Question about the "J", "E", "P", "R", "D", and the "changed Old Testament".
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
27-03-2013, 08:59 AM
RE: Question about the "J", "E", "P", "R", "D", and the "changed Old Testament".
WTF is a "empirical evidence for textual change?" And one can take parsimony to Genesis 2:4 and it's a "duh." Do the algebra... does (image of god) = (breath + dust)? Is god hearing you calling him a dust devil?

I mean, duh.

[Image: klingon_zps7e68578a.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-03-2013, 09:47 AM
RE: Question about the "J", "E", "P", "R", "D", and the "changed Old Testament".
What was your purpose in altering my quote "But your comments are unacceptable to me as I am aware of cultural and historical context, canon formation, and etc." to
Quote:But your comments are unacceptable to me as I am unable to deal with them.
- that is inappropriate and lying.
Quote:Yet I quote the biblical texts and you cannot.

I win.

You lose.
What are you claiming now? As part of my devotional life, I have hundreds of Bible verses, including complete chapters, committed to memory. Or are you dodging the fact that I don't need to cite any verses to point out that there is ZERO empirical evidence for JDEP, Q, etc.?
Quote:Something denied by Fundis. Why would there be Egyptian iconography if the Exodus were historical?
How did I deny it? I cited the iconography book itself. Straw man. The Jewish people syncreted worship of God with foreign gods over and again. You did say you read the Bible? They also traded hospitably with the Egyptians, the scripture directing them to be kind to the Egyptians specifically, don't you know? Solomon married an Egyptian princess. Are you on drugs?
Quote:So citing the biblical texts in the original language is an "Appeal to Authority?"
Huh? You did that to comment on the posted videos. But you appealed to authority to "prove" JDEP theory. I don't think you understand what JDEP is claiming, frankly.
Quote:Relax. We all know you lost.
Lost what? That you can go to Wikipedia and cite scholars who make special claims for the Bible's canonization and authorship that are unsupported by evidence, while I make logical statements in the forms of questions that you duck and dodge every time? Maybe I should just put you on ignore. At least BB and others respond to my questions. They must think very little of your intelligence.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-03-2013, 04:35 PM (This post was last modified: 05-04-2013 11:07 PM by Doctor X.)
RE: Question about the "J", "E", "P", "R", "D", and the "changed Old Testament".
******

Those who administer and moderate in order to exercise personal agenda merely feed into the negative stereotype of Atheism
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Doctor X's post
27-03-2013, 05:22 PM
RE: Question about the "J", "E", "P", "R", "D", and the "changed Old Testament".
I don't know about any of you all, . . . but I'm glad I started this thread. :-)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes DeavonReye's post
27-03-2013, 05:45 PM
RE: Question about the "J", "E", "P", "R", "D", and the "changed Old Testament".
(27-03-2013 05:22 PM)DeavonReye Wrote:  I don't know about any of you all, . . . but I'm glad I started this thread. :-)

Yeah, it's all like gladiator games; without all the messy blood and pesky corpses. Thumbsup

[Image: klingon_zps7e68578a.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-03-2013, 05:53 PM (This post was last modified: 05-04-2013 11:07 PM by Doctor X.)
RE: Question about the "J", "E", "P", "R", "D", and the "changed Old Testament".
******

Those who administer and moderate in order to exercise personal agenda merely feed into the negative stereotype of Atheism
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Doctor X's post
27-03-2013, 06:06 PM (This post was last modified: 27-03-2013 06:56 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Question about the "J", "E", "P", "R", "D", and the "changed Old Testament".
He keeps using that word "special" *as if* somehow a scholar saying something "different" than he learned in Jebus-class is in any way equivalent to the logical fallacy of "special pleading". He constantly conflates these, and the statements of anyone on Wiki, (or anywhere, which, by the way are usually referenced and supported), have anything to do with "special pleading". It's just very very odd.

SPJTJ, an example of "special pleading" is when believers talk about their god(s) "existing" or having properties and attributes, or they describe them as having qualities which do not follow from, or are consistent with the OTHER qualities of their deities, yet they say, "well, that's because god is god". THAT is "special pleading". Ie, attemting to use Logic in describing your god(s), yet ultimately exempting it/them from Logical conclusions. Another example, is saying, the "sacrifice" of Jebus, or any action, "pleased" Sky Daddy. In order for that to be the case, Sky Daddy needs to exist in a temporal environment. THAT negates the deities "eternal/timless" nature. They cannot both be true. Saying they ARE ... now THAT is "special pleading". I still think you don't know what that means.

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
27-03-2013, 06:10 PM
RE: Question about the "J", "E", "P", "R", "D", and the "changed Old Testament".
I initially started this thread with a similar question about how the scholars know things were changed, because I am fairly new to this topic and would like to know all I can about it [since I was raised christian and believed it whole heartedly]. Is Karen Armstrong's book, A History Of God, a good resource for me, or should I [also] look elsewhere?

This sort of information [as I see it] puts a HUGE doubt upon the very religion of millions of people who believe their current bible is as it was meant to be, unaltered, and "the inerrent word of god".
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-03-2013, 06:31 PM (This post was last modified: 05-04-2013 11:07 PM by Doctor X.)
RE: Question about the "J", "E", "P", "R", "D", and the "changed Old Testament".
******

Those who administer and moderate in order to exercise personal agenda merely feed into the negative stereotype of Atheism
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Doctor X's post
27-03-2013, 06:47 PM
RE: Question about the "J", "E", "P", "R", "D", and the "changed Old Testament".
(27-03-2013 06:31 PM)Doctor X Wrote:  
(27-03-2013 06:10 PM)DeavonReye Wrote:  I initially started this thread with a similar question about how the scholars know things were changed, because I am fairly new to this topic and would like to know all I can about it [since I was raised christian and believed it whole heartedly]. Is Karen Armstrong's book, A History Of God, a good resource for me, or should I [also] look elsewhere?

No. I would recommend two references. The first is the Friedman Who Wrote the Bible?. It is more traditional and not everyone agrees with his dating and his assignment of authorship. But like a Creatard pointing out arguments between evolutionary biologist, just because someone argues about the ear bones of a gnat does not mean "EVILUTIONS TEH WRONGS!" Similarly, disagreement concerning the authorship of this or that passage does not invalidate the literal reams of evidence for multiple authorship.

A better book, in my opinion, Joel Baden's recent work The Composition of the Pentateuch. That is a deeper treatment--you can even see the comparison of the Biblical Hebrew and, no, you do not need to know Biblical Hebrew.

The alternative to the DH is letting the pitcher hit . . . no . . . wait . . . the alternative to the Documentary Hypothesis has been this traditional "accretion" model where the theory is that progressive additions were made to the texts. The problem is they simply cannot deal with the LARGE sections of clearly different texts that are coherent. A coherent text that has its own narrative is hardly an "accretion." Baden sort of dashes that.

If you want to know about polytheisms and the like I would direct you to either Day's work--hard to find--or Mark Smiths recent works. I disagree with Smith and agree with Day that Asherah was worshiped and was seen as a consort to YHWH. Dever's book on that topic is very good.

--J.D.

This has been a fasinating read. I must say if all fundie trolls manage to get threads like this going and posts like what Doc here has created bring em on. I must say I am in awe of the quality of the work you put here just to refute a jeebus freak. I actualy had never heard of El or most of the other points you made so I feel like I learned something new and that is a wonderful thing. Thank you.

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: