[Milton-L] Milton Judges in SA

Michael Gillum mgillum at unca.edu
Sun Feb 24 15:21:06 EST 2008


We need to bear in mind that Milton was an individualistic interpreter of
scripture.  He might, for example, have believed that Samson prayed for
personal revenge as in Judges, but God did not answer the prayer in the
spirit of Sampson's request. Suppressing the content of the prayer leaves
open the question of why God enabled the action. I am tempted to add "or
even whether God enabled the action," even though I think Milton thought God
did so. The ambiguity that Carrol insists on does tend to open that larger
question.

Michael

On 2/24/08 2:23 PM, "Carrol Cox" <cbcox at ilstu.edu> wrote:

> 
> 
> Paul Miller wrote:
>> 
>> Jim
>> 
>> Most argument does assert something and as for descending I will leave that
>> alone. I didn't say that Milton wrote SA as a direct narrative
>> representation of the biblical account just that where he differs from
>> scripture it is usually obvious. We only have the messenger's account in SA
>> and from that vantage point he couldn't hear the prayer and seeing the
>> moving lips of an inclined head at a distance may not be in the realm of the
> 
> Milton made it that way; he _chose_ to present it ambiguously. There are
> innumerable ways in which it would have been possible to avoid ambiguity
> but Milton _chose_ to present it through a witness not privy to that
> truth. The ambiguity is DELIBERATE.
> 
> Carrol
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Milton-L mailing list
> Milton-L at lists.richmond.edu
> Manage your list membership and access list archives at
> http://lists.richmond.edu/mailman/listinfo/milton-l




More information about the Milton-L mailing list