Dating of ancient books and scripture.

Post by **Minimalist** » Sat Jul 26, 2008 11:44 am

The "maximalists" do not think it is sleeping, my friend!

seeker · Post by **seeker** » Sat Jul 26, 2008 1:55 pm

Minimalist wrote:The "maximalists" do not think it is sleeping, my friend!

It's a funny paradigm shift though, maximalists have become the lunatic fringe in the discussion while minimalists have become more of the mainstream

Post by **Minimalist** » Sat Jul 26, 2008 2:02 pm

I'm leaning more and more that way myself... with a few caveats like utilizing pre-existing folklore and writing ole Yahweh into it.

seeker · Post by **seeker** » Sat Jul 26, 2008 7:45 pm

Minimalist wrote:I'm leaning more and more that way myself... with a few caveats like utilizing pre-existing folklore and writing ole Yahweh into it.

There is certainly wiggle room for that sort of argument. Personally I think the majority of people in the region after the Persians took over were from other regions. The Post Babylonian population of Judah was probably a couple of thousand while Persian Judah had something closer to 50,000 people living in it which strongly suggests that there were a lot of people new to the area in Judah. They could have pushed almost any story as historical and, over time, with total control over all writing, made it the only history people knew.

Post by **Minimalist** » Sat Jul 26, 2008 9:17 pm

Seeker is actually more of a "minimalist" than I am, guys.

rich · Post by **rich** » Sat Jul 26, 2008 9:23 pm

Think this would be a fitting icon???

http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=htt ... image&cd=1

Post by **Minimalist** » Sat Jul 26, 2008 9:27 pm

The url is a bit long.

rich · Post by **rich** » Sat Jul 26, 2008 9:28 pm

was the first thing I found on a search -

rich · Post by **rich** » Sat Jul 26, 2008 9:29 pm

its's on somebodies myspace page - but it just seemed to fit you're attitude at times

rich · Post by **rich** » Sat Jul 26, 2008 9:34 pm

Here's the same thing but just the image:

http://homepage.hispeed.ch/mosteve/Bild ... %20(2).jpg

War Arrow · Post by **War Arrow** » Sun Jul 27, 2008 3:05 am

Minimalist wrote:Seeker is actually more of a "minimalist" than I am, guys.

Pardon my idiocy but I always thought you'd chosen your username because... dunno... maybe you don't like having too much furniture or something... Now I suspect I may have been mistaken. So in one sentence, what is this "minimalist-maximalist" debate of which ye doth speaketh?

(and if this question is equivalent to 'Stonehenge? What's that?' I offer no apology - never claimed to be that broad in my areas of study!)

Ishtar · Post by **Ishtar** » Sun Jul 27, 2008 3:08 am

He says he only chose the name Min to annoy, Arch, WA - like I chose mine solely to annoy Marduk.

Forum Monk · Post by **Forum Monk** » Sun Jul 27, 2008 5:05 am

War Arrow wrote:So in one sentence, what is this "minimalist-maximalist" debate of which ye doth speaketh?

In one sentence, maximalists believe the bible contains historical truth and relevence while minimalists believe it's history is a collection of myths and fictions (possibly loosely based on real locations, events, or people) as it really an attempt for the compilers to gain an identity.

seeker · Post by **seeker** » Sun Jul 27, 2008 7:17 am

FM is pretty much right. Maximalists tend to take the bible literally as a historical record. The turning point in the debate is the archaeological record which pretty consistently points to a lower chronology and contradicts a good deal of the biblical record. People in the Maximalist camp like William Dever began to find that they simply couldn't support the Exodus, Conquest etc based on the evidence.

Minimalism takes the view that the bible is a series of stories composed in the post Persian period for political reasons. Scholars like Davies and Thompson point out that rather than a history the bible should be looked at as a propaganda tool used to gain support for various factions. In this view you end up with a clear division of stories that reflect a Persian perspective and a Hasmonean perspective (I'm simplifying and ignoring some of the internal factionalism that occurred).

That's as close to one sentance as I can explain it in.

seeker · Post by **seeker** » Sun Jul 27, 2008 7:21 am

rich wrote:Think this would be a fitting icon???

I wasn't as crazy about the Mini Me picture as I was about the animated gif in the posters sig line.