There is no such thing as The Bible

wait, so it's someone recording something someone said 150 years prior about who tradition says wrote what?that sounds a little sketchy to me.This message has been edited by arachnophilia, 10-03-2005 10:22 PM

---

אָרַח

well, right now it's not even authority. it's hearsay. someone wrote that someone said that someone wrote something -- with 150 year gaps in between.but when we get to authority, it's good to remember that authority is often unrelated to accuracy, andtradition, attribution ≠ scholarship shall we go through this bit? you're not gonna like it.the torah has five distinct authors or GROUPS of authors. notice i didn't say each book was written by a different. three of those sources are in genesis alone. there is a J source (who calls god yhvh elohym), an E source (who only calls god elohym), and a P source (the genealogies). i suspect there are remnants of a fourth source, too, but they were incorporated by E.these sources are stylistically independent, suggesting that the people who wrote them were not even aware of the other authors, and that they were included by a later redactor. this explains the inconsisties and contradictions very plainly. E wrote genesis 1, J wrote genesis 2.these two major sources continue through exodus and numbers. leviticus seems to be the fourth source, and deuteronomy is it's own source.genesis's latest components date to about 600 bc (yes, that recently). we know for instance that israel had a king when it was written:

quote:

---

Gen 36:31 And these [are] the kings that reigned in the land of Edom, before there reigned any king over the children of Israel.

---

we also know that the chaldeans possessed ur when it was written, which puts it betwee 900 and 600 bc:

quote:

---

Gen 11:28 And Haran died before his father Terah in the land of his nativity, in Ur of the Chaldees.

---

adn we know that camels were domesticated at the time, after about 900 bc:

quote:

---

Gen 24:64 And Rebekah lifted up her eyes, and when she saw Isaac, she lighted off the camel.

---

there's also a significant babylonian influence: the flood story, both creation stories. it's strong enough that i'm willing to place my guess around the babylonian exile.evidently, parts of sources are much, much older. but it seems to have been rewritten, in parts, close to 600 bc, and compiled as late as 516 bc. a year ago, i posted a thread that documents some pretty strong textual evidence that moses could not have written ANY of deuteronomy, due to the fact that it seems to be a divided-kingdom forgery written for political reasons:read, and feel free to answer there: http://EvC Forum: the forgery of deuteronomy camels are a pretty big part of the isaac and rebekah story. in fact, i don't thinlk the story works without them. if they had camels before moses, why didn't they use them during the exodus? certainly 40 years wanering the desert on a camel beats 40 years wandering the desert on foot. i think if you look you'll find a lot of jewish dissent, too. the first bits of question the sources of the torah was but forth by jews, not modern christians.

quote:

---

Several Talmud rabbis were the first to notice these problems. Basing themselves on the premise that Moses wrote the entire five books of Moses, they asked how he could possibly have written the text describing his own death and burial. While some contended that he wrote them prophetically, the dominant opinion seems to be that Joshua wrote them and added them to the text.

​

Later Jewish biblical exegetes, such as Abraham ibn Ezra (c.1093 - 1167) also noted the different style and language of Deuteronomy and stated that a number of verses must have been written by a later author, probably (in their view) Joshua.

​

In his introduction to Deuteronomy, Don Isaac Abravanel (1437 - 1508) was clear that the book had a different author than the first four books of the Pentateuch. Both men prefigured more contemporary exponents of documentary hypothesis, which claims that the book is indeed a distinct document, appended to the preceding books at a relatively late date.

​

Book of Deuteronomy - Wikipedia

---

those dates look modern to you? we're talking middle ages here. so what you're saying is that people wrote down the teachings of jesus, sometimes even 100 years after the fact, and got them right word for word? if you believe in divine inspiration, sure -- but if THAT is the case, why have 4 gospels, instead of 1? why the other differences, if god is transmitting the words 100% accurately to the prophets/disciples/whatevers? mine still reads fairly gnostically, but not as much as a true gnostic text. it's somewhere in between. while we're on it, the gospel of john also reads slightly gnostically to me. much of christianity is similar to other sun-god worshipping religions of the region and time. it's actually nearly identically to one in particular, but i forget the name. someone else here will know it, i'm sure.

