What a juvenile formulation.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Authorship of Torah
- Thread starter Rival
- Start date
And why should anyone think your findings credible? What, specifically, have you studied on the matter?
I'm trying to determine whether or not the your statement is ignorant or simply sophomoric.
See Torah.
firedragon
Veteran Member
Hey thanks. You're down the right path.
buddhist
Well-Known Member
What do the moderate and liberal scholars say about that, and why should I believe the conservative scholars more than the former?
whirlingmerc
Well-Known Member
For one thing the Samaritan Pentateuch predates Ezra...
"...Samaritans employ the Samaritan alphabet which is derived from the Paleo-Hebrew alphabet used by the Israelite community prior to the Babylonian captivity...." from https://vmturbo.atlassian.net/wiki/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=62325015
"...Samaritans employ the Samaritan alphabet which is derived from the Paleo-Hebrew alphabet used by the Israelite community prior to the Babylonian captivity...." from https://vmturbo.atlassian.net/wiki/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=62325015
whirlingmerc
Well-Known Member
For example grabbing a section of a book and saying it must be from a different epic or source because it has a different phrase I would reject
Books 2 and 3 of the Psalms use the name ELohim but those books reflect a poetic approach to Exodus and Leviticus where the books of Psalms that reflect Genesis Numbers and Dueteronomy use Yawheh. It's more part of a larger structure
Also in Genesis and Exodus there is allot of stucture and chiastic outlines hat would make it hard to gard a pieces here and there and plop together and get
What is most interesting here is that you most likely believe that you've answered my question.
The Documentary Hypothesis is more sophisticated than this, though. They are not simply looking at random sections. There are narratives that seem to repeat in Genesis, but with slight variations between them. When these narrative strands are separated out, we see that one will use a certain name for God while the other narrative uses a different word. Consistently. (And there is much more to it than what I mention here.) The Documentary Hypothesis could certainly be wrong; but, it does the best job I have seen of both explaining variations within the text and preserving the literary brilliance of the composer.
What is the best study that you've read that challenges the Documentary Hypothesis?
That is a good question and one that gives me cause for reflection. I have read nothing scholarly that takes a different stance, only apologetics by Christian Fundamentalists. Saying so makes me realize my own ignorance about rebuttals to the Documentary Hypothesis. I never made a point of pursuing challenges to it. Maybe someone in this thread will provide some good counter-theories.
In my opinion, Blenkinsopp's The Pentateuch: An Introduction to the First Five Books of the Bible is well worth reading, not so much because he rejects the DH, but because he cautions against presuming that we know far more that we do (or can) know.
I own a fun Chumash by Richard Elliot Friedman where JEDPR are all conveniently identified by color, font, and weight. It's clever (and informed) guess work, but it is only that. It's just too darn easy to overreach.
whirlingmerc
Well-Known Member
I have broadly read overviews on the subject, but they are largely from a conservative perspective.
Are you disagreeing that the Samaritan Pentateuch predates Ezra?
I know (in a fairly extreme view) some people try and minimialize the Torah saying the priest rewrote it to their advantage but the Samaritans would lack such motive.
I wrote to Carl Sagan on the issue 30 years ago when he made this claim on TV for example
whirlingmerc
Well-Known Member
By the way, an interesting article on the Doc Hypthesis raising the question whether anyone should believe it.
http://www.ukapologetics.net/docu.htm
http://www.ukapologetics.net/docu.htm
Seriously?
I know of no reason to believe otherwise, nor am I aware of any substantive scholarship supporting such a claim. You've certainly failed to reference anything of the kind.
Of course you did.
whirlingmerc
Well-Known Member
Thanks. I try.
Are you agreeing with Carl Sagan that priests wrote the whole thing after the exile for power and control ?
Are you agreeing with Carl Sagan that priests wrote the whole thing after the exile for power and control ?
Where does Carl Sagan say such a thing? And why would you consider Sagan an authority on the matter?