<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Posts You Might Have Missed 4</title>
	<atom:link href="http://timesandseasons.org/index.php/2008/07/posts-you-might-have-missed-4/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://timesandseasons.org/index.php/2008/07/posts-you-might-have-missed-4/</link>
	<description>Truth Will Prevail</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 12 Feb 2012 06:09:37 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: David Larsen</title>
		<link>http://timesandseasons.org/index.php/2008/07/posts-you-might-have-missed-4/#comment-269569</link>
		<dc:creator>David Larsen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Jul 2008 17:23:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.timesandseasons.org/?p=4663#comment-269569</guid>
		<description>Thank you, Dave, for the link. I don\&#039;t know that I meant for the post to have such political overtones, but I thank you for your review. I really do think \&quot;restatements\&quot; or reconstructions of Old Testament history are in order, as it becomes more and more apparent that the texts that have come down to us represent only certain points of view at the expense of others. To quote Barker on the topic:

Since the Deuteronomists and their successors were a major influence on the formation of the Old Testament -- the collection and preservation of the texts that survived the destruction in 597 BCE, for example -- there is a complex problem facing any attempt to reconstruct the original temple [or history in general]. There may be complete texts that never became canonical -- 1 Enoch is a good example -- and there may have been earlier versions of the Hebrew text underlying the present form, as the Qumran fragments suggest. The reason for the exclusion and alteration of those texts is very likely to be that they were evidence for the position the Deuteronomists sought to to supersede. Any reconstruction that relies on their written evidence is therefore at a distinct disadvantage. Since conventional scholarship takes their canonical texts as the norm, a great deal has to be undone before any real progress can be made. 

I tend to agree with that statement and think a little looking outside the canonical \&quot;box,\&quot; so to speak, is good for us.

Thanks,
David Larsen</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thank you, Dave, for the link. I don\&#8217;t know that I meant for the post to have such political overtones, but I thank you for your review. I really do think \&#8221;restatements\&#8221; or reconstructions of Old Testament history are in order, as it becomes more and more apparent that the texts that have come down to us represent only certain points of view at the expense of others. To quote Barker on the topic:</p>
<p>Since the Deuteronomists and their successors were a major influence on the formation of the Old Testament &#8212; the collection and preservation of the texts that survived the destruction in 597 BCE, for example &#8212; there is a complex problem facing any attempt to reconstruct the original temple [or history in general]. There may be complete texts that never became canonical &#8212; 1 Enoch is a good example &#8212; and there may have been earlier versions of the Hebrew text underlying the present form, as the Qumran fragments suggest. The reason for the exclusion and alteration of those texts is very likely to be that they were evidence for the position the Deuteronomists sought to to supersede. Any reconstruction that relies on their written evidence is therefore at a distinct disadvantage. Since conventional scholarship takes their canonical texts as the norm, a great deal has to be undone before any real progress can be made. </p>
<p>I tend to agree with that statement and think a little looking outside the canonical \&#8221;box,\&#8221; so to speak, is good for us.</p>
<p>Thanks,<br />
David Larsen</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Adam Greenwood</title>
		<link>http://timesandseasons.org/index.php/2008/07/posts-you-might-have-missed-4/#comment-269540</link>
		<dc:creator>Adam Greenwood</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Jul 2008 02:15:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.timesandseasons.org/?p=4663#comment-269540</guid>
		<description>Thanks, DB.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks, DB.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stephen M (Ethesis)</title>
		<link>http://timesandseasons.org/index.php/2008/07/posts-you-might-have-missed-4/#comment-269539</link>
		<dc:creator>Stephen M (Ethesis)</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Jul 2008 01:51:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.timesandseasons.org/?p=4663#comment-269539</guid>
		<description>These are always interesting to read, I&#039;m glad you keep pointing good posts out.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>These are always interesting to read, I&#8217;m glad you keep pointing good posts out.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
<!-- WP Super Cache is installed but broken. The path to wp-cache-phase1.php in wp-content/advanced-cache.php must be fixed! -->