---

אָרַח

Well, you'll have to link me to your arguments, I don't know where they are.My arguments are -1) There is the repeated claim of the book "These are the words of Moses" (e.g. 1:1, 4:44, 29:1 - there are 40 claims in total). To deny this is to claim that the book is a total fraud.2) Joshua, Moses' immediate successor, attributed Deuteronomy to Moses (Josh. 1:7).3) The remainder of the OT attributes Deuteronomy to Moses (Jud. 3:4, 1 Kings 2:3, 2 Kings 14:6, Ezra 3:2, Neh. 1:7, Ps. 103:7, Dan. 9:11, Mal. 4:4).4) Deuteronomy is the book of the Law most quoted in the NT, often with words like "Moses truly said" (Acts 3:22), "Moses says" (Rom. 10:19), or "it is written in the law of Moses" (1 Cor. 9:9).5) Jesus also attributed Deuteronomy to the hand of Moses, saying, "Moses said" (Mark 7:10) or "Moses wrote" (Luke 20:28).6) In Deuteronomy, 70 references to the events of the Exodus are in the past tense, while references to entry into Canaan are in the future.7) The geographical and historical details of the book display a first hand acquaintance such as Moses would have had (e.g. the nations mentioned in Deuteronomy are of Moses' time).8) The structure of Deuteronomy is modeled on a structure for ancient political treaties that were only in use in the age of Moses (1500-1200 BC).9) The last chapter of Deuteronomy about Moses' death was probably written by his successor Joshua, in accordance with the custom of the day.10) As I alluded to in one of my last posts here, evangelical scholars recognize there are small editorial and explanatory changes in accordance with the original author's meaning.11) Re. Deut. 1:1 and 1:5, verse 5 states that Moab was the location of the speech which was EAST of the SOUTHERN half of the Dead Sea. The River Jordan runs from the NORTHERN end of the Dead Sea. I think you are reading too much into these verses, the geography does not fit your version of events as far as I can tell.

which of course i am anyways. and i have evidence, too, which you failed to address. but moreover, that's not the point. "the words of moses" do not indicate that moses physically penned the book -- quite the contrary in hebrew tradition. it means that moses spoke the words, and someone else wrote them -- not even neccessarily at the time. uh, no. not deuteronomy. the word it uses is הַתּוֹרָה -- ha-torah. the torah. literally, it's referring the law which moses gave. that's in the book of exodus and leviticus. this is the same for the following: but let's look at a few, shall we? i'll ignore the ones that are absent of a specific reference to a part of the torah.

quote:

---

2Ki 14:6 But the children of the murderers he slew not: according unto that which is written in the book of the law of Moses, wherein the LORD commanded, saying, The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, nor the children be put to death for the fathers; but every man shall be put to death for his own sin.

​

Deu 24:16 The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin.

---

this one does refer to deuteronomy, and must. i don't see another place where this is written.

quote:

---

Ezr 3:2 Then stood up Jeshua the son of Jozadak, and his brethren the priests, and Zerubbabel the son of Shealtiel, and his brethren, and builded the altar of the God of Israel, to offer burnt offerings thereon, as [it is] written in the law of Moses the man of God.

---

the instruction for building the altar are in exodus, but not deuteronomy. this passage does not refer to deuteronomy.

quote:

---

Neh 1:7 We have dealt very corruptly against thee, and have not kept the commandments, nor the statutes, nor the judgments, which thou commandedst thy servant Moses.

---

could be exodus or deut. no indication that it has to be deut.

quote:

---

Dan 9:11 Yea, all Israel have transgressed thy law, even by departing, that they might not obey thy voice; therefore the curse is poured upon us, and the oath that [is] written in the law of Moses the servant of God, because we have sinned against him.

