Designated Hittah for the DH
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
14-06-2013, 02:25 PM
Designated Hittah for the DH
In 1966 Professor Kenneth Kitchen wrote,
' . . . Even the most ardent advocate of the documentary theory must admit that we have as yet no single scrap of external, objective evidence for either the existence or the history of J, E, or any other alleged source-document..' (p. 23, Kitchen, K.A. (1966), Ancient Orient and Old Testament. London: Tyndale).

Don't be a hater of the hittah!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-06-2013, 02:34 PM
RE: Designated Hittah for the DH
Ladies and gentlemen, may I present the venerable Mr. BuckyBall.

But now I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth.

~ Umberto Eco
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes evenheathen's post
14-06-2013, 03:18 PM
RE: Designated Hittah for the DH
(14-06-2013 02:25 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  In 1966 Professor Kenneth Kitchen wrote,
' . . . Even the most ardent advocate of the documentary theory must admit that we have as yet no single scrap of external, objective evidence for either the existence or the history of J, E, or any other alleged source-document..' (p. 23, Kitchen, K.A. (1966), Ancient Orient and Old Testament. London: Tyndale).

Don't be a hater of the hittah!

A source 40 years old ? Well I suppose that's an improvement on a source 2000 odd years old full of made up crap.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes morondog's post
14-06-2013, 03:20 PM (This post was last modified: 14-06-2013 06:22 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Designated Hittah for the DH
Oh, you mean the evangelical Egyptologist ? The guy who is not even a Biblical scholar ?

"Kitchen is an evangelical Christian and has published frequently from that background on questions relating to the Old Testament. His publications in this area have consistently defended the historical books of the Old Testament as an accurate record of events, i.e., as history, against the academic consensus that they are primarily theological in nature"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenneth_Kitchen

Are you trying to make your position look weak, or is it just a result of your obtuse ignorance of the field ?

So, now all of a sudden, YOU, (of all people) change your position and require "evidence" ? Do you have any idea what literary criticism, and literary "evidence" even means ? You better tread lightly here, Mr. Change-Your-Mind-And-NOW-Requires-Evidence. Are you SURE this is the road you want to tread here ?

From one of my prior posts :

"In 1952, a team was set in place by the world-famous, preeminent scholar, archaeologist and pioneer discoverer of Holy Land historical sites and documents, Dr. William Foxwell Albright, the professor of Semitic languages at the Johns Hopkins University. Their job was to write criticisms and scholarly work concerning all biblical texts. The team was composed of the most respected biblical scholars in the US and Europe, including Dr. John W. Bailey, Professor Emeritus, New Testament, Berkley Baptist Divinity School, Dr Albert E. Barnett, Professor Candler School of Theology, Emory University, Dr. Walter Russell Bowel, Professor, The Protestant Episcopal Seminary, Virginia, Dr. John Bright, Professor, Union Seminary and many others.

The team of 124 clergymen and scholars came mostly from conservative, mainline universities and churches for the most part, the likes of whom will never be seen again in one place, whose names evoke the utmost and deepest respect, even if one completely disagrees with their religious views. They wrote the huge 13 volume set, now considered a valuable rare book, called "The Interpreters Bible". Today it is usually kept under lock and key in seminaries and libraries. This set includes an introduction to scholarship and looks at every single verse and word in the Bible, discusses their origins and possible meanings from various points of view. It has been updated in the 1990's, but the original scholarship is still the central fundamental summary of knowledge, which summarized scholarship from the Medieval period up to the 1850's -1950's, and is therefore considered to be an interesting historical snapshot. It is also an assurance that these absolutely respected leading intellectuals from the 20th Century scholarship, of whom most were religious, have agreed to have each other's names associated with their own, and that they felt comfortable with what each other were saying in an academic setting, and commanded world-wide respect as conservative, careful, and sincere, life-long teachers, academics and scholars."

They all signed off on the Documentary Hypothesis.

Shit. Why is it atheists have to teach fundie clerics/churchmen about their damn books ?

Tongue

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 10 users Like Bucky Ball's post
25-06-2013, 06:23 AM
RE: Designated Hittah for the DH
Huh?! The Professor's statement is STILL true. Please admit there is no empirical evidence for this idea, only textual "evidence".
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-06-2013, 06:48 AM
RE: Designated Hittah for the DH
(25-06-2013 06:23 AM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  Please admit there is no empirical evidence for this idea, only textual "evidence".

Present to me extra-biblical evidence for a supernatural event of your choice, since you have here asserted that textual evidence is insufficient.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-06-2013, 06:50 AM
RE: Designated Hittah for the DH
So... Basically an argument from authority.


And, as Bucky Ball rather astutely pointed out, the authority your citing has no credentials in the field you are trying to undermine.


Lol


#ShooFly.

[Image: 0013382F-E507-48AE-906B-53008666631C-757...cc3639.jpg]
Credit goes to UndercoverAtheist.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Atothetheist's post
25-06-2013, 07:36 AM (This post was last modified: 25-06-2013 07:47 AM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Designated Hittah for the DH
[Image: zelda.gif]

Madame Zelda tole me you have not been polishing yer crystal ball for
Soothsaying - Divination 101 ("prophesy") Summer makeup camp for flunkees / flunkettes.
Shame on you. Free Windex an everthin. What do you people want ?

Jebus gonna send ya to the naughty chair, Pleasy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time-out_%28parenting%29

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
25-06-2013, 07:50 AM
RE: Designated Hittah for the DH
(25-06-2013 06:23 AM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  Huh?! The Professor's statement is STILL true. Please admit there is no empirical evidence for this idea, only textual "evidence".

Not exactly. We don't have manuscripts showing J or E, but the most prominent theories these days reject them as sources anyway. On the other hand, we do have many biblical manuscripts from Qumran and the Septuagint that show exactly the kind of textual development that source criticism posits. The Diatessaron is a Christian example of source conflation that witness to the same development. In addition, we have ancient texts from other cultures that show exactly the kind of textual development proposed by source criticism taking place over the course of several centuries. From those manuscripts we can identify the textual phenomena that result from editing and redacting the texts together into a single corpus, and those phenomena are identical to phenomena observable in the Pentateuch at just the places where textual seams have been posited.

The notion that the source critical methodologies are useless without empirical confirmation is about as meaningful as the statement that sonar is useless without physically feeling the bottom of the ocean.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like maklelan's post
25-06-2013, 08:15 AM
RE: Designated Hittah for the DH
Quote:Present to me extra-biblical evidence for a supernatural event of your choice, since you have here asserted that textual evidence is insufficient.

An excellent try. We can look at cosmology and the creation of the universe or evolution, and then we can argue over thousands, and thousands, and thousands of individual data points. There remains, however, no evidence that there were earlier versions of any Old Testament scriptures or books that were later edited and redacted before they appeared in the form in which we know them today.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: