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
28-03-2013, 10:08 AM
RE: Question about the "J", "E", "P", "R", "D", and the "changed Old Testament".
(28-03-2013 09:54 AM)Chas Wrote:  I find it mind boggling that you all spend so much effort on this picayune bullshit.

All holy texts are demonstrably products of the humans of the era. This is blindingly obvious to all but the blind.

What a fucking waste of time.

For them it is love of scholarship. For me, I'm a prophet. For you, it's a urinal. Win/win/win...

don't question it, Vakko. Take it on faith. Big Grin

[Image: klingon_zps7e68578a.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-03-2013, 10:16 AM (This post was last modified: 28-03-2013 11:00 AM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Question about the "J", "E", "P", "R", "D", and the "changed Old Testament".
(28-03-2013 09:54 AM)Chas Wrote:  I find it mind boggling that you all spend so much effort on this picayune bullshit.

All holy texts are demonstrably products of the humans of the era. This is blindingly obvious to all but the blind.

What a fucking waste of time.

Exactly. However we know the texts in question were the assembly products of a number of far different sets of humans. Each set with their own political agenda. The texts reflect specifically the political interest of each of the sets. The Bible is essentially not a religious book. It's an entirely political set of texts. SPJTJ is trying to make us think that somehow there is a nebulous "one source set". No scholar would agree with that.
Before the texts were assembled by the priests in Exile there was no mention of and no Torah of Moses, (ie no Bible). The "Bible" did not exist, anad had no central organizing role in the life of the Hebrew nation until AFTER they came back from Babylon. There were no synagogues until AFTER the Exile. The reason there is a Torah of Moses AT ALL is because the Persian king, (Artaxerxes) and Ezra colluded to write a politically unifying scroll. No gods were in any way involved .

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
28-03-2013, 10:39 AM
RE: Question about the "J", "E", "P", "R", "D", and the "changed Old Testament".
Chas, I think topics like this are very important for those who used to be bound to a religion and have never heard the truth about how those ancient texts were written and re-written over the centuries. As christianity insists, what we have in the current bible, usually the KJV, is "the exact words of God". Being introduced to the truth of the past human influences is good to see [for those such as myself]. It cements that I am on the right track.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-03-2013, 12:18 PM
RE: Question about the "J", "E", "P", "R", "D", and the "changed Old Testament".
(28-03-2013 10:39 AM)DeavonReye Wrote:  Chas, I think topics like this are very important for those who used to be bound to a religion and have never heard the truth about how those ancient texts were written and re-written over the centuries. As christianity insists, what we have in the current bible, usually the KJV, is "the exact words of God". Being introduced to the truth of the past human influences is good to see [for those such as myself]. It cements that I am on the right track.

In addition it is always interesting to see the mythology of aceint cultures as it really shows the cultural importance of varios natural phenominom. The Greeks for instance had 3 main gods 1 of the sky one of the Sea and One of Death. That would show without any other knollege of the area that the greeks were a seafaring people. To me the myth making is always more interesting than the Myths though the pagans did know how to write an interesting story.


In this instance the formation of Yaweh from other canaanite gods shows what the proto hebrews were valuing and what needed to change as time progressed. Of note this is a lay opinion I dont claim the scholarship that others have. 1 thing I have always wondered is how much did Zues worship influence the final forms of Yaweh, cause on the surface it seems a very heavy influence.

(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
28-03-2013, 01:51 PM
RE: Question about the "J", "E", "P", "R", "D", and the "changed Old Testament".
Quote:That is NOT what the Documentary Hypothesis says.
I apologize if it was difficult to thread through my JDEP arguments and my Q arguments in one post. They are different things. But I must caution you, hundreds of scholars have also signed off before on:

*gay marriage
*abortion on demand
*contraceptives on demand for very young teens or even younger
*Etc.

And they would give citations, cultural histories and appeal to authority on the above. You have a choice before you to AGAIN tell me I'm ignorant and/or obstinate or to defend your position by actually articulating a position. I must have asked over a dozen questions in the last thread. Why not shread my viewpoint and address some of them if you can? I'm here to learn. That's why I'm asking you questions. "Idiot, you don't understand" is really not a question answered.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-03-2013, 02:14 PM (This post was last modified: 28-03-2013 02:50 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Question about the "J", "E", "P", "R", "D", and the "changed Old Testament".
(28-03-2013 01:51 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  
Quote:That is NOT what the Documentary Hypothesis says.
I apologize if it was difficult to thread through my JDEP arguments and my Q arguments in one post. They are different things. But I must caution you, hundreds of scholars have also signed off before on:

*gay marriage
*abortion on demand
*contraceptives on demand for very young teens or even younger
*Etc.

