This counts as evidence? What you’re describing is itself a style of writing used by any number of authors. First you tell the short version of a story, and then you go into more detail. First you tell it from one perspective, then from another perspective. Why do people insist that this proves multiple authorship? Any idiot can take a finished work and separate the parts written in one style from another style, but as far as I know, no such manuscripts have ever been found.
And if some person or group did choose to merge the varied versions, do you really think that the audience was so stupid as to not notice the mixed styles? How did they accept such a mishmash patchwork? My answer is that there wasn’t anything odd about it, because it can be a legitimate style of a single author. What other answers are there?
For most of the last 2500-odd years, those smart enough to notice it were also presumably smart enough not to mention it, so as not to be stoned or burned.
Nope. This is 1.) not a style used by ancient authoirs and b.( not what’s happening in in the Bible. It is interwoven narratives of completely different styles.
This is not what’s happening in Genesis. It’s not one “perpsectovce” then another. It’s different versions of the same story, told in different voices, with different vocabulaties.
You really should read up on the DH, because you have very little understanding of it.
There was no intent to hide the fact that it was composed of multiple narratives. It wasn’t supposed to be a secret from the audience.
The same way you do.
It’s definitely not a single author. Single authors don’t continully change style and vocabulary and tell contradictory versions of the same story. These are stories from different sources woven together. There was no goal to make it look like a single author anyway, they were just syncretizing multiple tribal traditions into a single unified narrative.
I’m sorry, but some of the stories in the bible can be concluded to be false because of scientific discoveries. For instance, a global flood is absurd. The exodus narrative, while not quite as absurd as a global flood, strains credulity to the breaking point. The story of the fall of babel is another one that is too ludicrous to believe.
Those are a few off the top of my head.
Now, could these stories contain a nugget of truth (say a local flood?), maybe, but as presented in the bible they are absurd.
If you take this stance, then why not accept Egyptian miracle stories as well?
Who cares if there are internal contradictions or not? Are you saying that authors simply cannot make their stories without contradiction? That only through a divine hand can a text contain no contradictions?
Do you believe that the moon gives off it’s own light, as indicated in the bible?
If this is the case, then (and no offense, really) ‘who cares’? I mean that in the sense that if a Christian believes this then doesn’t that undercut the miraculous nature of the whole account?
This naturalize the bible movement, didn’t it start and fizzle out in the 1800’s? If you stick with this train of thought, then don’t you have to scrap the resurrection as well? If not, why not?
And you didn’t even bring up
[Zipporah at the inn - Wikipedia] (Exodus 4:24–26)
in which not only did God apparently abruptly change his mind and try to kill Moses… but having made this remarkable decision, God apparently failed to accomplish it.
I appreciate it. I do think Diogenes has provided some helpful answers and I’ll definitely check out The Bible Unearthed. I’d appreciate some cites and/or book recommendations which could give me more background on understanding these scholarly conclusions which he mentioned. I do have access to a university library:
Who wrote the Bible?, Richard Elliott Friedman, Englewood Cliffs, N.J. : Prentice Hall, c1987. ISBN 0671631616
Moses, Elisas Auerbach (in German, but available in English translation).
While I found these books to be fascinating and thought-provoking, please note that I do not necessarily support the authors’ premises or all conclusions drawn by them.
An empire is a combination of then existing states. The Davidic empire was clearly not as big as the ones you mention, but it was also not a vassal state of anyone. An independent state of this size would have been quite significant at the time, and large enough to have merited some notice, I would have thought. But as for the point of the OP, no Davidic Empire does not imply no David. Unlike the sons of Jacob, he was not placed far enough in the past to be purely legendary, I would think.
Well, we’re talking about Moses here. Even without his staff he was a badass–at least, as long as he was within the influence Earth’s low gravity and yellow sun.
Since we’re supposedly dealing with God, impossibility seems like a bad argument. Lack of evidence seems a much better one. (Or evidence directly against, such as you’ve given.)
Western culture seems stuck in the rut of the Bible being true, so you get loons like Velikovsky who aren’t even necessarily believers trying to give plausible explanations for things that never actually happened. (And failing.) It is like the Creationists trying to show that the Flood is scientifically possible. They at least have a political motive, since if they just said it was all a miracle even they would have to admit it couldn’t be taught in the schools. But it would be a lot more honest.
We might as well spend time looking for scientific explanations for the success of psychics in the current spate of TV series.
BTW, as usual thank you for all the good information.
There’s an episode of Nova on Netflix that looks into recent archeology from OT sites. They touch on the multiple authorship of the Torah, the actuality of King David and when, where, and how big his kingdom was, and the results of the Babylonian Exile. They agree with Diogenes, below.
Per Nova, it was during the Exile that they went from sort of monotheistic, with other Canaanite gods on the side, to truly monotheistic. And it was during the Exile that the story of the Exodus came together, along with the claim that they were not Canaanite.
I’d provide an episode name and link, but Netflix is blocked at work. I’ll try to remember to come back with the information later.
The term you want is henotheistic–henotheism being the belief in a supreme deity without necessarily denying the existence of other gods. It’s pretty clear to me that the Yahweh of the early Tanakh is not presenting himself as the only immortal supernatural being. He’s just capable of kicking all their asses at will, so long as nobody cheats by bringing in iron chariots.
Not really. If we’re dealing with God, then lack of evidence is also a bad argument, since he could have made it pop out of existence. Why ? Who the fuck knows. Because faith is better than knowledge and if we knew he was true we… wouldn’t believe in him ? I don’t know, I never grokked the religious folks who harped on the purity of faith over evidence. But you get my point: once we’'re in omnipotent lalaland, nothing is proof of anything and vice versa.
You would be amazed how many Christians I have encountered who gave a variation of this argument, in total sincerity. They say that if God’s existence was obvious, then there would be no merit in being a good person, because anyone who knew for sure that God existed would OF COURSE always follow his laws. Therefore God conceals his existence, because anybody who does good simply to please God isn’t really good. Or something.
Even ignoring the “Mosaic Law = Good” absurdity, they clearly have never read the Bible. If some Islamic source published an alleged account of Israelites that depicted them as seeing miracle after miracle, and then rejecting God time after time, to the point where the only possible explanation is either utter stupidity or utter depravity, it would replace “The Protocols of the Elders of Zion” as the most blatantly anti-Semitic forgery ever perpetrated.
I don’t see how anyone can read the book of Exodus without having a WTF? moment every few paragraphs. The constant cycle of sin-oppression-repentance-deliverance in Judges is almost as bad.
This would take us straight into GD territory (which my comment already did, and I apologize for that). Please look at God’s actions in Exodus and consider how they might indicate what God thinks of evidence versus faith - in terms of the story, of course.
