In a book about the Ethiopics, a member of the family that has dominated the region for millennia, the New York Times criticizes the Ethiopian scholars and scholars who have questioned their legitimacy.
The New York Review of Books has a lengthy article that criticizes Ethiopians for the “lack of scholarly rigor” and the “inaccurate attribution of the Ethiopic manuscript to the Hittite kingdom.”
In an article about the Book of Genesis, the editors of the New England Review of Classics wrote that “The Ethiopics have never, ever been a credible source for any ancient Hebrew text.
No Ethiopic source can be trusted.”
In the first installment of a series on Ethiopian authors, the historian James D. McPherson argues that the Ethiopicans are “one of the few surviving ancient Hebrews of the Bible that do not accept the existence of a second creation and the origin of the human race.”
McPherson’s article has since been deleted from the online version of the book.
The article in question is part of a long series of essays that were published in the late 1990s by the University of Georgia, The Christian Science Monitor, and The Atlantic Monthly.
The Atlantic piece, entitled “Ethiopians,” examines how Ethiopians are misrepresented by the mainstream scholarly community.
The book, by the late historian David C. Scharf, was a review of the Ethiopian-language Bible.
The title “The Case Against Ethiopians” was written in 1996 and was published by the New Atlantis in 2002.
It was a critique of Ethiopians, arguing that they are “unquestionably a flawed and unreliable source of information.”
In The Atlantic article, the book criticizes “many scholars who say they are not only unaccredited by the majority of scholars but are actively hostile to them.”
The article was also widely shared on social media, where it was shared more than 7,500 times on Facebook.
The online version, which was later deleted, was written by a scholar who has also written books critical of the ancient Hebrew Bible, including a 2009 article that argued that “some Ethiopian scholars are not so much sympathetic to the Bible as hostile to Christianity.”
The New Atlantis has not commented on McPhesons critique, nor has the Christian Science News, which is owned by the same company that owns the Times, which also has a long history of publishing inaccurate articles.
McPsherry, who is no longer with the Times and has since retired from the university, told The Christian Post that he wrote his article “because of the recent controversy about the Ethiopian manuscripts.”
“The reason for writing the article was because I was frustrated with the scholarly treatment of Ethiopics and their claims about the Hebrew Bible,” McPhee told The Post.
McPhilsherry, the author of numerous books critical a number of ancient Hebrew texts, including the Genesis, Exodus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, and Hosea, also wrote that the Ethiopian literature “is a ‘bogus’ source of historical information, and I was convinced that it is simply wrong.”
In 2006, McPheys piece was published in an online book called “The Old Testament and the Ancient Near East: A Biblical and Historical History.”
McPshee said that he didn’t intend for his article to be an attack on the Ethiopias.
“I’m not saying that there’s no basis for Ethiopians’ claims, but it’s just that there isn’t a lot of it,” he said.
“If you look at the text of the Old Testament, there’s not a lot about Ethiopians in it.
The Hebrews aren’t in it.”
McPriths criticism of the writings of Ethiopias scholars is “unacceptable,” McPhilms said.
McPrith told The Washington Post that there are many Ethiopians who “know very little about the Bible, and they are often accused of not being reliable sources.”
“If I say something wrong, the next person that hears it will say, ‘Why are you making this accusation?’ and ‘Well, I’ve heard that before,'” he said, “and they’re right.”
He said he has received more than 200 letters in support of his work.
“People say that there aren’t a few Ethiopians on the Times.
In a 2013 article, McPrinces work in the New Testament “contains errors that undermine the scholarly consensus that the New Testaments are the only available source of the Book,” McPrists essay said.
He said that “if there are errors in the Hebrew scriptures, there is an equally good reason why the Ethiopids are a poor source of their own text.”
McParris has also been criticized by scholars.
In a recent book review, historian Steven L. Jones, a professor of history at Texas A&M University, wrote that McParres essay “misrepresents the views of a number scholars.”
“I have reviewed more than 60 Ethiopians