Sometimes “shouting” is necessary, but with some it doesn’t help anyway.
While Old/New CAN reflect some form of the “progressive/suppersessionist” thinking, in this case it does not because it refers to a different collection of books. From: Andrea Rapp [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Sunday, June 03, 2012 9:22 AM To: [email protected] Cc: Hasafran Subject: RE: [ha-Safran] RDA and the Bible No need to "shout, " but brit/covenant has been translated (first by St. Jerome, I believe) as "testament." (i.e. testamentum) So the point is that the use of the terms Old and New Testament reflects a supersessionist/replacement theology, a bias against Judaism - the assertion that Judaism's covenant is the old one, and has been replaced with a new one. Andrea --- On Sat, 6/2/12, [email protected] <[email protected]> wrote: Testament does NOT mean covenant… and NEVER has.
__ Messages and opinions expressed on Hasafran are those of the individual author and are not necessarily endorsed by the Association of Jewish Libraries (AJL) ================================== Submissions for Ha-Safran, send to: [email protected] To join Ha-Safran, update or change your subscription, etc. - click here: https://lists.service.ohio-state.edu/mailman/listinfo/hasafran Questions, problems, complaints, compliments send to: [email protected] Ha-Safran Archives: Current: http://www.mail-archive.com/hasafran%40lists.service.ohio-state.edu/maillist.html Earlier Listserver: http://www.mail-archive.com/hasafran%40lists.acs.ohio-state.edu/maillist.html AJL HomePage http://www.JewishLibraries.org -- Hasafran mailing list [email protected] https://lists.service.ohio-state.edu/mailman/listinfo/hasafran