​

Deu 11:28 And a curse, if ye will not obey the commandments of the LORD your God, but turn aside out of the way which I command you this day, to go after other gods, which ye have not known.

---

nearest i can tell, this one has to refer to deut. as well. so that's two. all the rest refer to the torah or law as a whole, or don't indicate a clear source.let's look at another ot reference to deuteronomy, shall we?

quote:

---

2Ki 22:8 And Hilkiah the high priest said unto Shaphan the scribe, I have found the book of the law in the house of the LORD. And Hilkiah gave the book to Shaphan, and he read it.

---

read this chapter and the next. king josiah's priests find a book while renovating the temple. this is a book of the law -- a second book of the law that was not in judah's possession before this time. josiah is upset by this, and totally reorganizes the theological structure of judah because of it. he tears down every place of worship except the temple in jerusalem.the intructions that prompt this can be found in the book of deuteronomy. josiah's priest found the book deuteronomy. and there's the evidence, right there in kings. feel free to check the commandments just as i did above. here's a good one:

quote:

---

Deu 12:13 Take heed to thyself that thou offer not thy burnt offerings in every place that thou seest:

---

this one's not in exodus, or numbers, or leviticus, is it? so, where was this book between moses writing it and josiah finding it? how did it get built into solomon's temple, without solomon knowing it?this book was evidently used for political reasons against israel by josiah. they were now idolators, becuase they had temples elsewhere with their own cherubim. of course, to do any different would mean that the citizens of israel would have to go to another country they were often at war with -- judah -- to worship, every week. the entire population.there's further evidence of forgery, too. it mentions a throne -- no mention in exodus/num/levi. evidently, it was written after there was a king.this book was integrated into the canon soon after discovery. it is the standard on which all kings in the book of kings are judged (the origin of the sin of jeroboam). it is no suprise to see kings and every book written afterward refering to it as part of the torah.see, when you're presented with evidence that something is a forgery, evidence of people BELIEVING it is not evidence that it is authentic. the scientific community believed the piltdown to be authentic for many years. i could probably find tons of quotes regarding it. but that doesn't make it legit.so references like these don't mean a heck of a lot: luke and paul were evidently fooled just like the rest of them. but for jesus, the son of god there would be no excuse.

quote:

---

Mar 7:10 For Moses said, Honour thy father and thy mother; and, Whoso curseth father or mother, let him die the death:

​

Exd 20:12 Honour thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee.

---

good thing that's not only in deuteronomy, isn't it. as for the other one:

quote:

---

Luk 20:27 Then came to [him] certain of the Sadducees, which deny that there is any resurrection; and they asked him,
Luk 20:28 Saying, Master, Moses wrote unto us, If any man's brother die, having a wife, and he die without children, that his brother should take his wife, and raise up seed unto his brother.... etc

---

this is a question posed to jesus, not jesus's answer. let's look at what jesus says when he actually QUOTES deuteronomy, shall we?

quote:

---

Mat 4:7 Jesus said unto him, It is written again, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God.

​

Luk 4:12 And Jesus answering said unto him, It is said, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God.

​

Deu 6:16 Ye shall not tempt the LORD your God, as ye tempted [him] in Massah.

---

"it is written." not by moses. not in the torah. just it is written, or it is said. maybe jesus DOES know better? if i were forging a book, wouldn't i do it that way? actually, the political treatise part is the covenant: the ten commandments. those are borrowed from exodus. ad-hoc, and without any textual evidence. but i'll do better than this. if i HAD to split deuteronomy into two sources, i'd split off the last SIX chapters. why?

quote:

---

Deut 1:1 These are the words which Moses spoke unto all Israel beyond the Jordan; in the wilderness, in the Arabah, over against Suph, between Paran and Tophel, and Laban, and Hazeroth, and Di-zahab.

