Re: Novel Interpretations {formerly Minor correction re: Bildad)

From: Mike Adams (mikadams@ix.netcom.com)
Date: Wed Dec 13 1995 - 18:57:31 EST


You wrote:
>
>>Bildad the Shuhite was not really the shortest man in the Bible. While
>>he was certainly taller than Kneehighmiah, he cannot have been as short
>>and as small as Habakkuk, who stood on his watch, or as Peter, who
>>slept on his watch....

>>Edward
>
>I am just getting around to absorbing this serious contribution of Edward
>Hobbs. I must say, it is a bit troubling to me, for the following reasons.
>(1) If Peter were that small, then the church founded on that rock must
>also be very small. Perhaps that is what lay behind the Swedish hymn that
>referred to the "little flock."

nice point!

>.... (3) On the other hand, if he stook on a Roman sundial,
>he may have had glue on his feet. But then, he could have served as a
>gnomon. Perhaps that latent petrine biass underlay the name which the great
>Wuerttemberg theologican gave to his one volume commentary: _Gnomon novi
>testamenti_; it's Johnann Albrecht Bengel I am referring to of course.
"reader-response criticism," how far off would I be.
..
Of course, as I mentioned to Hobbs previously, Bildad as well could have
stood or slept comfortably on a standard sunidal.

Also, FYI, I stood upon my own watch, and it didn't break. I have witnesses!
I did not, however, venture to toss it in my bed to sleep upon it.

...
>Edgar [nota bene: We are both Ed, but are not otherwise to be confused.]

With this, I am greatly impressed, for I find myself constantly confused!!!

Ellen Adams



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:37:34 EDT