1. A midrash is a thorough interpretation of sacred Hebrew texts.
2. The validity of both the Bible and the novel could be argued because those texts could present truth based on the writers’ perspectives. Based on the argument, The Red Tent could also be valid because the story was true in the eyes of Diamant.
3. Because of their beliefs, Simon and Levi committed a mass slaughter even after Shalem’s people were circumcised.
4. Although The Red Tent is inaccurate in the eyes of historians, the novel delivers the original purpose of the Bible.
5. A miracle when Jesus turned water into wine is one of multiple examples written in the Bible that could not be proven.
6. Anita Diamant’s interpretation of the Bible led to certain components of the Bible to be portrayed differently in the novel.
7. …show more content…
The Bible is written that Dinah went to the women of the land; however, the Bible does not give a reason why she has gone on that journey.
43. Although the article “Mary Magdalene: Saint or Sinner” and the novel The Red Tent misinterpreted the concept of truth, both texts are referred as a common truth.
44. Overall interpretation of the Book of Genesis that readers receive is that Dinah’s family had thought that she was raped by Shalem and slaughtered all of Shalem’s family.
45. Diamant’s novel contradicts the story written in the Bible.
46. The Bible and The Red Tent had different points of view towards the rape of Dinah.
47. Even though The Red Tent reasonably describes the controversial issue as love between Dinah and Shalem, one downside is that it was not a historical text.
48. There is a possibility that the story of Dinah might not actually be the story of Dinah.
49. Simon and Levi reasoned their argument by saying, “should he have treated our sister like a prostitute” (Genesis 34).
50. People mistaken falsehood to be truth.
51. A midrash includes additional interpretation of the Bible and the interpretation of Diamant about the events that were told by
2. The validity of both the Bible and the novel could be argued because those texts could present truth based on the writers’ perspectives. Based on the argument, The Red Tent could also be valid because the story was true in the eyes of Diamant.
3. Because of their beliefs, Simon and Levi committed a mass slaughter even after Shalem’s people were circumcised.
4. Although The Red Tent is inaccurate in the eyes of historians, the novel delivers the original purpose of the Bible.
5. A miracle when Jesus turned water into wine is one of multiple examples written in the Bible that could not be proven.
6. Anita Diamant’s interpretation of the Bible led to certain components of the Bible to be portrayed differently in the novel.
7. …show more content…
The Bible is written that Dinah went to the women of the land; however, the Bible does not give a reason why she has gone on that journey.
43. Although the article “Mary Magdalene: Saint or Sinner” and the novel The Red Tent misinterpreted the concept of truth, both texts are referred as a common truth.
44. Overall interpretation of the Book of Genesis that readers receive is that Dinah’s family had thought that she was raped by Shalem and slaughtered all of Shalem’s family.
45. Diamant’s novel contradicts the story written in the Bible.
46. The Bible and The Red Tent had different points of view towards the rape of Dinah.
47. Even though The Red Tent reasonably describes the controversial issue as love between Dinah and Shalem, one downside is that it was not a historical text.
48. There is a possibility that the story of Dinah might not actually be the story of Dinah.
49. Simon and Levi reasoned their argument by saying, “should he have treated our sister like a prostitute” (Genesis 34).
50. People mistaken falsehood to be truth.
51. A midrash includes additional interpretation of the Bible and the interpretation of Diamant about the events that were told by