Anat

spin, were Patriarchal stories about Bethel, Shechem and Dan relevant in post-exilic times?

spin

Shechem was obviously relevant to post-exilic times through the conflict with the Samaritans. I haven't thought about the others except to acknowledge that traditions can come from a long way back in time. (Traces of Gilgamesh have been found in the 1001 Nights; materials in the grail legends go back to Mesopotamia. How were these transmitted?)

What we often find is that parallels between traditions and historical events get made and the traditions get reinvented. The return was related to the exodus; the struggle with Antioch related to the struggle with Babylon; the building of the walls under Simon the Just almost certainly with Nehemiah. We are lucky that we know some of the connections between traditions and later recontextualizations.


spin

spin

The most important thing about the DH has been that it does show seams.

Working on the notion that these texts were the possession and the product of a priestly organization, I find the few authors assumption unrealistic. What comes to mind is a particular Hindu text, whose name has escaped me, which although containing parts that were ancient, runs the gamit from Mohammed to Queen Victoria.


spin

Anat

spin, what about the legal part of the pentateuch? Do you think the repetitions and variations are the result of multiple traditions, sectarianism or what? Do you think any pre-exilic laws made it into the pentateuch?

Anat

I find it interesting that the attitude to Shechem in the Pentateuch and DH is ambivalent - it is a place of worship for Abraham and Jacob, but also the setting for the Dinah story and its aftermath; it is the place of Joshua's altar and also the capital of Abimelech's ill-fated illegitimate mini-kingdom. If the time of writing is post-exilic, I wonder how anything positive about Shechem was retained.

The same can be asked of Joseph and his descendants - if the writing is so late, when the north was represented entirely by the hated Samaritans, why make such heroes of Joseph and Joshua? Judah and Caleb are certainly present in the stories and most of the time show positive leadership and responsibility, but their status is not anywhere near that of their counterparts.

spin

The only sectarianism that I think involved in the bible is late literature such as Ezra and Chronicles which have a non-priestly (!) emphasis, suggesting a period after the priesthood lost control of the Jewish literary heritage.

There is another issue however. The true relationship between Gerizzim and Jerusalem has been obscured by later conflict. These are two centers which shared extremely similar religious views and probably shared religious literature, especially probable when you consider that priests from Jerusalem were involved in Gerizzim.

There are many causes for the repetitions and variations you mention, partly regarding the manner of transmission, the internals of scrolls not being easily accessible will stimulate the restatement of content elsewhere with accompanying variation; different time periods will stimulate variation and repetition; different sources such as Gerizzim and Jerusalem will have similar effects.


spin

spin

I'd guess received tradition. If Gerizzim was not anathema until relatively late -- and this is evinced by the intermarriage between the priesthoods --, then Shechem won't be always painted badly. The Dinah story fits further down the line of problems between the two centers.

You'd be surprised how small the theological differences are between the Judaic and Samaritan pentateuchs.

What is more interesting to me is the fact that although Abraham is given prime position in Genesis (he's the one who gets the promise), trickster Jacob gets top mention throughout the Tanakh. It's as though Abraham is a later tradition. Jacob is still putting up Yahweh pillars under Asherah trees. Abraham has a more personal, and more sophisticated, relationship with his god.


spin

aChristian

It is a wacko theory. In at least one case I have heard of, it cuts one verse into three authors. Of course the only real manuscripts you find are all complete. You don't find a J, D, E, or P document except in the fantasies of those who make up their own history and then try to go back to the source documents and throw out what disagrees with their preconceived ideas in order to find support for their theory. The people who lived back then considered them to be single authors. It is only those who live far enough after the event (like 4000 years) who will dispute the traditional authorship. If you really want some info on it, try Gleason Archer's Intro to the Old Test. There are other good conservative books on it. Robert Dick Wilson totally destroyed the theory, but those who want JEDP to be true don't want to read his works.

spin

Those people who want the exodus to be true don't want to read archaeology. Those people who want the flat earth to be true don't want to use telescopes, who want creatio ex nihilo to be true don't want to read the Hebrew text, who want Star Wars to be true,... who want the Da Vinci Code to be true... In short, the reasoning of the quotation is non-existent.


spin

Apikorus

It seems as though Abraham also plants the equivalent of an asherah tree:

And Abraham planted a tamarisk tree in Beer-sheba, and called there on the name of yhvh, el olam. (Gen 21:33)