhaps you might have a few arcane examples from the CB. spin |
|
03-03-2005, 10:15 AM | #12 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: none
Posts: 9,879
|
How about the Spetuagintal readings from Qumran? That throws a lot of doubt in the superiority of the MT, don't you think?
|
03-03-2005, 10:29 AM | #13 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Singapore
Posts: 2,875
|
Segue hell, mein Chris. What do differences in manuscripts have to do with different readings of the text?
Joel |
03-03-2005, 10:56 AM | #14 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: none
Posts: 9,879
|
Whether or not which is more accurate to the original? :huh: Many manuscripts at the DSS site shows that the Septuagint actually has credibility in Ancient Hebrew and was not just "bad translations" altogether. Do we take the the longer or shorter Jeremiah?
|
03-03-2005, 11:00 AM | #15 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Singapore
Posts: 2,875
|
Right, let me rephrase. What's that got to do with yours and spin's earlier comments, since you were talking about readings pertaining to translations?
Joel |
03-03-2005, 11:13 AM | #16 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: none
Posts: 9,879
|
I wasn't, but spin was.
|
03-03-2005, 11:35 AM | #17 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Singapore
Posts: 2,875
|
So what are you actually trying to study when you said, "You can't even trust the texts...always the question 'which reading?' Just look for biases and question question question"? Don't trust the "texts" to do what? What exactly do you want from the texts? Which texts don't represent Jewish thought? You're not coming up with some idea about a mystical canonical version are you?
By the way spin, how is the rest of Mesopotamia and the Bible? A lonely copy of it has been sitting in one of the bookstores here for a while which was tempting because of the dearth of decent books on the ANE here, but I declined to buy it solely on the basis that Yamauchi had contributed to it (much worse is his Persia and the Bible though Africa and the Bible is excusable for debunking some Afrocentrist Pharoahs-were-black crap). Joel |
03-03-2005, 11:48 AM | #18 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Washington, DC (formerly Denmark)
Posts: 3,789
|
Quote:
I am surprised that there are still 'scholars' out there that do not accept that polytheism was the norm at the time of the Assyrian invasion (and long afterwards), especially in the north. Julian |
|
03-03-2005, 11:59 AM | #19 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: none
Posts: 9,879
|
Sorry Joel, what I meant was you can't even accept the writings as they are in tradition as perfect, which accepts the biases of the compilers/redactors/scribes etc...
|
03-03-2005, 12:47 PM | #20 | |
Contributor
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: nowhere
Posts: 15,747
|
Quote:
What I saw was some useful information mixed with conservative crap. A Daniel Fleming writing on Emar comments on Ahlstrom as "a more skeptical history". I've seen in passing attacks on Lemche, but still there is a lot of stuff to read. Just need to keep the crap detector switched on. (BTW, I've bought 2nd hand books from Abebooks without any trouble. And $50 will get you Wesselius.) spin |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|