Lawrence Boadt’s excellent Reading the Old Testament has a chart on page 79 that illustrates some key differences between the way the ancients viewed history and the way we do today. We tend to be shocked when we discover that there might be any deviation from what we subconsciously have accepted as the only viewpoint. These are examples Boadt gives for distinctions that should inform our study of the Old Testament, even the parts written in some sense as history. Here is the chart:
Related posts:
- Are the early Genesis stories historical accounts? Before I "took the road less traveled by" into historical linguistics, I was highly interested in ancient history, especially as it related to the Old...
- Case Study: the Fall This is the seventh in a series of posts on inspiration, inerrancy, and hermeneutics. The traditional doctrines of the Fall and of Original Sin teach...
- Contextual interpretation in Genesis: Cain’s mark I suppose it goes without saying that approaching the Bible as contextually bound literature leaves you asking different questions and giving different answers. In the...
- Thinking “Outside the Box” about the Bible My friend Cliff Martin has written one of the best, most concise descriptions of the nature and purpose of the Bible that I have ever...
- The origins debate: more than evolution From the Rev. Dr. Fritz Ritsch, pastor of St. Stephen Presbyterian Church in Fort Worth, comes this gem of an op ed (Star-Telegram.com). The debate...
View Comments on “Ancient and modern methods of recording historical events”
You can track this conversation through its atom feed.
Why creationists are creationists | Undeception says:
[...] the creation stories in fundamentalist and evangelical circles. Those who interpret the stories as infallible history and especially those unwilling to reevaluate the majority’s interpretation of Pauline [...]
Posted on August 8, 2009 at 8:46 pm.