A consistent hermeneutic

Now we return to the issue with which we began. When we try to understand what the Bible says, it is of utmost importance that we approach the text consistently. We cannot take individual passages or verses in isolation and apply whatever particular logical process is necessary to make them say what we want them to say or think they should say. This is true whether we are apologists trying to defend the Bible or anti-Christian critics attempting to defame it. Inconsistent interpretations are of no value, and their conclusions should not be seriously considered by anyone.— The Lost World of the Israelite Conquest, 253

<idle musing>
I agree 100 percent. It's an admirable goal and one to which we should all aspire. But after reading this book twice now, and looking at the reviews and interacting with the few comments left here, I have to think that there are some hermeneutical gymnastics going on.

As much as I wish I could find a logical, agreeable solution to ḥerem, I'm still left without one. And that's probably ok. Somethings just aren't understandable this side of paradise—I just wish I could choose which ones!
</idle musing>