In Good Company: Problematic Sources and Biblical Historicity

Advocates of robust biblical historicity often express concern that critics of this view act from partisan purposes, and should instead treat biblical testimony as innocent until and unless it can be demonstrated otherwise—virtually an impossible task in light of the exiguity of the evidence. These...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal for the study of the Old Testament
Main Author: Henige, David (Author)
Format: Electronic Article
Language:English
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Drawer...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Published: Sage 2005
In: Journal for the study of the Old Testament
Year: 2005, Volume: 30, Issue: 1, Pages: 29-47
Online Access: Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Parallel Edition:Electronic
Description
Summary:Advocates of robust biblical historicity often express concern that critics of this view act from partisan purposes, and should instead treat biblical testimony as innocent until and unless it can be demonstrated otherwise—virtually an impossible task in light of the exiguity of the evidence. These claims are seldom undergirded by a canvas of extra-biblical materials and even then, never beyond the ancient Near East. This article draws a small sample of examples from a variety of times and places to argue that the incidence of error, fraud, and misplaced trust is well beyond the point that would justify this deferential treatment. It urges those who would too readily accept the reliability of the biblical account of early Israel to canvass more widely before committing themselves.
ISSN:1476-6728
Contains:Enthalten in: Journal for the study of the Old Testament
Persistent identifiers:DOI: 10.1177/0309089205057776