Mon Dec 4 09:26:58 1995

From majordom  Mon Dec  4 09:26:58 1995
Return-Path: 
Received: by scholar.cc.emory.edu (5.0/SMI-SVR4)
	id AA08628; Mon, 4 Dec 1995 09:26:58 +0500
Date: Mon, 4 Dec 1995 09:26:52 -0500 (EST)
From: "James R. Adair" 
X-Sender: jadair@scholar
To: TC List 
Subject: Re: Hebrew Bible, OT, or ...?
In-Reply-To: <199512041223.EAA14327@netcom14.netcom.com>
Message-Id: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Length: 969
Sender: owner-tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu
Precedence: bulk

I think the discussion that has ensued as a result of my original post 
has demonstrated that there is not any single term to describe the 
textual criticism of the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament/First 
Testament/Tanakh that is one hundred percent satisfactory.  My question 
was directed solely at the use of these terms in the field of textual 
criticism, not religious studies as a whole.  Though there is obviously 
some overlap, I think the fact that the discipline deals explicitly with 
language, and implicitly with canon, contributes to the difficulty.  
Textual critics of all backgrounds should continue to use the terms that 
seem to them, for whatever reasons, to be the most satisfactory, 
remembering the imperfections of whatever term they choose.

Jimmy Adair
Manager of Information Technology Services, Scholars Press
    and
Managing Editor of TELA, the Scholars Press World Wide Web Site
---------------> http://scholar.cc.emory.edu <-----------------

Back