Nylla

The irony is killing me.

"He said he was reporting something others were saying."

Yes, much like the writers of the bible, and Jesus's modern followers.

ksen

Hold on, you are changing your question (again). Originally you weren't questioning whether only the account we currently have was in the original you were questioning whether or not ANY account of Adam and Eve were in Genesis.

Read Gundulf's post above.

You are the only one making this request. And now you've changed your request.

Oh, then the text really wasn't the issue. There'll always be something else.

Gundulf

I think I'm confused now - what 'original story' of Adam and Eve are you referring to here? I assume you don't believe that it actually happened, so I'm assuming you mean the original mythical story that was passed around a campfire? Or do you mean the first time it was actually transcribed and written down on a piece of paper/parchment/stone?

Personally, as a fundie who actually believes in the Mosaic authorship myself, I still have no problem suggesting that Moses acted as a redactor of sorts and wrote that story in his words from various other sources.

But once that story was actually written down, by Moses, or by J & E, or whoever, you're suggesting that it was significantly altered, beyond just simple textual errors? Or by 'original story' do you mean the story that Moses, or J & E, borrowed from? Are you certain that this story was ever written down before Moses/J&E penned their versions? Personally, I don't see any significant reason, historical, textual, or otherwise, to suggest that the story was significantly altered from the time it was originally transcribed - be it by Moses or J & E or whoever.

Can you explain EXACTLY what you mean by 'original story'?

Gundulf

By the way, since it came up during this discussion - I'm curious what is so extraordinarily bizarre about the idea that Moses might have acted as the original author/redactor of the Pentateuch?

ksen

Why, those "fundies" believe Moses is the author/redactor of the Pentateuch and people who want to be seen as "credible" Bible scholars can have no similarities with "fundies!"

Johnny Skeptic

Ksen was talking about me. What I want to know is what evidence is there that the copies that we have today of the first recorded story of Adam and Eve are the same as the first story except for scribal and copyist errors? Regarding the Gettysburg Address, which was delivered in 1863, which was only 144 years ago, there is a big difference between the authenticity of that document and the authenticy of texts that were originally written over 4,000 years ago.? At http://www.cybernation.com/gettysbur..._original.html, there is the original Gettysburg Address in Lincoln's own handwriting. You obviously cannot produce the original of any Old Testament document.

There is also a big difference between the integrity of a single document written in probably a few days by one or several authors, and many documents written by many authors over many centuries. As far as inerrantists are concerned, the integrity of the story of Adam and Eve is primarily an issue of faith, but you have attempted to disguise the issue of faith as being an issue of history. Who do you think you are kidding?

James Brown

Assuming that Moses did write Genesis, from where did he get his information? At best we could conclude he was the author of Exodus through Deut if we take the stance that he was writing biography in the third person.

But how did Moses know the order of the events of Creation? Who told Moses what Adam and Eve and God said to each other? How did Moses know the fate of Cain & Abel, the Great Flood, and the shenanigans of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob?


Looking at these passages in NIV, I'm not sure about these. I don't know Greek, so the NIV's English is all I'm going on.

Mark 12 has the Sadducees saying, "Moses wrote..." but Jesus says the law comes from the "book of Moses," which could be a reference to a book about Moses (or a book of Moses' law) rather than a strict interpretation of "book written by Moses."

The Luke passage has Jesus calling it "an account" and then quotes Moses, but that's much different than saying that Moses wrote the account.

John 1:17 is not Jesus saying anything about Moses' authorship, but is the author of John comparing law being given by Moses and grace being given by Jesus.

John 1:45 also does not have Jesus say anything about who wrote the Pentateuch. It's only one disciple telling another that he thinks Jesus is "the one Moses wrote about."

Only John 5 has Jesus saying, "Moses wrote about me." But then, John is the latest gospel and the one most intent on demonstrating that Jesus has been center-stage all the way back before the creation of the universe. Plus, Jesus doesn't quote any passage of the Pentateuch when making this claim, which weakens his arguments against the Jews. He essentially says, "Moses wrote about me, and it's up to you to figure out where, but why bother? You don't believe Moses so you won't believe me, either." Not a very good argument, in my opinion.

I think one could have done more to prove a case than just using an online Bible search to find the mentions of Moses in the Gospels and then claim that from those Jesus made declarative statements. And of course, since Jesus never thought to write down anything down, at best all we can say is that John said that Jesus said that Moses somewhere wrote about Jesus.

ksen

Oral tradition?

Directly revealed to him by God?

I don't know.

I suppose taking the time to go through my Strong's Concordance would have lent weight to the verses I posted?

What makes using an online source suspect in your eyes? I take it then that you don't use Google or Wikipedia to research anything when you need to make a quick point?

Should I have put up a 10-page dissertation using 12 to 15 sources?

Clearly the writer's of the New Testament believed in Mosaic authorship and John clearly relates an account of Jesus strongly implying that Moses authored the Pentateuch.

Chris Weimer

That's not quite true. Fundamentalists and credible Bible scholars do share some similarities. They're both human, for one. (Though sometimes I wonder...)

The real reason that Mosaic authorship is absurd is...Moses may well not have even existed! Archaeology has pretty much killed the idea that there was a mass exodus from Egypt by the Hebrews for forty years. The conquest of Joshua (successor of Moses) didn't happen as described. There was never a conquest.

Not only that, but there are discrepencies in the Torah that show a later dating - such as Aramaic words.

It's also rather peculiar that the Hebrew of the Pentateuch reflects a Hebrew much later than was around at the time of Moses.

All this and not even to mention the documentary hypothesis, which surely doesn't deserve a mere hand-waving dismissal.

Finally, finally - couldn't Jesus and the Sadduccees (assuming, of course, that this conversation actually happened) have been speaking in common parlance? Jesus was a product of his time, not ours. It's unbiblical to take Jesus out of his own context and place him in yours, assuming wrongly on your part that you are special in some way. Jesus' views on Mosaic authorship of the Torah are technically unknown to you, because you can't ask him now. Back then, it wasn't normal discourse to assume anything otherwise than Mosaic authorship.

JEST2ASK

Sorry to intrude, could you clarify do you believe that A&E is actual history or myth (part of oral history) before there was an Hebrew (Jewish) people, culture / language It has always been a problem to me regarding the accuracy of any of the biblical stories prior to the time of the Judges.