lao tzu

Over the course of the last couple of days, I've managed to make my way through this thread, and would like to thank those who've presented their arguments on the DH, something I've been meaning to look at more closely for quite some time. My thanks especially to Dean Anderson for a clear and concise rendering of the consilience argument.

I've noted that IIDB is sometimes less than adamant about reining in the dilations of our more enthusiastic YECs, and the information provided in this thread is a wonderful example of the benefits of this policy.

Greetings, Constant Mews,

If you'll allow an observation, I find your criticism here both valid and seemingly irrelevant. Most of us with a passing knowledge of ANE cultures are aware of "pre-Flood" (aka third millenium BCE) writings handed down to "Noah" and "Moses" (aka biblical authors). Examples include the Enuma Elish and the law codes of Hammurabi and Ur-Nammu.

Or, in generosity, perhaps it is relevant in that these inclusions do not tend to support a divine inspiration of the Abrahamic sacred texts, and the omission of these sources could be seen as invidious. In either case, though, and in the apparent spirit of allowing this odd excursion to continue, they are on the table now.

As ever, Jesse

Cege

Colophon examples in ancient literature have been difficult to find online, but here's one, quoting Ancient Israelite and Early Jewish Literature By A. S. van der Woude:

"A good example of a colophon can be found in the Baal myth from Ugarit:

"The scribe Ilimilku, the Shubbanite,
Disciple of Attanu-purulini, who is chief of the priests,
(and) chief of the cultic herdsmen;
ta'iyu-official of Niqmaddu, (who is) king of Ugarit,
lord (of) YRGB, (and) master (of) TRMN. "

It doesn't appear to be anything like the toledoths used in Genesis.

Sauron

<edit>

Dean Anderson

None of which, of course, would show that the DH itself was wrong - even if you were correct about these assumptions.

Well, that was what your initial statements - the ones which I wanted you to defend in a debate - were about.

Again, we have this misleading statement. The DH says that the whole Torah is a compilation, and tracks the various sources through the Torah through multiple ways of differentiating the text, all of which are consilient with each other.

The Tablet theory says that about the first half of Genesis is a compilation, but that the other 80% of the Torah is the handiwork of Moses. This goes no way to explain the consilience between the ways of splitting the Torah, or to explain why that consilience applies to Genesis equally with the rest of the Torah.

a) You have provided no evidence that the Toledoths are indicators of source documents.

b) You present a false dichotomy between "written tablets by the patriarchs" and "no writing in the time that Moses allegedly lived" - neglecting such possibilities as "other written sources that can be tracked throughout the Torah"

I have already shown an example of a colophon (chosen at random, not cherry picked) which is quite clearly not similar to a toledoth.

You have provided no evidence of such similarity.

That, plus the fact that - as I have shown - the DH explains the consilience seen across the Torah and the Tablet theory doesn't, are very good reasons not to assume your hypothesis; initially or otherwise.

You are equivocating between "colophon" and "toledoth".

I do not question that tablets with colophons exist. I have reproduced an example of a colophon from a tablet myself.

What I question is that colophons and toledoths bear any relationship to each other.

Dave, I have shown an example colophon in this thread. It is quite obviously not similar to a Biblical toledoth.

You have provided no evidence that there is any similarity.

Sorry, but if trusting what I can see with my own eyes over trusting what you assert makes me "closed minded" then so be it.

This is perfectly compatible with both the DH and the Tablet theory, and is therefore not evidence that either should be preferred over the other.

Egypt was the big superpower of the era, with influence (both trading and military) that extended way beyond Israel and Judah.

What evidence do you have that later Hebrews would be so ignorant of Egyptian customs?

This argues for the DH, and against the Tablet theory - since Wiseman gives an incomplete list. As spin has already listed on this thread, there are many more places that did not exist at the time that Moses was alleged to have existed yet did at a later time which corresponds to the age of the Hebrew language that the Torah is written in.

By Wiseman's own argument, we should favour the DH over the Tablet theory.

Completely irrelevant. Just because someone goes into details does not mean that those details are accurate. Since we have no other accounts to compare them to, we have no way of knowing how accurate they are.


What evidences are these? You have given none so far.

VoxRat

Well, they both involve words, many of which are proper nouns.

That looks like a pretty compelling case to me!*


*(as compelling a case as afdave has ever made for any of his reality-defying hypotheses, that is) :Cheeky:

Constant Mews

I'm sorry, perhaps I did not make my point clear. Dave claimed that he could show positive evidence that such tablets were handed down to Noah. Unfortunately, he has failed to present any evidence that Noah even existed.

You may not be completely familiar with Dave's techniques; he is quite fond of making grandiose claims that cannot be supported, and then declaring victory at some later moment.

I'm not sure I entirely follow your last point.

Cege

More colophon examples from ancient literature, as cited in The Babylonian Genesis:

COLOPHON I

First tablet of Enuma elish; (written) like (its) original and collated).
The tablet of Nabu-Balatsu-iqbi, the son of Na>id-Ma(rduk...)
By the hand of Naub-balatsui-iqbi, the son of 'Nai>id-Marduk...

COLOPHON II

First table ot Enuma elish, after the ta(blet...)
A copy from Babylon; written like its original (and collated).
The tablet of Nabu-mushetiq-umi, the son of (...).
He who fears Marduk and Sarpani(tu shall not take it away illegitimately)
Or withhold (it) from use...
The month of Iyyar, the ninth day, the twenty-seventh year of D(arius).

Dean Anderson

I agree that they are hard to find.

But it is readily apparent that the one that you found is very similar to the one that I found.

And neither of them are anything like a Biblical toledoth...

Toto

The chuqqim digression has been split off here

FatherMithras

Dave, this is pathetic. You can't make an argument and just say "Your argument doesn't hold up. Mine does. It has the evidence, bam. But I will never ever tell you what it is. just know it's there. Have faith in the lord yada yada."