friesen@psivax.UUCP (Stanley Friesen) (11/21/84)
Regarding Yiri's comments: > 1) understanding the N'tzarim writings as a historical document, what > it most likely read, and what was meant by the Jews who wrote it > and the Jews to whom it was written > 2) asserting one's beliefs about the implications of the writings, and > 3) intractable insistence upon absolute faith in a perverted version > of #1 > My interest is in #1. Your defiantly committed to 3 and asking me to > leave the scholarly aspect of it and get involved in #2. No. > Since my interest is in #1, what it says or does not say is not an > embarrassment to me in any way. You are under some kind of delusion in > that regard. I search for the truth and have no reason to fear it. I also recognise the importance of #1 above. And in that light I would *very* much like to see more supporting details about your position. I am perfectly capable of handling #2 for myself - given sufficient data. But I have yet to see *any* detail analyses of the texts and how Christian translations have corrupted them, so I have no basis for re-evaluation. In fact, my experience is that the best Christian Bible scholars and commentators *do* attempt to retrieve the meaning intended by the original authors. And as far as I can tell they have succeeded, because it thier interpretations have allowed me to have intelligent conversations with my Jewish friends and colleagues. To take an example mentioned previously - the meaning of the word "repent". Which Yiri claims is misused by Christians. I felt this to be untrue, at least with regard to those Christians I respect the most. So I looked it up in "The Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible", and found the definition there corresponded to the one I have been using for years. Namely: (Paraphrased somewhat) repentance: renouncing sin/evil and turning back to a God and righteous/obedient living. Applied both at the individual and national level. It implies a renewal of life and spirit. Of course this does *not* prove that this is the original intent of the Jewish authors, so to confirm the matter I looked in the "New Standard Jewish Encyclopedia", written by and for Jews(originally published in Israel). Not only did it agree with the Interpreter's Dictionary in essence, it used *very* similar wording. I feel this is strong evidence that intelligent Christians do pay attention to author's intent in interpreting the scriptures. Another thing I would find helpful is if Yiri would define some of his terms more precisely. This would help bring about understanding, since if we mean different things by the same word we will be arguing at cross-purposes. (If this has already been done I missed it since I am relatively new to the net) In particular I would like to know *exactly* what is meant by "antinomism" &c. in this discussion. Does it mean simply rejection of rigid adherance to the letter of Jewish Law, or is it supposed to incorporate aspects of the Christian doctrine of "justification by faith" - and if so what are the defining characteristics involved. The various Christian denominations differ quite a bit in this area of theology, so an argument besed on only one variant MAY not be applicable to others.