The Chiastic Theory
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
05-07-2013, 10:44 PM
RE: The Chiastic Theory
(05-07-2013 10:27 PM)TarzanSmith Wrote:  I am merely trying to rework the thinking that the redactors of the Pentateuch were merely editors but instead authors in their own right.

So....kinda what I said earlier? This doesn't negate the fact that the original manuscripts came from multiple sources, it was just neatly cut and pasted together to form an acceptable presentation of literature in the style of the time that it was introduced.

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
05-07-2013, 11:04 PM (This post was last modified: 06-07-2013 09:04 AM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: The Chiastic Theory
(05-07-2013 10:27 PM)TarzanSmith Wrote:  @ BuckyBall

Quote:An obvious fallacy. Just because there are two of something, (actually there are 4 sources at least), does not prove chiasm.

I am unsure as to what you are trying to say here. There is virtually no argument whether or not there are Chiasms in the Pentateuch. This was a style that was widely practiced by the Jews and is clearly seen in the narrative I presented (although I admit it is difficult to see because of the format). The sources also have no factor in identifying a chiasm.

Quote:All the reasons for thinking it was more than one source remain unanswered in this. Anytime there are two of something does not prove chiasm. The gospels are obviously chiasms, as Carrier has shown.

Yes the Gospels are written chiastically and they were written by a single hand. I am also not trying to deny that the author of the book wrote without there being previous documents. Some documents had to have existed prior to the writing of the Pentateuch. A good example would be Deuteronomy in which God gives the Jews rules to follow which the Jews then don't follow. The rules had to exist before the writing of the narrative. I am merely trying to rework the thinking that the redactors of the Pentateuch were merely editors but instead authors in their own right.

There are no gods. The history of Deuteronomy reflects it's human political historical situations 100 %. The gods had NOTHING to do with it Every single law existed ALREADY in the culture, and HUMANS wrote it into the their texts. The gods had nothing whatever to do with any of it.
Human political leaders cooked it up because it served their political interests.

I think you really have no idea *what* you are trying to say. It is perfectly obvious that you have no clue what the 6 lines of evidence mean, or how they DISPROVE your idea totally. They do. 1/2 of your (supposed) "chiasm" is VASTLY DIFFERENT than the other half. What is there about that, that you can't understand ? ONE author would not write a chiasm with more than TWO DIFFERENT (consistent) sets of vocabulary, place names, god names, and discernible ideas that reflect TOTALLY different political interests, and histories, in one half, and not in the other half. So first of all it's not chiasmic, as it does not "peak" in the center of anything. It's PARALLEL, with two entirely different threads, that rise and fall, IN PARALLEL, (not chiastically), and do not meet in a center.
This is a chiasm :

--- A I will never leave you nor forsake you
------- B Be strong and courageous … be strong and very courageous
----------- C Be careful to obey all the law … that you may be successful
---------------- D Do not let this Book of the Law depart from your mouth
---------------- D′ Mediate on it day and night
----------- C′ Be careful to do everything written in it … you may be prosperous and successful
------- B′ Be strong and courageous. Do not be terrified; do not be discouraged
-- A′ for the Lord your God will be with you wherever you go. (Joshua 1:5-9)


J and P and E are not set into a chiasm. They are TOTALLY at least two entirely separate lines of literature, worked together, and obviously NOT from one author, for the reasons stated above. If "the sources have no factor in identifying a chiasm", BUT THE SOURCES ARE OBVIOUSLY DIFFERENT in the text of the very chiasm YOU are talking about, OBVIOUSLY it's NOT from one author.

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
05-07-2013, 11:24 PM
RE: The Chiastic Theory
(05-07-2013 11:04 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(05-07-2013 10:27 PM)TarzanSmith Wrote:  @ BuckyBall


I am unsure as to what you are trying to say here. There is virtually no argument whether or not there are Chiasms in the Pentateuch. This was a style that was widely practiced by the Jews and is clearly seen in the narrative I presented (although I admit it is difficult to see because of the format). The sources also have no factor in identifying a chiasm.