And they would give citations, cultural histories and appeal to authority on the above. You have a choice before you to AGAIN tell me I'm ignorant and/or obstinate or to defend your position by actually articulating a position. I must have asked over a dozen questions in the last thread. Why not shread my viewpoint and address some of them if you can? I'm here to learn. That's why I'm asking you questions. "Idiot, you don't understand" is really not a question answered.

Attempted deflection noted. Those are not the subjects under discussion, and SexuallyPleasingJebus, with no discussion, assumes all Christains actually agree with him, and attemps to take (falsely) the "moral high-ground" which has not been establised. No points addressed. Try harder, troll. Expecting other to share your delusions, as your reasoning process, is childish.

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
28-03-2013, 02:22 PM
RE: Question about the "J", "E", "P", "R", "D", and the "changed Old Testament".
Quote:Bucky,

You cite:
1. Wikpedia, which cites a BBC documentary plus two books in its "In Israel and Judah" section
2. The Huffington Post, which cites Time and Discovery
3. Discovery (the article cited by Huffington), which apparently relies on interviews and does not cite any papers
4. newworldencyclopeida.org - which seems to also rely on books rather than papers

How would you suggest a lay person such as PJ go about assessing the credibility of individual cited book titles, or assessing what the academic consensus looks like, here?
Uh-huh.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-03-2013, 02:29 PM (This post was last modified: 28-03-2013 03:12 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Question about the "J", "E", "P", "R", "D", and the "changed Old Testament".
(28-03-2013 02:22 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  
Quote:Bucky,

You cite:
1. Wikpedia, which cites a BBC documentary plus two books in its "In Israel and Judah" section
2. The Huffington Post, which cites Time and Discovery
3. Discovery (the article cited by Huffington), which apparently relies on interviews and does not cite any papers
4. newworldencyclopeida.org - which seems to also rely on books rather than papers

How would you suggest a lay person such as PJ go about assessing the credibility of individual cited book titles, or assessing what the academic consensus looks like, here?
Uh-huh.

More attempted defleaction. I just offered you 13 volumes of scholarship in the other thread. You dismissed it. I see you are really operating in bad faith here, as there is really nothing that would cpnvince you of anything. Thanks for revealing yourself as a bad faith troll. Most of us always knew you were just that, as you proved in the gautlet thread.

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
28-03-2013, 03:00 PM (This post was last modified: 05-04-2013 11:06 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
28-03-2013, 03:35 PM (This post was last modified: 28-03-2013 04:18 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Question about the "J", "E", "P", "R", "D", and the "changed Old Testament".
I think I also will put SPJTJ on ignore.
I leave you with this. If you don't accept the Documentary Hypothesis, then have fun explaining :

