2 Sam. 6:6-7
Tim Taylor errancy@infidels.org
Mon, 31 May 1999 06:11:07 -0700 (PDT) (00928174267, 19990531131107.5533.rocketmail@web123.yahoomail.com)
--- Inversion99@collegeclub.com wrote:
>
>
> TIM
>
> >1 Samuel 7:1
> >"So the men of Kiriath Jearim came and took up the ark of the LORD.
> >They took it to Abinadab's house on the hill and consecrated Eleazar
> >his son to guard the ark of the LORD."
> >
> >Where does this say Uzzah or Abinadab was a Levite?
>
> JEFF
> I cited 1 Sam. 7:1 to show that Abinadab was a Levite. Since all male
> Levites were to serve as priests (Num. 8:15-25), it follows that Uzziah
> son of Abinadab was a Levite.
Tim
I am aware of why you cited the verse. I am also aware that there
is nothing in that verse to indicate that Abinadab was a Levite.
> >>JEFF
> >> -The Kohathite clan of Levites were responsible for, among other
> >> things, the Ark of the Covenant (Num. 4:27-32). Thus, Abinadab (and
> thus
> >> Uzzah) was probably a Kohathite.
> >
> >Tim
> >Is this circular reasoning?
> >
> >1. The Ark was supposed to be guarded by a Levite.
> >2. Therefore Abinadab's family were Levites, since they were guarding
> >the Ark.
> >
> >Again, how does (2) follow from (1)?
>
> JEFF
>
> My argument is intended as an inference to the best explanation, not a
> deductive syllogism.
Tim
Since we do not know if Abinadab was a Levite, your inference fails.
>
> >>JEFF
> >-As a Kohathite, Uzzah was trained from his youth to handle the Ark.
> >
> >Tim
> >We know nothing of the history of Uzzah prior to his execution.
> >The text provides no information. We don't know his age. We
> >don't know even if he lived with his father prior to the day
> >he helped guide the ark.
> >
>
> JEFF
>
> Mr. Taylor, you are arguing from silence. According to your line of
> thought, we also don't know whether or not Uzzah ever blinked his eyes,
> ate food, or spoke Hebrew because the text does not explicitly mention it.
> Please reconsider whether or not such a high degree of skepticism is
> warranted in this case.
Tim
No, you are wrong here. An argument from silence is to claim
"absence of evidence is evidence of absence". I am not claiming
this. I am simply claiming you have no evidence, which is true.
>
>
> >>JEFF
> >> That no one else was punished despite the fact that all were
> >> accomplices indicates that God is compassionate;
> >
> >Tim
> >To prove this, you would have to prove that murder, with no warning,
> >is compassionate. I have already posted a definition of compassionate,
> >which consists of pity, mercy, and sympathy. Striking a man dead,
> >without warning, does not manifest any of these attributes.
> >
> > A compassionate God would have issued a warning SOMEWHERE
> >in the chain of events, instead of murdering in anger.
>
> JEFF
>
> Aside from the fact that your above assertions beg the question,
Tim
No question-begging involved. A conclusion based on textual evidence.
>JEFF
> please
> see Num. 4:14,19-20, and 1 Sam. 6:19-20 for indications that Uzzah had
> received previous warning regarding the dangers of improperly handling the
> Ark.
Tim
That certainly would be fascinating, since Uzzah is never mentioned prior
to 2 Samuel. You have no evidence. The conclusion still remains.
Yahweh was quick to anger and lacked compassion in the striking down of
Uzzah.
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com