Chapter

Reply to Fales

Christopher Seitz

in Divine Evil?

Published in print November 2010 | ISBN: 9780199576739
Published online January 2011 | e-ISBN: 9780191595165 | DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199576739.003.0032
Reply to Fales

Show Summary Details

Preview

relphiPhilosophy of Religion

The response from Evan Fales was difficult to assess. For the purpose of this response I will only indicate some areas of confusion and for further discussion.

1. Fales does not address historical-critical work on the Conquest and its limitations, which was a major theme of my chapter (how do diachronic methods create a plausible account of the date of the narratives in question, but avoid the moral question by breaking up the canonical presentation?). At one point he attributed to me a view I rejected: that speaking of ideal accounts from Deuteronomy did not resolve the moral problem. I nowhere called the account of Judges ideal and indeed classified it as the account historical criticism called frank and un-ideal. Fales lumps Deuteronomy and Judges together in ways that confused my account. I am not sure he understood the argument....

Chapter.  1639 words. 

Subjects: Philosophy of Religion

Full text: subscription required

How to subscribe Recommend to my Librarian

Buy this work at Oxford University Press »

Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content. Please, subscribe or login to access all content.