RE: Historicity

From: Shuan Rose (shuanr@boo.net)
Date: Thu Jun 27 2002 - 18:14:34 EDT

  • Next message: bivalve: "RE: The Bible: human word of the almighty God.doc"

    There is a cable TV series called "Myth America" hosted b by Rick Shenkman,
    that holds that quite oa bit of what we think we know about American history
    is false. Read about his book here at

    http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0060972610/ref=pd_sxp_elt_l1/002-5425
    607-4568066

    We should probably lay to rest the idea that there is a kind of pure,
    unretouched version of history out there, except for maybe contemporary
    history. Even then, different Americans have very different memories of say,
    the Vietnam War years.

    -----Original Message-----
    From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu]On
    Behalf Of Michael Roberts
    Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2002 12:04 PM
    To: asa@calvin.edu
    Subject: Fw: Historicity

       No, discussion about the historicity of the bible is not meaningless and
    has
       been a controversial issue for about 200 years since German critics
       questioned the historical reliability of the Bible.

       In Seminaries students have to deal with scholars who question all or some
       of the historicity. Take Thompson who a few years ago argued there was no
       historical content in any of the OT. There are other scholars (including
       those who would call themselves conservative) who reckon that there is
    much
       theological reflection on a historical core and possibly some
    non-historical
       midrash.

       Then there are questions whether some books are non-historical. Now I hold
    Job and Jonah to be definitely non-historical - and some orthodox scholars
       have held this for 200 years. And then is Daniel historical?

       Then if we ask of the biblical material if it has any historical info
    which
       can be tested , we find it often can for the NT and part of the old T. But
       what historical/archaeological evidence is there to support Moses or
       Abraham. The best there is is to say that these stories fit in with the
    time
       claimed but no one has found a Telabanana tablet or something similar
       mentioned Moses or Abraham. I dont think that is discrediting the bible
    but
    > is saying that supporting evidence is not there.
    >
    > Over the years I have done a lot of historical research on Darwin and
    have
    > found that his Autobiography contains several mistakes especially on
    event
    s
    > of the 1820 to 1842 due to his writing it down from memory in 1878. A
    lot
    > of biographers have not checked out the reliability of his auto and some
    get
    > ratty when you say it contains mistakes - as it does when you check it
    out
    > against his letters and notebooks of the period. One of my gags is to say
    > this disproves the historicity of Darwin and thus he never lived. If one
    > adopts the arguments of the Jesus Seminar and applies them to Darwin one
    has
    > to have severe doubts that he ever lived.
    >
    > Now if what passes for American history is like the English counterpart
    it
    > contains a lot of myths, and I doubt a lot of what passes for history of
    > science and the church.
    >
    > However one must ask historical questions of the bible even if it makes
    > people uncomfortable. It is not an easy question.
    >
    > Enough I am going to bed
    >
    > Michael
    > ----- Original Message -----
    > From: "Jim Eisele" <jeisele@starpower.net>
    > To: <asa@calvin.edu>
    > Cc: "Don Munro" <don@asa3.org>; <phseely@aol.com>; <shuanr@boo.net>;
    "Peter
    > Ruest" <pruest@dplanet.ch>; "Walter Chang" <walterychang@yahoo.com>; "Sue
    > Gosnell" <scout0701@juno.com>; "Jeff Geraci" <jeffg99@comcast.net>; "Curt
    > Balch" <curtbalch@earthlink.net>
    > Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2002 10:44 AM
    > Subject: Historicity
    >
    >
    > >
    > > We routinely go back and forth about the historicity of the Bible.
    > >
    > > Is this a meaningless discussion?
    > >
    > > Let's take a look at the United States.
    > >
    > > What if, tomorrow, someone told you George Washington was fictional?
    > >
    > > What would that do to the credibility of the school system?
    > >
    > > What if, tomorrow, someone told you that Abraham Lincoln was a
    > > "polemic" against slavery?
    > >
    > > Would you still believe Civil War books were trustworthy?
    > >
    > > I want to go on record as saying that I find discrediting the
    > > historicity of the Bible offensive, as a Christian.
    > >
    > > Jim Eisele
    > > Genesis in Question
    > > http://genesisinquestion.org
    > >
    >



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 28 2002 - 10:58:43 EDT