Yes the Gospels are written chiastically and they were written by a single hand. I am also not trying to deny that the author of the book wrote without there being previous documents. Some documents had to have existed prior to the writing of the Pentateuch. A good example would be Deuteronomy in which God gives the Jews rules to follow which the Jews then don't follow. The rules had to exist before the writing of the narrative. I am merely trying to rework the thinking that the redactors of the Pentateuch were merely editors but instead authors in their own right.

There are no gods. The history of Deuteronomy reflects it's human political historical situations 100 %. The gods had NOTHING to do with it Every single law existed ALREADY in the culture, and HUMANS wrote it into the their texts. God had nothing whatever to do with any of it.

I think you really have no idea *what* you are trying to say. It is perfectly obvious that you have no clue what the 6 lines of evidence mean, or how the DISPROVE your idea totally. They do. 1/2 of you (supposed) "chiasm" is VASTLY DIFFERENT than the other half. What is there about that, that you can't understand ? ONE author would not write a chiasm with at least TWO DIFFERENT sets of vocabulary, lace names, god names, ideas that reflect TOTALLY different political interests, and histories, etc etc.

Deuteronomy is as fabricated as The Book of Mormon and for much the same reason. It was written in that style to give credence to the Then King of Judah's claim to both the Southern Kingdom of Judah and to the formerly conquered Northern Kingdom of Isra-el. Too bad for him the Assyrians came around and killed him stopping any chance of a dynasty. Everything about that book screams fake, a found scroll of Moses that just happens to give divine ordinance to the King's Grand Plan.

Not only did it not introduce anything new to the Society (as Bucky has asserted) but was written specifically to get everyone on board with the King's expansion ideas. It was the report of WMD's circa 450 bce to draw an analogy. Too bad , as always happened to the Israelites, reality stepped in and their dreams and predictions of World Domination fell flat as a real Superpower of the time came around and utterly defeated them.

(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
[+] 1 user Likes Revenant77x's post
05-07-2013, 11:37 PM
RE: The Chiastic Theory
(05-07-2013 11:24 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  
(05-07-2013 11:04 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  There are no gods. The history of Deuteronomy reflects it's human political historical situations 100 %. The gods had NOTHING to do with it Every single law existed ALREADY in the culture, and HUMANS wrote it into the their texts. God had nothing whatever to do with any of it.

I think you really have no idea *what* you are trying to say. It is perfectly obvious that you have no clue what the 6 lines of evidence mean, or how the DISPROVE your idea totally. They do. 1/2 of you (supposed) "chiasm" is VASTLY DIFFERENT than the other half. What is there about that, that you can't understand ? ONE author would not write a chiasm with at least TWO DIFFERENT sets of vocabulary, lace names, god names, ideas that reflect TOTALLY different political interests, and histories, etc etc.

Deuteronomy is as fabricated as The Book of Mormon and for much the same reason. It was written in that style to give credence to the Then King of Judah's claim to both the Southern Kingdom of Judah and to the formerly conquered Northern Kingdom of Isra-el. Too bad for him the Assyrians came around and killed him stopping any chance of a dynasty. Everything about that book screams fake, a found scroll of Moses that just happens to give divine ordinance to the King's Grand Plan.

Not only did it not introduce anything new to the Society (as Bucky has asserted) but was written specifically to get everyone on board with the King's expansion ideas. It was the report of WMD's circa 450 bce to draw an analogy. Too bad , as always happened to the Israelites, reality stepped in and their dreams and predictions of World Domination fell flat as a real Superpower of the time came around and utterly defeated them.

That is the traditional view. There are now some various other theories about some possible (prior) source materials embedded in it, but as you say the fact they "just happened to find it" during a "temple renovation", by a priest/court official : ("Oh look what I just happened to find") strains credibility beyond the breaking point.

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
06-07-2013, 11:56 AM
RE: The Chiastic Theory
It seems to me to be more than just a bit silly to base a philosophy on those mossy little pets that sell around the holidays. I mean, who bases their theories around Chia pets and expects to be taken seriously?

Every time I see the title to this thread, I think of chia pets and cannot bring myself to add anything seriously to this thread.

Drive by posting complete...carry on.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes BryanS's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: