Freethought & Rationalism Archive

spin · 03-03-2005, 08:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris Weimer

Heh, I was referring to the actual text and not mere translations...

"Mere" is a quaint word in this situation.

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

Chris Weimer · 03-03-2005, 10:15 AM

How about the Spetuagintal readings from Qumran? That throws a lot of doubt in the superiority of the MT, don't you think?

Celsus · 03-03-2005, 10:29 AM

Segue hell, mein Chris. What do differences in manuscripts have to do with different readings of the text?

Joel

Chris Weimer · 03-03-2005, 10:56 AM

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?

Celsus · 03-03-2005, 11:00 AM

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

Chris Weimer · 03-03-2005, 11:13 AM

I wasn't, but spin was.

Celsus · 03-03-2005, 11:35 AM

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

Julian · 03-03-2005, 11:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

It just goes to show that when the opportunity arises, the Norwegian Blue will always pine for the fjords.

Just goes to show you that Yamauchi is solidly nailed to his perch.

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

Chris Weimer · 03-03-2005, 11:59 AM

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...

spin · 03-03-2005, 12:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Celsus

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).

Well, the next day something more pressing arrived and I haven't got past the skim of a couple of days back, when it first turned up.

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
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

03-03-2005, 10:15 AM	#12
Chris Weimer 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
Celsus 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
Chris Weimer 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
Celsus 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
Chris Weimer Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: none Posts: 9,879	I wasn't, but spin was.

03-03-2005, 11:35 AM	#17
Celsus 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, 11:59 AM	#19
Chris Weimer 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...

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.