1. Why humans are created twice (Gen. 1:27, 2:7f).
2. Why Noah is commanded to take two of every animal (Gen 6:17) and then seven of every clean and two of every unclean (Gen 7:2).
3. Why the breaks between the two creation accounts and the two flood accounts also divide perfectly into the two similar similar language sets and vocabulary sets that are used in the creation and flood accounts, and correspond perfectly, consistently, with no major or noteable exception
4 .Why in one text (Num 12:4-15) the tent of meeting is outside the camp, and anyone can go to it, and in an earlier one (Num 2), it is in the center of the camp, and only the priests can enter it. And why these two texts preserve similar language and textual allusions to other the same similarly divided texts.
5. Why in the flood account it is proclaimed that the god limits man’s days to 120 years, but in Genesis 47:9 Jacob says he lived 130 years and Abraham and Isaac lived even longer.
6. Why Hagar is banished twice (Gen 16 & 21)
7. Why Jacob is named twice (Gen 32 & 35)
8. Why Beersheva is given two different lines/etymologies (Gen 21 & 26).
9. Why Abraham is born in Ur Kasdim (Gen 11:27-32), i.e., in southern Iraq, then moves to Haran, i.e. North Syria, and while in Haran the god tells him to leave his birthplace to go to Canaan (Gen 12:1ff.), but of course he’d already left his birthplace—in Ur! Woops.
10. Why Jacob finished a long discourse about why Ephraim and Manasseh will be adopted as Jacob’s sons, and then in the NEXT verse doesn’t know who they are (Gen 48:3-7, 8), and why if you remove that talk, the text makes perfect sense. Why that discourse matches with language of other similar discourses that are divided by similar literary seams.
11. Why in one text (Gen 35:23-26, (=P)) Benjamin is born in Paddan Aram, but in another (35:16-19 (=E)) he is born near Bethlehem, in Canaan.
12. Why in one text (Gen 37:36) the Midianites sell Joseph to Potiphar, but in another (Gen 39:1) it was the Ishmaelites.
13. Why, in Genesis 37:21-22 it’s Reuben who wants to save Joseph, and in 26-27 it was Judah.
14. Why Moses’ father-in-law has two names (Reuel/Jethro), and Sinai has two names (Sinai/Horeb), and why the use of each of these names corresponds to other linguistic, thematic, and narrative distinctions and traditions.
15. Why Abraham tries to pass his wife off as his sister in two similar instances (albeit with important distinctions that would indicate different sources) and then Isaac does the same thing. (Genesis 12, 20, 26).
16. Why the name of God is revealed as if for the first time in Genesis 3, then again in Genesis 6, and why in these distinct texts there are linguistic similarities that track back to other texts distinguished by the SAME linguistic and literary divisions, and why in those divisions the one that hasn’t used the tetragrammaton up to this point then begins to use it, but in the others it had been used all along.
17. Why God’s hardening of Pharaoh’s heart so that he chases the Israelites (Exod 14:8-9) follows Pharaoh’s decision to chase the Israelites (14:5-7).
18. An angel moves to the rear of the fleeing Israelite camp (Exod 14:19a) but in the same verse it was not the angel but the cloud pillar (Exod 14:19b).
19.Why it seems that God blew the sea back, drying the ground, in one text, and in the next split the waters through which the Israelites walk. (Exod 14:21a, compare 14:21b-22). And if this seems scant, why in Exodus 15, which recounts the mighty acts of the deliverance, there is no splitting of the sea.
20.Why linguistic formulae that are never supposed to be interrupted (the command-fulfillment pattern in the Pentateuch) are interrupted around source divisions or insertions of other material.
21.Why Exodus 34 can be separated into two narratives, one about God appearing to Moses and making a covenant, and the other about Moses going up the mountain to receive the second set of tablets with the same writing on them. And why these two episodes preserve the language and terminology of J and E, respectively, and why when these two episodes are separated their narratives match up perfectly with where the other separated J and E narratives left off and where they continue. And why Deuteronomy 10 quotes only one of these tightly integrated stories.
22.Why God is "immanent" in some texts and "transcendent" in others (compare the Tent of meeting, where he is transcendent, to the Tabernacle, where he is immanent).
23.Why in some texts the ark is just a plain wooden box with two tablets in it, and in others it’s an ornately-decorated chest containing several relics.
24.Why we have the Decalogue and Covenant Code, (=the set of laws beginning in Exodus 20), and the Deuteronomic Code (Deut 5; 12-26, which is supposed to be a repeat of the Covenant Code, but it’s not; it introduces many, many changes. Compare, for example, the Sabbath laws in Exod 20 and Deut 5).
25.Why in Exodus 12 we have pesach (passover) celebrated followed immediately by the seven-day matzah festival, but in Deuteronomy 16:1-8 there is only a seven-day festival (pesach and matzah have been conflated), with no specific date assigned in Deuteronomy. Also, why Deuteronomy requires the paschal lamb to be slaughtered at the central shrine but in Exodus it’s done in a family setting.
26.Why in some texts Moses’ staff is used to perform miracles, and in others it’s Aaron’s. (And why in these different cases there is other linguistic and narrative evidence pointing toward source divisions.)
27.Why the differentiated texts exhibit particularized geographical foci. Why, for example, do the spies in Num 17-20, 22-24 only see sites in the kingdom of Judah? (These happen to correlate with other J texts, whose focus is clearly on Judah). Abraham, in J, lives in Hebron, a capital in Judah. There are only four birth stories in J: Reuben, Simeon, Levi, and Judah, and in J the first three are disinherited, leaving Judah to rule. These trends can be extended to the other sources.
28.Why all of these discrepancies are differentiated along linguistic, terminological, and substantial lines. That is the doubled stories will show different names for god, treatments of the priesthood, use of individual words (where such words are excluded from the other sources), sacred objects, etc. And, why the separation of these differentiated texts and rejoining to texts seemingly hewn from the same quarry results most often in a continuous narrative. Were one to spell out these individual differentiations, they’d number in the thousands.

So, you get to propose a replcement theory, SPJTJ. AFTER you do that, and explain every one of the 28 lines of EVIDENCE above, have someone let me know.

I know there is as much chance of that happening as there is of the Easter Bunny stopping at my house.

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
Post Reply
Forum Jump: