What are your thoughts on the Documentary Hypothesis?

by easyreader1970 4 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  easyreader1970

  I recently picked up Who Wrote the Bible? from my local library. It's subject is the Documentary Hypothesis. What that is, in a nutshell, is a theory that more than Moses wrote the first five books of the Old Testament and perhaps Moses didn't write any of it. It suggests that there are four independent and distinct sources of the ancient text.

  Some of it seems like it is reaching but many of the texts discussed, after considering them, give this theory some serious believability. Of course I can't discuss my findings with any Witnesses that I know unless I want to be hauled in front of a judicial committee meeting for apostasy (if they only knew).

  I was just wondering if anyone else had considered this theory or had read this particular book.
• 

  Narkissos

  The documentary hypothesis has been modified many times since Wellhausen and today, especially in continental Europe, there is no real consensus about the number, content or even existence of written independent "documents" upstream of the Torah. What most agree on is a rather long (and fairly diverse) process of redaction and edition starting from the reform of Josiah and extending well into the Persian period, with the insertion of a few older poetical fragments. From this perspective the date usually ascribed to "Moses" is off by almost one millenium.
• 

  OnTheWayOut

  The fellows who examine the Hebrew text seem to have a good bit of expertise.
  It would be folly for any of us that cannot examine ancient Hebrew to say they
  are wrong, other than to state it by faith instead of knowledge. I prefer knowledge
  these days.

  It would seem that much was written much later than expected. Even with what
  remains, it is quite evident that the Hebrews were worshipping other gods besides
  Yahweh long after the days of David and Solomon.

  Experts feel that the book that was "discovered" during the dynasty in the temple
  was Deuteronomy and it was not so much discovered as it was recently written.

  I personally speculate that nobody EVER lived under the Mosiac law code strictly- EVER.
  It was written as if it were received by Moses, and (my speculation- no letters, please)
  Moses never existed and the Israelites were never slaves in Egypt. The people worshipped
  in various ways up until the freedom of bondage to Babylon, and generally leaned toward
  worship of Yahweh after that, but there were variations on that type of worship.

  Even up until the time of the destruction of the temple around 70 C.E., the various forms
  of worship centered around Yahweh persisted, but then their world ended when the temple
  was destroyed. All of the various ways to worship included the temple. But two ways were
  less dependent upon that temple and two dominate religious ways came out of - Rabbinical
  Judaism and Christianity. Both ways pretended the worship that existed before the
  destruction of the temple was more established and stable than it really was.

  Along with WHO WROTE THE BIBLE, you should try THE HARLOT BY THE SIDE OF
  THE ROAD. It helps you see what kind of strange stuff is left over in Genesis through
  Kings.
• 

  JCanon

  Hi easyreader:

  Can you share with us something in particular that impressed you? Something specific that you felt compelling in the work?

  It is clear from some parts of the text that Moses did not write every single word because one of the books actually records his death. But it would be interesting if there was something else that a scholar thought perhaps came from another writer. Plus how could that be absolutely proven. Anybody can copy and/or translate something from the original author. Doesn't mean that author actually wrote that translation.

  Thanks.
• 

  JCanon

  Hi OnTheWayOut:

  I personally speculate that nobody EVER lived under the Mosiac law code strictly- EVER.
  It was written as if it were received by Moses, and (my speculation- no letters, please)
  Moses never existed and the Israelites were never slaves in Egypt. The people worshipped
  in various ways up until the freedom of bondage to Babylon, and generally leaned toward
  worship of Yahweh after that, but there were variations on that type of worship.

  You seem to have thought about this. Without me simply contracting with my own view, would you mind just sharing with me your response to the following?

  Kathleen Kenyon's statement about the fall of Jericho:

  Kathleen Kenyon: Digging Up Jericho, Jericho and the Coming of the Israelites, page 262:

  "As concerns the date of the destruction of Jericho by the Israelites, all that can be said is that the latest Bronze Age occupation should, in my view, be dated to the third quarter of the fourteenth century B.C. This is a date which suits neither the school of scholars which would date the entry of the Israelites into Palestine to c. 1400 B.C. nor the school which prefers a date of c. 1260 B.C."

  Page 261 of her book, "Digging Up Jericho," in the Chapter called "Jericho And Coming Of The Israelites," she says:

  "It is a sad fact that of the town walls of the Late Bronze Age, within which period the attack by the Israelites must fall by any dating, not a trace remains."

  Including, were you aware of this reference? Thanks.

  JC