Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: The Calf of Exodus vs. the Calves of 1Kings 12

Expand Messages
  • George
    Richard, Such good questions! You write: Now that the list is in your hands rather than Kim s, are you actually going to promote debate and the presentation
    Message 1 of 31 , Sep 1, 2004
    • 0 Attachment

      Such good questions!

      You write:
      "Now that the list is in your hands rather than Kim's, are
      you actually going to promote debate and the presentation of
      alternative views, or just jump on everything that doesn't
      meet your personal position?"

      I have been pondering exactly how to balance between
      the two positions.

      I feel a genuine responsibility to uphold a more
      "critical" or "skeptical" approach to biblical history.
      Afterall, this is the position I have taken consistently
      for quite some time.

      And yet, of course, I want this list to CONTINUE to be
      a place of promoting debate.

      My recent post, while not supportive of your position,
      was actually LESS stinging than I can sometimes be.
      For example, I DID say that your position was CONCEIVABLE.

      But simply because I am moderating the list (mostly for
      behavior issues), I don't want this to be a STRAIGHTJACKET
      on my own views.

      As you know, I **DO** have my own views.

      One restriction I put on the list home page is that discussion
      of UFO theories in connection with the bible are off-limits.
      There are OTHER lists for UFO-in-history discussions.

      And I've had some off-list correspondence about my reaction
      to Velikovsky theories. In an important way, your question
      has helped me arrive at the conclusion that Velikovsky theories
      will NOT be banned from the list.

      Richard, you and I go a long way back. And you represent
      an important (shall we say) "caucus" of this list. You should
      feel free to offer up your interpretations about biblical

      And I **TOO** will feel free (as a member as well as a moderator)
      of describing what I think are short-comings of your

      I would not have accepted Kim's "promotion" of me if I thought
      that being a moderator would force me NOT to offer my views
      as always.

      My competency as moderator should not be measured by whether
      or not I have strong personal opinions, but whether I am fair
      in settling disputes, and do not act arbitrarily in the pursuit
      discovering "what was true" in the days before, during and
      after biblical events.

      I hope this post helps to clarify the "balancing act" that
      I must face each day. And in the long run, I hope that
      my responsibilities keep my tone and posts MORE compassionate
      and understanding than when I was just a regular member.


    • emarhalys
      Hi Ethel! How s your studies going? I haven t been doing much scholarly threads, but I do enjoy the dialogues in abh. James M. Rogers emarhalys@yahoo.com ...
      Message 31 of 31 , Sep 6, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        Hi Ethel! How's your studies going?

        I haven't been doing much scholarly threads, but I do enjoy the
        dialogues in abh.

        James M. Rogers

        --- In AncientBibleHistory@yahoogroups.com, ethel jean saltz
        <nietgal@a...> wrote:
        > Funny, I thought I'd just start getting the digests again and say
        > nothing. My first reading and here I am:) BUT this post is right
        > point for me. Now, can you give me the approx. dates of
        these "Persian
        > times"? Do you mean Babylonian Exile around the 600's around the
        > of Josiah? I get mixed up with the Babylonian Exile and Persian
        > Influence (as shown by the Esther Scroll). We're studying
        > right as part of our religion now and it's my impression that the
        > historiography as we know might have been collected and cemented
        at the
        > time of Josiah. Actually Rabbis agree with this as an option but
        > members don't like us talking this way. it's considered profane :)
        > That's why I'm interested in this group again :)
        > BTW, I've got a lot of support about my interpretation of the
        bible by
        > scanning the Quran on the keywords "torah" or "scriptures". So
        for me
        > the Abrahamic Faith as we know it is from c, 600 to 600. In case
        > think I'm being religious, I'm not. It's just a fact of life for
        > hundreds of years that every sabbath the first five books of the
        > are studied and discussed every which way in synagogues the world
        > Certain portions of the rest of the O.T. are assigned to these
        > sectional reading. The entire 5 books are studied every year for
        > hundreds of years. Some of us discuss it historically, others
        > hysterically. The hysterical ones usually have the $$$ so I just
        > going. Hurts my brain. I'm glad I never unsubscribed to this
        > thanks to y'all.
        > > Message: 5
        > > Date: Wed, 1 Sep 2004 23:00:02 -0500
        > > From: "Dora Smith" <villandra@a...>
        > > Subject: Re: Moderator Summary of Editorial Posture
        > >
        > > Um, George ALWAYS jumps on everything, folks! It has nothing
        to do with
        > > his being moderator!
        > >
        > > I haven't seen him suppressing alternate points of view yet.
        If he were,
        > > we'd be formally required to think that the OT was written in
        Persian times.
        > >
        > > Actually, it's real nice to have some of the old discussion back.
        > --
        > Ethel Jean Saltz, be-emet oo-ve-ahavah oo-ve-shalom
        > I will NOT submit, MMMMMR;) Jews Created God
        > mailto:nietgal@a...
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.