Is The Documentary Hypothesis Still Valid?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
01-06-2013, 01:11 PM
Is The Documentary Hypothesis Still Valid?
Lately, I've been reading up on the Documentary Hypothesis a bit, (for those who don't know what it is;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Documentary_hypothesis) it seems to make sense, and explains many of the double tellings and other difficulties in the Pentateuch.

However, I've also read some sites which claim that the Hypothesis is now considered invalid in academic circles, because it was based on now discredited nineteenth century ideas, such as writing not existing in Moses' time (it did).

So, my question is, is the documentary hypothesis still considered valid by the historical community?

I Will have My revenge on AlternateHistory.com, in this life or the next Evil_monster

~WrappedInShadows (AKA Me)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-06-2013, 02:08 PM (This post was last modified: 02-06-2013 10:38 AM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Is The Documentary Hypothesis Still Valid?
(01-06-2013 01:11 PM)TheLastEnemy Wrote:  Lately, I've been reading up on the Documentary Hypothesis a bit, (for those who don't know what it is;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Documentary_hypothesis) it seems to make sense, and explains many of the double tellings and other difficulties in the Pentateuch.

However, I've also read some sites which claim that the Hypothesis is now considered invalid in academic circles, because it was based on now discredited nineteenth century ideas, such as writing not existing in Moses' time (it did).

So, my question is, is the documentary hypothesis still considered valid by the historical community?

I don't think the "historical" community cares or thinks about it much. In Biblical Studies/Ancient Near Eastern Studies, (except for the far right fundies), it is accepted as valid. There are permutations and small adjustments to it, now and then. But it remains the best explanation for the combo job that some of the texts are. BTW, Moses was a myth. There are all kinds of reasons they know he did not write the texts that were originally ascribed to him. Whether there was written language in the ancient Levant at the time he supposedly existed, is irrelevant, (actually he existed "in the *distant* past, in the cultural "memory" of the Northern Kingdom). He was probably not a real historical person, and certainly the Exodus did not happen the way it's described. There were already Semite settlements in Canaan at the time of the Mernepteh Stele, (in Egypt) which is basically the only "evidence" an "Exodus" ever happened, even on a very small scale. There is a long interesting history of how they came to understand that Moses could not have written the Pentateuch, and the errors and "goofs" that made it obvious. There are a number of other very good reasons to think it was assembled for political reasons.
http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...ble-Bull-s
See the two texts by Dr. Richard Elliott Friedmann, PhD, ("Who Wrote the Bible") and William M. Schniedewind, PhD, M.A., (chair of the Department of Near Eastern Languages & Cultures, the Kershaw Chair of Ancient Eastern Mediterranean Studies, and Professor of Biblical Studies and Northwest Semitic Languages at the University of California, Los Angeles), "How the Bible Became a Book".
Much as fundies hate to be reminded of the fact, in the 1950's, 134 conservative scholars, seminary professors, department heads, pastors, and archaeologists, all signed off on, and wrote parts of, William Foxwell Albright's "The Interpreter's Bible", (13 volumes, normally locked in the rare book rooms in college libraries today), (which was updated in the 1990's.) Every line in the Bible is sourced, and the translations and contexts examined, and the Documentary Hypothesis is discussed and accepted as essentially correct.
http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...other-Look

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like Bucky Ball's post
01-06-2013, 02:24 PM
RE: Is The Documentary Hypothesis Still Valid?
(01-06-2013 02:08 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(01-06-2013 01:11 PM)TheLastEnemy Wrote:  Lately, I've been reading up on the Documentary Hypothesis a bit, (for those who don't know what it is;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Documentary_hypothesis) it seems to make sense, and explains many of the double tellings and other difficulties in the Pentateuch.

However, I've also read some sites which claim that the Hypothesis is now considered invalid in academic circles, because it was based on now discredited nineteenth century ideas, such as writing not existing in Moses' time (it did).

So, my question is, is the documentary hypothesis still considered valid by the historical community?

I don't think the "historical" community cares or thinks about it much. In Biblical Studies, (except for the far right fundies), it is accepted as valid. There are permutations and small adjustments to it, now and then. But it remains the best explanation for the combo job that some of the texts are. BTW, Moses was a myth. There are all kinds of reasons they know he did not write the texts that were originally ascribed to him. Whether there was written language in the ancient Levant at the time he supposedly existed, (actually he existed "in the *distant* past, in the cultural "memory" of the Northern Kingdom). He was probably not a real historical person, and certainly the Exodus did not happen the way it's described. There were already Semite settlements in Canaan at the time of the Mernepteh Stele, (in Egypt) which is basically the only "evidence" an "Exodus" ever happened, even on a very small scale. There is a long interesting history of how they came to understand that Moses could not have written the Pentateuch, and the errors and "goofs" that made it obvious. There are a number of other very reasons to think it was assembled for political reasons.
http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...ble-Bull-s
See the two texts by Dr. Richard Elliott Friedmann, PhD, ("Who Wrote the Bible") and William M. Schniedewind, PhD, M.A., (chair of the Department of Near Eastern Languages & Cultures, the Kershaw Chair of Ancient Eastern Mediterranean Studies, and Professor of Biblical Studies and Northwest Semitic Languages at the University of California, Los Angeles), "How the Bible Became a Book".

Interesting, thank you for the references.

I Will have My revenge on AlternateHistory.com, in this life or the next Evil_monster

~WrappedInShadows (AKA Me)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-06-2013, 02:55 PM
RE: Is The Documentary Hypothesis Still Valid?
What Bucky said.

