On JEDP

[maklelan]

This is similar to a thread I put on another board. I'm curious what y'all think.

My purpose with this thread is to show that the JEDP theory (best know as contained in the Documentary Hypothesis, but not exclusive to that theory) did not develop out of minimalist polemic or humanistic campaigns against the Bible

[J Green]

Great summary, Mak.

I recently finished slogging through the evidence for an early J that Richard M. Wright presents in Linguistic Evidence for the Pre-exilic Date of the Yahwistic Source (NY: T&.T Clark, 2005). I'm not a trained textual analyst like you are, but I found him pretty convincing.

Cheers

[Zakuska]

The flood story provides another example. Noah is said both to bring seven pairs of animals and to bring only two pairs of animals. Noah is said to enter the ark seven days before the flood and on the same day as the flood. Two different promises are found at the end of the story. In one, God say he will never destroy all living creatures again. In the other, he only promises never to send another flood. If we separate the narratives according to these differences we find two separate, yet complete, accounts of the flood. In one, Noah brings seven pairs of animals and enters the ark seven days prior to the flood. At the end he leaves and offers sacrifices to Yhwh and is promised that all life will never again be destroyed. In the other, Noah only brings two pairs of animals, enters the day the flood begins, and there is no mention of sacrifice upon leaving. God

[Kemara]

Mak,

Excellent post, keep them coming.

[maklelan]

Very intresting insite mak. This sounds just like what later Bible translators and textual Critics did as well. I beleive Dr. Erhman talks about this type of translation, it would be like us taking the 4 gospels. and weaving them together into a single Gospel to try and get a better understanding of Christs life. In essence reading them side by side. And thats were the reall problems begin. Like who showed up at the seplacure first. etc. etc.

This was done a few times by early Christians. The most famous is Tatian's Diatessaron: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki?search=Diatessaron

[Nathair/|\]

This was done a few times by early Christians. The most famous is Tatian's Diatessaron: http://en.m.wikipedi...rch=Diatessaron

Do we have a tanist for the chair of Nibley and DCP?

[maklelan]

Great summary, Mak.

I recently finished slogging through the evidence for an early J that Richard M. Wright presents in Linguistic Evidence for the Pre-exilic Date of the Yahwistic Source (NY: T&.T Clark, 2005). I'm not a trained textual analyst like you are, but I found him pretty convincing.

Cheers

Thanks for the comment. I definitely think J is pre-exilic. Gen 2, for example, is definitely a Syro-Palestinian creation account, as opposed to Gen 1's Assyro-Babylonian account.

[Pahoran]

Thanks for the comment. I definitely think J is pre-exilic. Gen 2, for example, is definitely a Syro-Palestinian creation account, as opposed to Gen 1's Assyro-Babylonian account.

Thanks for this, Mak. As I read your OP, it occurred to me that a multiple authorship scenario is about the only plausible way to allow Moses to have any substantive input any more. What's your view on that?

Regards,

Pahoran

[maklelan]

Thanks for this, Mak. As I read your OP, it occurred to me that a multiple authorship scenario is about the only plausible way to allow Moses to have any substantive input any more. What's your view on that?

Regards,

Pahoran

I think, Moses or otherwise, it's difficult to argue something other than multiple authorship, but there's no reason the different authors can't present different perspectives on historical events that have simply accreted a bunch of superfluous and rhetorical details.

[jo1952]

I'm glad to see you revived this on the other board. I happened to catch your most recent addition on their "within 24 hour" list and referred it to another poster from that board just yesterday. He has started from the beginning and is loving getting caught up to your most current post. Please keep your posts coming on both boards!!

God bless,

jo

[Alf O'Mega]

Hey Mak, can you recommend any detailed source deconstructions of sections (or even the entirety) of the Pentateuch? I recognize that there may be disputed passages, but it would be interesting to see a detailed breakdown of, say, Genesis 6

[maklelan]

Hey Mak, can you recommend any detailed source deconstructions of sections (or even the entirety) of the Pentateuch? I recognize that there may be disputed passages, but it would be interesting to see a detailed breakdown of, say, Genesis 6

[maklelan]

I'm glad to see you revived this on the other board. I happened to catch your most recent addition on their "within 24 hour" list and referred it to another poster from that board just yesterday. He has started from the beginning and is loving getting caught up to your most current post. Please keep your posts coming on both boards!!

God bless,

jo

It doesn't seem to be taking in some places.

[David T]

This story is not quite as developed, and is not literarily sophisticated. God is also much less transcendent and omniscient. Adam and Eve here the sound of God walking in the garden, and God asks Adam what he did

Mak, fantastic post. In regards to this statement, though, I'd like to hear your input on the thought in this thread - I think you missed it:

to Mak and other hebraists: "In the cool of the day" | "In the wind of the storm" An interesting alternate translation of Gen 3:8?

[maklelan]

Mak, fantastic post. In regards to this statement, though, I'd like to hear your input on the thought in this thread - I think you missed it:

to Mak and other hebraists: "In the cool of the day" | "In the wind of the storm" An interesting alternate translation of Gen 3:8?

I've commented on that thread. It's an interesting idea, but I'd need a lot more convincing.