Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Steviepinhead · 10-24-2007, 11:45 AM

So there you go, afdave: if you'd go to the source documents, and read for comprehension, instead of being satisfied with the first quote-mine you can find that satisfies your inherent need for authority-approval of your preconceptions, you wouldn't find yourself having to awkwardly back-and-fill out of one over-tight parking space after another.

Dave Hawkins · 10-25-2007, 09:40 AM

ERNEST NICHOLSON, PROVOST OF ORIEL COLLEGE AT OXFORD ACKNOWLEDGES STEADY ATTACKS ON THE DH

In The Pentateuch in the Twentieth Century: The Legacy of Julius Wellhausen (or via: amazon.co.uk) (1998), Ernest Nicholson says the following ...

Quote:

By the end of the decade [1970s], however, and continuing throughout the 1980s and into the present decade [1990s], one major study after another, like a series of hammer blows, has rejected the main claims of the Documentary Theory and the criteria on the basis of which they were argued. Winnet's view, for which he expected few if any converts, is now in the driving-seat, so to speak, and those who adhere to the Documentary Theory are very much on the defensive. As a result, Pentateuchal research since the mid-1970s has become a mirror image of what it was in the years following the publication of Wellhausen's study of the composition of the Pentateuch in the mid-1870s: whereas at that time the Documentary Theory which he had so persuasively argued was in the ascendant, commanding ever increasing support, today it is in sharp decline--some would say in a state of advanced rigor mortis--and new solutions are being argued and urged in its place. (p. 95-96)

This author still is an advocate of the DH, but the recent convulsions have caused him to modify his positions somewhat.

Dave Hawkins · 10-25-2007, 09:45 AM

This thread asks if the Book of Genesis is composed of written records or oral traditions. It seems we need to focus more on this. I will make a post in line with this shortly. In the mean time, please have a look at my new thread ... <which was merged with this thread> which points out that DH advocates are now on the defensive.

This would explain the Myers paragraph in question on this thread. I sure do want to see what Friedman wrote that caused her to footnote him. I guess I will have to buy the book. My library doesn't have it. I will discuss the Myer/Friedman topic more on my new thread.

Dean Anderson · 10-25-2007, 10:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by afdave

This thread asks if the Book of Genesis is composed of written records or oral traditions. It seems we need to focus more on this. I will make a post in line with this shortly. In the mean time, please have a look at my new thread ... <which was merged with this thread> which points out that DH advocates are now on the defensive.

Since this thread has been about the DH from the very first post, I have asked for that thread to be merged into here.

There's no point starting a new DH thread whilst there are still so many outstanding issues on this one.

Faid · 10-25-2007, 11:01 AM

Oh look, it's the Dave Dance!

Can this thread be locked or merged, please? Dave has all the room he needs for his dance moves.

Diogenes the Cynic · 10-25-2007, 11:11 AM

I merged Dave's new thread with this one per Dean's request.

DtC, Moderator, BC&H

Coleslaw · 10-25-2007, 11:17 AM

This review of the book The Pentateuch in the Twentieth Century: The Legacy of Julius Wellhausen (Paperback) (or via: amazon.co.uk)
by Ernest Nicholson comes from Amazon:

Quote:

Editorial Reviews
Review
`Review from previous edition the publication of this book is quite welcome. Nicholson does not merely survey the history of the field ... He reviews many studies in great detail and subjects their assumptions, their reasoning, and their treatment of sample passages to a close analysis. This well-written book is both crucial reading for Pentateuch specialists and an excellent aid for other biblicists who need to keep abreast of the revolutions and counter-revolutions that have taken place in Pentateuchal criticism.' Benjamin D. Sommer, Review of Biblical Literature.

`This book ... treats the gamut of modern Christian scholarship on the Pentateuch in the last two centuries, and this comprehensive approach proves extremely useful.' Benjamin D. Sommer, Review of Biblical Literature.

`the book genuinely helps make recent challenges to the Documentary Hypothesis more accessible even as it defends the older view.' Benjamin D. Sommer, Review of Biblical Literature.

Regardless of whether one agrees with Nicholson's judgements ... his comprehensive analysis of modern Christian scholarship on the Pentateuch renders this book crucial to all further discussion; the book must be placed on reading lists for all graduate students and scholars.

`Throughout the book he is in dialogue with the major scholars in the biblical field. Though most of them are German, their positions are carefully explained so that the reader will readily understand the argument ... the book should be in theological libraries.' The Bible Today, vol 37, No 5 September/October 1999

`It is a clearly written description of a complicated topic. The volume is a significant contribution to contemporary Pentateuchal studies.' W. H. Bellinger, Jr, Religious Studies Review

Book Description
Despite innumerable studies from at least the time of the Reformation, it was not until little more than a century ago that one hypothesis concerning the origin of the Pentateuch, the so-called `Documentary Theory' formulated by Julius Wellhausen, established itself as the point of departure for all subsequent study of this topic. This has remained so until recently, but during the past twenty-five years the study of the Pentateuch has been once more in turmoil, and new theories have proliferated. This book arises from the conviction that much in current Pentateuchal research needs to be subjected to rigorous scrutiny and that much, indeed, is radically mistaken. Professor Nicholson argues that the work of Wellhausen, for all that it needs revision and development in detail, remains the securest basis for understanding the Pentateuch. The book is not a mere call to go `back to Wellhausen', however, for Professor Nicholson also shows that much in the intervening debate has significantly modified his conclusions, as well as asking questions that were not on Wellhausen's agenda. But the Documentary Hypothesis should remain our primary point of reference, and it alone provides the most dependable perspective from which to approach this most difficult of areas in the study of the Old Testament.

