Freethought & Rationalism ArchiveThe archives are read only. |
06-17-2002, 02:56 AM | #1 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,777
|
The Documentary Hypothesis & 'Minimalism'
Some, like Kosh, assert that the whole Tanakh is some [i]"7th cent BCE. Fabrication". But doesn't this mean a complete repudiation of the Documentary Hypothesis? Is there, in fact, a Friedman/Finkelstein debate?
|
06-17-2002, 04:53 AM | #2 | |
Regular Member
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Lancaster, PA
Posts: 167
|
Quote:
What exactly is meant by documentary hypothesis? If you mean the hypothesis that the Tenakh is an eyewitness historical account, or at least an account grounded on factual accounts of the past, then hasn't that been soundly refuted by all non-biblicist archeaologists, minimalist or non-minimalist? |
|
06-17-2002, 05:07 AM | #3 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,777
|
Quote:
|
|
06-17-2002, 05:48 AM | #4 | |
Regular Member
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Lancaster, PA
Posts: 167
|
Quote:
But couldn't you support a view that the other redactors simply followed the 7th century BCE? The midrash tradition would support such a view. Does Finkelstein completely discount that possibility? |
|
06-17-2002, 06:11 AM | #5 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,777
|
Quote:
|
|
06-17-2002, 06:34 AM | #6 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Portlandish
Posts: 2,829
|
Quote:
|
|
06-17-2002, 07:12 AM | #7 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Orions Belt
Posts: 3,911
|
Quote:
However, as he also points out, I still believe it's mostly mythology. No Adam and Eve, no Flood, No Exodus. No great Temples of Solomon, etc. That's why I call it a fabrication. Of course, this is my opinions, and as the saying goes, "Opinions are like Assholes..." |
|
06-17-2002, 07:18 AM | #8 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,777
|
I'm not sure why I haven't come across this before, but I much appreciate the intellectual honesty found in this <a href="http://members.iinet.net.au/~temdavid/the%20veracity%20of%20the%20exodus.html" target="_blank">Sermon Delivered on First Morning of Passover</a>
The problem I see with confusing 'final redaction' with "fabrication' is that the latter tends to 'throw the baby out with the bath water'. This is fine if the only question at hand is the inerrancy of the Torah. But once the focus shifts from apologetics to one of history, archaeology and anthropology, to quote Feldman's editorial in BAR: "The debate over the historicity of the Bible is nowhere near as settled as Lazare would have the readers of Harper's believe." [ June 17, 2002: Message edited by: ReasonableDoubt ]</p> |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|