The only naysayers I ever came across were fundies who had a stake in keeping people believing that Moses wrote the Torah with minor posthumous addendum by scribes.

It was just a fucking apple man, we're sorry okay? Please stop the madness Laugh out load
~Izel
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-06-2013, 03:11 PM
RE: Is The Documentary Hypothesis Still Valid?
Person A writes a story, then person B writes a similar story 100 years later. (or essentially rewrites person A's story)
Person C writes a similar story to person A & B 100 years after person B's story is written. (essentially retelling the same tale)
Now person D comes along another 100 years later and writes again a similar story (retelling the same tale)

And you find it to be TOO MUCH of a Coincidence that all these four stories are similar ?

Really ? Seriously ? Do have trouble with puzzles that contain more than 2 pieces ?

Insanity - doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-06-2013, 03:19 PM
RE: Is The Documentary Hypothesis Still Valid?
(01-06-2013 03:11 PM)Rahn127 Wrote:  Person A writes a story, then person B writes a similar story 100 years later. (or essentially rewrites person A's story)
Person C writes a similar story to person A & B 100 years after person B's story is written. (essentially retelling the same tale)
Now person D comes along another 100 years later and writes again a similar story (retelling the same tale)

And you find it to be TOO MUCH of a Coincidence that all these four stories are similar ?

Really ? Seriously ? Do have trouble with puzzles that contain more than 2 pieces ?

I don't think he was disagreeing with it. Depending on which fundie site you go to, they do attempt to discredit it, and say "it's out of date" and no longer accepted. That's simply false. Wait till Monday. Pleasy will throw up a good smoke screen about it, and attempt to say it's false. In fact, most mainline scholars accept it. There is not a shred of evidence that the Scroll of Moses existed, before Ezra came back from exile with it, and it contains a LOT of Sumerian/Babylonian material.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
01-06-2013, 03:25 PM
RE: Is The Documentary Hypothesis Still Valid?
(01-06-2013 03:11 PM)Rahn127 Wrote:  Person A writes a story, then person B writes a similar story 100 years later. (or essentially rewrites person A's story)
Person C writes a similar story to person A & B 100 years after person B's story is written. (essentially retelling the same tale)
Now person D comes along another 100 years later and writes again a similar story (retelling the same tale)

And you find it to be TOO MUCH of a Coincidence that all these four stories are similar ?

Really ? Seriously ? Do have trouble with puzzles that contain more than 2 pieces ?

I Wasn't calling it false.

I Will have My revenge on AlternateHistory.com, in this life or the next Evil_monster

~WrappedInShadows (AKA Me)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-06-2013, 09:41 AM (This post was last modified: 02-06-2013 10:21 AM by houseofcantor.)
RE: Is The Documentary Hypothesis Still Valid?
Bucky breaks out the scholarly bit. As a prophet, writing more than "I love my Gwynnies" is too much writing. There has to be intermediaries, regardless. Whether or not the Documentary Hypothesis is truth as stated doesn't lessen the truth as implied.


(01-06-2013 03:19 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  I don't think he was disagreeing with it. Depending on which fundie site you go to, they do attempt to discredit it, and say "it's out of date" and no longer accepted. That's simply false.

What I find, every time I feel ambitious and research it. Thumbsup


(02-06-2013 10:19 AM)evenheathen Wrote:  
(02-06-2013 07:47 AM)houseofcantor Wrote:  To say that I am a gnostic atheist and understand that agnosticism is the only logical argument leads to paradox, and I'll tell you why - the plurality of you.

Okay, I'm intrigued. But I will admit, being as that it is sunday morning I do have bourbon in my coffee. That being said, I am not sure of what's going on here, please do me the honor of an " ad HoC" elaboration.

See what I'm talking about? Big Grin

living word
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like houseofcantor's post
02-06-2013, 07:14 PM
RE: Is The Documentary Hypothesis Still Valid?
I tend to disagree with some of the ideas of the documentary hypothesis as I follow the chiastic hypothesis. This is essentially that because there is a structure to the books in the Pentateuch, there is a reasonable reason to believe that it was written by one person. However, this person most likely drew on multiple traditions and viewpoints. Also there do appear to be pieces added here and there, but not to the extant that the documentary hypothesis proposes.

I'm homophobic in the same way that I'm arachnophobic. I'm not scared of gay people but I'm going to scream if I find one in my bath.

I'm. Also homophobic in the same way I'm arachnophobic. I'm scared of spiders but I'd still fuck'em.
- my friend Marc
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-06-2013, 08:25 PM
RE: Is The Documentary Hypothesis Still Valid?
(02-06-2013 07:14 PM)TarzanSmith Wrote:  I tend to disagree with some of the ideas of the documentary hypothesis as I follow the chiastic hypothesis. This is essentially that because there is a structure to the books in the Pentateuch, there is a reasonable reason to believe that it was written by one person. However, this person most likely drew on multiple traditions and viewpoints. Also there do appear to be pieces added here and there, but not to the extant that the documentary hypothesis proposes.

Chiasmus appears throughout both Old and New Testaments. Your reasoning leads to the implication that one person wrote the entire bible.

Also, chiastic structure shows how artificial the text of the bible is. It is not history, it is myth, like the stories of the Greek pantheon.

It was just a fucking apple man, we're sorry okay? Please stop the madness Laugh out load
~Izel
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: