Re: [asa] Re: Ages of the patriarchs

From: David Opderbeck <dopderbeck@gmail.com>
Date: Thu Feb 22 2007 - 14:15:27 EST

And the MT is only garbage if one assumes the ages of the patriarchs are
literal ages. If they are symbolic, then it matters not whether the MT
"chronology" jibes with some other chronology, because the text simply isn't
giving a chronology.

On 2/22/07, Iain Strachan <igd.strachan@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 2/22/07, Dick Fischer < dickfischer@verizon.net> wrote:
> >
> >
> > So anyone who derives a marvelous numbers matrix based upon the MT needs
> > to reflect on that old IBM adage garbage in, garbage out.
> >
>
>
> Interesting take. So the MT is garbage, right? I'm sure the Masoretic
> scholars are turning in their graves.
>
> Dick, by your own admission, you are not a mathematician. So I don't
> think you have the right to make derisory comments about a "marvellous
> numbers matrix", when there are mathematicians here who have some idea of
> the probability of such symmetrical patterns turning up, and thus to infer
> intentionality on the part of the author. Also you stated earlier that the
> evidence for long ages was pretty scarce. So, if I claim that the MT
> scholars manipulated the ages to make a pretty pattern, it's really no
> different from saying that the LXX scholars (or whoever preceded them)
> adjusted the figures to make events align with known historical events.
> Just because the account squares with known history doesn't prove that the
> long ages were true. It just means that one set of editors manipulated the
> figures to fit with historical dates, and one set manipulated them to make a
> pattern of symbolic numbers.
>
> Iain
>
> Iain
>

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Thu Feb 22 15:43:18 2007

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Feb 22 2007 - 15:43:18 EST