That fact that the biblical version is strikingly similar to the Mesopotamian versions, as we have seen, reflects the cultural connections between these peoples. The differences between them reflect their different theologies. The Israelite version is a statement of theological independence from the older stories of the superpower nations around them. The common medium of a well-known flood story was used by the Israelites for its own purpose.

For both contextual and scientific reasons, the biblical flood story is clearly not a statement of vital historical information. It is a powerful expression of theological identity among the other peoples of the world. – Enns on Biologos Blog

In his project at Western Seminary, which I read, Lakrey claims for himself, just as the Roman Catholic Church does, the right of interpretation.  It really is a necessary element of a closed hermeneutic.  Otherwise, the question of who gets to interpret remains open.  As with the Walter Brueggemann book where he says that Israel has two streams regarding the nations, one where they are to be destroyed, and one where they are part of Yahweh’s plan.  He sees passages pointing to both in the OT.  So which is the valid one?   So Lakrey is correct in claiming the right to determine the proper interpretation.

I could find the quote but I know it is in that Word document somewhere.  It is one of the things that really struck me.

Ehrman

Submitted by sranney on Fri, 01/14/2011 – 20:24.

The same thing in Ehrman – in his fundamentalist days he thought that the Bible would predict the future via Hal Lindsay, yet it was Lindsay who came up with his bizarre interpretation.

I believe it was today”s reading on coveting where the author says something like ”business owners need more workers, so they offer more money and thus steal the employees from another business, rather than encouraging them to stay where they are.”

Perhaps I am totally immersed in the capitalistic mentality but I found this argument not to be convincing.  Even aside from the capitalism we know, I”d say in most any historical period or place, the workers are going to go where they can make more money.

It is pretty difficult though, to think about economic systems in terms of the ethic of the Ten Commandments or of Christ.  On the one hand you could theorize about the best economic system, on the other hand you can think about how to live in the most just manner within the system in which you find yourself.    I think the latter is probably a more productive approach.