Theology for the Masses

Conversations in Theology and its interaction with Culture

Browsing Posts tagged Biblical Texts

Our very own Hank, from Think-Wink, linked to בלשנות (balshanut), which is a biblical linguistics blog, on the topic of loan words in the Hebrew Bible.  There the claim is made that:

Some scholars have argued that Biblical Hebrew was never a fully spoken language, but was an artificial literary language created by post-exilic scribes. For instance, Ullendorff’s paper “Is Biblical Hebrew a Language?” BSOAS 34 (1971): 241-55, Knauf’s “War ‘Biblisch-Hebräisch’ eine Sprache?” ZAH 3 (1990): 11-23, and North’s “Could Hebrew Have Been A Cultic Esperanto?” ZAH 12: 202-17. In this article, Eskhult argues that if BH is an artificial language created only in post-exilic times, then loanwords ought to be fairly equally distributed throughout the various books and genres contained in the Bible… 

[However], the Akkadian, Egyptian, and Persian loanwords seem to follow the pattern of the political history described by the biblical texts. It is difficult to explain such a connection if the language was artificial and late. Further, Perisan loanwords abound within the books that are obviously late, but do not appear at all in the Pentateuch.

For those of you following along at home, this is important because it suggests the tradition behind the biblical text dates to the periods and cultures from which the text itself claims to be writing, compared to being composed entirely as an after-thought. 

John F. Hobbins over at Ancient Hebrew Poetry has a great little bit about the nature of confessional scholarship nestled in a great gut check post on the complegalitarian debate.

As a confessionally engaged biblical scholar, I have a bottom line: it should be possible to discuss the meaning of biblical texts with the intention of allowing them to speak to us on their own terms, rather than exaggerating their weight when they “score one for our side,” or engaging in damage control when they do not support the position we hold dear.

The complegalitarian blog, which invites actual discussion between comps and egals, invites Completarians to explain what Egalitarians totally do not get (about Complementarians).

Sillyness abounds!  Some of you might be ahead or behind the LOLz Cats thing, but I must send along the LOLz Cats Bible!  Here is a little bit from John:

1 In teh beginz is teh cat macro, and teh cat macro sez “Oh hai Ceiling Cat” and teh cat macro iz teh Ceiling Cat.2 Teh cat macro an teh Ceiling Cat iz teh bests frenz in teh begins.

3 Him maeks alls teh cookies; no cookies iz maed wifout him.4 Him haz teh liefs, an becuz ov teh liefs teh doodz sez “Oh hay lite.”5 Teh lite iz pwns teh darks, but teh darks iz liek “Wtf.”

Some friends and I have been going through Rich Chrisitans in an Age of Hunger.  I think we spend two or three hours discussion the first two chapters and tangetical issues the other night.  One of the things we brought up is our lack of knowledge of micro-loan institutions.  The Bible Money Matters Blog, while discussing what we can do with out historically abundant wealth, brings up one such micro-loan institution, Kiva.

Update: Cheapham has done a bit of research on micro-loans and suggests Opportunity International as a good micro-loan provider.

What is the word of God?

  1. The Bible in a reader’s native language which is faithful in message to the autographs
  2. The autographs of biblical texts
  3. The message behind texts we consider inspired
  4. Jesus
  5. Other
Powered by WordPress Web Design by SRS Solutions © 2010 Theology for the Masses Design by SRS Solutions

Bad Behavior has blocked 357 access attempts in the last 7 days.