Roberto da Silva Rocha, university professor and political scientist
Books on Amazon.com
The bible would be just one more book among all those that speak of a sacred deity.
One more. Only that.
The bible and all holy books were written by human beings. Among the 44 known authors there are a small number of books of the bible whose authorship is still unknown. And it wasn't God.
Validation and Verifiability
Epistemology of biblical exegesis and hermeneutics.
There is a methodological problem on questions of interpretation of holy scriptures.
A great and endless debate limited to ancient Greek, Hebrew and ancient Aramaic connoisseurs around the validation of sacred texts, which hijacked the exclusivity of the debate about the interpretations of the texts of the Holy Bible.
It happens with the greatest naturalness in the world that every time there is a controversial question or not about the interpretation of some sacred text of the bible, the ancient papyri engraved in Greek, Hebrew or Aramaic are used as the only and greatest source of validation of the bible. .
Then all the proofs of the true and original interpretation are established exactly and exclusively upon the texts of the original official parchments and papyri.
Document validation is carried out according to the scientific methodology based on the technique of historical documentation, which is not the type of empirical scientific research nor is it part of Karl Popper's hypothetical deductive method, it is one of the scientific research techniques The most fragile of all, which is the documental historicist research technique, of scientific precision far below the deductive method and the inductive method.
Supporting the inductive method we have the architecture provided by the science of Statistics; to support the deductive method we have the a priori categorical paradigms and imperatives that can be of transcendental categories and those of general categories.
The documental historical method is restricted to the validation of sources and the authentication of documents, internally and externally.
It seems to us that Professors Sabino and Professor Ferreira have an obsession with the materiality of the content without being aware of the fragility of the external validation of the material, confronting the text of the papyri and parchments with the cultural contingency and the limitations imposed by science in general: the Physics, Chemistry, Mathematics, Archeology, Geography, then philosophy, mythology, superstition are mixed just because everything is written in Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic, and as if that was enough to validate everything that is in the scrolls.
The same scrolls that count: of a talking serpent, of a whale that regurgitates a live man after three days in its esophagus or stomach, or of a sea that opens with a heroic gesture for the safe and dry passage of more than half a million people without getting their feet wet. Or the stone walls that crumble with the sound of trumpets. Five fish and three loaves of bread that feed five thousand men. A man who repopulated the earth by saving it from a flood by putting five pairs of each species of animal in a huge ark and then with three pairs of people rebuilt the entire population of the earth.
Where is the line that limits the myth from the facts?
It would be a gigantic epistemological leap to examine a text totally contaminated with mythologies and magic written to impress and convince the reader that it is a huge book of miracles and magic.
How could it be possible to separate what is myth from what could be used for a documentary historical examination with so much effort to learn Hebrew and ancient Aramaic and mix facts with myths and treat these as a serious thing, simply because it is written in the Greek originals, Hebrew and Aramaic, seems to me a huge wasted intellectual effort.
Nenhum comentário:
Postar um comentário