MiddleMan

From what I understand, source theory itself is not dead. The major bones of contention are on the number of sources (was there just a single "J" source? Or is "J" itself composed of other sources; "J1", "J2", "J3", etc? Or, was there a "J" at all and instead "J" and "E" are part of one single source used by the Deuteronamists?) and when these sources were authored/included in the final product.

Anat

Chris, what does AUC stand for?

Amaleq13

anno urbis conditae or "in the year from the founding of the city" referring to Rome (ie 753BCE)

Chris Weimer

What he said. It's a fairly religionless term that I prefer over BCE/CE being a Classicist and all.

Anat

So the 2nd century AUC would be from about 553 BCE to 453 BCE? which date should I trust more in your post #7? (The cultural influences would be quite different.)

Sheshbazzar

"Documentary Hypothesis" = "DH"

DH, A Dead Horse, now dead in its tracks, surrounded by a desert with no oasis in sight, its riders having no other ride, yet remain by its side, and continue to flog its now stinking carcass.

Will any have the sense to walk away? Will they fall upon their knees and pray?
For a miracle indeed it would take, to revive again that old dead horse,
but that old dead hose is not the Way.

But for whomsoever shall walk away, and pray, a path shall be opened before him in the wilderness, leading to the Oasis where the water is always sweet, and never fails, and the trees bear fruit in every season.

Gather your provisions for the journey from the pack, a measure of flour, and water for your thirst, and to prepare your bread, but take heed, leave all that leavens behind.

Set foot upon the path that is laid straight through this wilderness, and walk.
Do not go from the path, either to the right, nor the left, and do not look back. After many days walking, living only on water and unleavened bread, you shall see the Oasis.

A voice upon the wind, speaking in the wilderness

Chris Weimer

Neither. It's been too long of a day. Actually, go with the second one. Now I think I'll log off for a bit.

Loomis

Well … I’m no scholar. But if we only listen to Friedman, and only to the ‘Documentary Hypothesis’ then I think we’re going to miss some juicy stuff.

For example, it looks like the first creation story in Genesis 1 originally had the elohim creating everything over the course of seven days without any rest. It looks like someone came along later (a redactor, a second author, whatever you want to call it) and re-arranged things so that the elohim could rest on the seventh day.

How does Friedman explain this?

Another example is Genesis 14. The entire chapter appears to be an insertion. The Melchizedek verses (18, 19, 20) appear to be an insertion in the insertion. And the word “Yahweh�? at verse 22 is a late gloss. (Abram raised his hand to El, the Most High God, not to Yahweh.) Nevertheless the ‘Documentary Hypothesis’ attributes Genesis 14 and most of the surrounding chapters to the Yahwist.

Go figure. Why would a Yahwist write it and then forget to mention Yahweh?

How does Friedman explain this?

And of course my favorite is Deuteronomy 32:8-9 where the Most High divides humanity according to the number of the sons of El. Nevertheless Friedman is proud to allow you to think that the Most High is dividing humanity according to the number of the children of Israel. Evidently Friedman has redacted his own view on this issue. What does he have to say for himself?

I think the thing that pisses me off the most about the “Documentary Hypothesis�? is its monotheistic allegation that ‘the Pentateuch was written by different authors who held different opinions about God.’ It makes no mention of the earlier polytheistic stories that those ‘opinions’ grew out of.

Genesis 2:4

These are the generations of Heaven (a personal name) and Earth (a personal name) - when Yahweh among the gods made Earth and Heaven.

JPED my ass.

Sheshbazzar

AKA, JEPD and JEDP for those who are interested in searching the subject further.

Brel

I go to a fairly conservative Christian university, and even they taught and embraced the DH. Heh, had I not gone here and been forced to take Religious Studies classes, I probably never would have heard of it!

It was fascinating to learn about and explains the divisions in the Bible well. And it furthered my lack of belief in the Bible as revealed truth.