My bolding added.

shirley knott · 10-25-2007, 12:04 PM

I'm somewhat surprised that no one has yet pointed out the absurd false dilemma dave is presenting.
What on earth makes anyone with more than 1 brain cell think that there is a reasonable and usable distinction between "based on written records" and "based on oral accounts"?
What we know of Homer and the various Greek epics is that they were predominantly oral in tradition at the time.
And, of course, they have been in written form since then, and for a substantial period of time when the oral tradition was still very much active.
IOW, there was a period of time when the Odyssey was *both* written and oral.
So dave is presenting a false dilemma.
And it is one that cannot possibly do him any good -- what possible difference does it make if the nonsense in Genesis existed in a written form prior to the writing of Genesis or if it existed in oral form, or both?

If I ever though dave 'had it', I'd be suggesting that he has lost it.

no hugs for thugs,
Shirley Knott
(And apologies if this has already been raised and I missed it)

Steviepinhead · 10-25-2007, 12:57 PM

"I think I lost it
Let me know if you come across it
Let me know if I let it fall
Along a back road somewhere
Money can't replace it
No memory can erase it
And I know I'm never gonna find
Another one to compare"

I Lost It, words and music by Lucinda Williams
(Sorry, with Shirley's intro, I couldn't resist...)

Dave Hawkins · 10-25-2007, 02:02 PM

Coleslaw ... Your bolded section is not new information ... Notice my comment at the end of my Nicholson post.

Shirley ... Many people today think that the Torah contains inaccurate history ... They think this in large part due to the DH advocates who imagined that the Pentateuch came from oral traditions and thus could not possibly be reliable history. So it's an important question. If the Torah is inaccurate, how can it be inspired by God?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

10-24-2007, 11:45 AM	#1031
Steviepinhead Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Seattle, WA Posts: 1,642	So there you go, afdave: if you'd go to the source documents, and read for comprehension, instead of being satisfied with the first quote-mine you can find that satisfies your inherent need for authority-approval of your preconceptions, you wouldn't find yourself having to awkwardly back-and-fill out of one over-tight parking space after another.

10-25-2007, 09:45 AM	#1033
Dave Hawkins Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Missouri Posts: 2,375	This thread asks if the Book of Genesis is composed of written records or oral traditions. It seems we need to focus more on this. I will make a post in line with this shortly. In the mean time, please have a look at my new thread ... <which was merged with this thread> which points out that DH advocates are now on the defensive. This would explain the Myers paragraph in question on this thread. I sure do want to see what Friedman wrote that caused her to footnote him. I guess I will have to buy the book. My library doesn't have it. I will discuss the Myer/Friedman topic more on my new thread.

10-25-2007, 11:01 AM	#1035
Faid Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Athens, Greece Posts: 1,057	Oh look, it's the Dave Dance! Can this thread be locked or merged, please? Dave has all the room he needs for his dance moves.

10-25-2007, 11:11 AM	#1036
Diogenes the Cynic Moderator - Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Twin Cities, Minnesota Posts: 4,639	I merged Dave's new thread with this one per Dean's request. DtC, Moderator, BC&H

10-25-2007, 12:04 PM	#1038
shirley knott Regular Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: Madison, WI Posts: 416	I'm somewhat surprised that no one has yet pointed out the absurd false dilemma dave is presenting. What on earth makes anyone with more than 1 brain cell think that there is a reasonable and usable distinction between "based on written records" and "based on oral accounts"? What we know of Homer and the various Greek epics is that they were predominantly oral in tradition at the time. And, of course, they have been in written form since then, and for a substantial period of time when the oral tradition was still very much active. IOW, there was a period of time when the Odyssey was both written and oral. So dave is presenting a false dilemma. And it is one that cannot possibly do him any good -- what possible difference does it make if the nonsense in Genesis existed in a written form prior to the writing of Genesis or if it existed in oral form, or both? If I ever though dave 'had it', I'd be suggesting that he has lost it. no hugs for thugs, Shirley Knott (And apologies if this has already been raised and I missed it)

10-25-2007, 12:57 PM	#1039
Steviepinhead Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Seattle, WA Posts: 1,642	"I think I lost it Let me know if you come across it Let me know if I let it fall Along a back road somewhere Money can't replace it No memory can erase it And I know I'm never gonna find Another one to compare" I Lost It, words and music by Lucinda Williams (Sorry, with Shirley's intro, I couldn't resist...)

10-25-2007, 02:02 PM	#1040
Dave Hawkins Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Missouri Posts: 2,375	Coleslaw ... Your bolded section is not new information ... Notice my comment at the end of my Nicholson post. Shirley ... Many people today think that the Torah contains inaccurate history ... They think this in large part due to the DH advocates who imagined that the Pentateuch came from oral traditions and thus could not possibly be reliable history. So it's an important question. If the Torah is inaccurate, how can it be inspired by God?

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.