​

Deut 28:69 These are the words of the covenant which the LORD commanded Moses to make with the children of Israel in the land of Moab, beside the covenant which He made with them in Horeb.

---

bookends. those 28 chapter are all one speech. from there, it returns to narrative, and the narrative remains in the same style throughout. if joshua wrote only a portion, it was chapters 29-34. except that it contains the hebrew word for "across." lots of translations seem to botch this, for whatever reason (gee, i wonder). it says moses is giving the speech across the jordan river. he's in moab, they are not.if the geography doesn't fit, it's not my fault. that's what it says. (of course, the geography DOES fit, but that's another point. look at the map again). notably the book fails to mention philistines. which is good, because they shouldn't be there yet. but i'm not sure i would categorize its descriptions as "first hand."

---

אָרַח

12 year difference on Matthew, 17 years on Luke, overlap on John and Mark...that's not far different, considering we're 2 millenia down the road from that century.

It migth seem just like a few years, but .. they still are mutually exclusive.Since that makes it mutually exclusive, the accounts can not be taken as inerrent.

I guess the problem with your argument is that Deuteronomy IS part of the Torah, there are FIVE books of the Law not four. I see no reason to split of Deuteronomy from the rest of the Torah, and Jews don't view it that way either.
I don't buy your argument about Moses not writing the vast majority of the Torah. After all, no author is mentioned for, say, 1 Kings, for example, so why pretend Moses wrote the Torah if he didn't?? I think your source does not respect Jewish history the way the Jews did.
You found 2 references to Deuteronomy in those verses I quoted (and my list was not exhaustive) so I don't see why you pursue this line of argument.
Re. the book Josiah discovered, this was not a new book, but the book of Moses, which had been lost and found. Hence, no surprise it was in the Temple. If they had managed to lose their OWN book, hard to imagine how they would know those other treaties existed for a short time (300 years or so) in Moses' day, about 500+ years before, and were able to duplicate them in this alleged forgery you talk about.
Re. Moses' speech, I still don't see why it has to be someone else doing the speech, they were facing a town called Suph, which is East of the Jordan River, not west, where Canaan (Promised Land) was.

Two Gospels' dates overlap, and the two that don't, actually have much material in common with one that does.
I really would be curious to see how your source came to their dates.

you're getting tripped up by the word TORAH. it translates as LAW and just happens to be the name used for a collection of writings. these are not necessarily the same and the use of the word LAW does not necessarily reference the whole book now called TORAH.

this is the strangest b-c-v request i'll ever make, but it's for a valid reason: where does it say there are FIVE books of the torah, in the bible? book, chapter, verse?because every where it's referred to, it's called this:

quote:

---

Jos 8:31 As Moses the servant of the LORD commanded the children of Israel, as it is written in the book of the law of Moses,

---

book. singular. so frankly, the idea that there HAS to be 5 books of the torah is ridiculous. some of the jews i quoted above did. the fun thing about judaism is that it's a pretty broad set of beliefs -- and they debate everything. it's called tradition. besides which, the torah seems to be claiming mosaic authorship at some points (some people read references to moses taking down the law as the book refering to itself). this of course is highly debatable. which source was that? the book of kings? or the talmud? either way, i think they did. nobody is debating that the book of deuteronomy became accepted canon. it's not suprising to see people who read it as such. but someone's opinion of something is not evidence that the opinion is true -- especially when the authenticity is called into question.as i said, i could probably find quotes about what a revolution piltdown man was. the majority of the scientific community did not doubt it at the time. but that isn't evidence that it's not a hoax. except the textual evidence is pretty clear that it's specifically the book of deuteronomy. this is not a shaky case, either. all of the actions josiah does to cleanse judah of idolatry are influenced by verse found in deuteronomy, but not any other book of moses. i don't think you know what you're talking. the specific treaty is a suzerainty -- a large occupying power to a weaker subservient power. the larger power announces who they are, and then lists a few reasons why the smaller one owes the allegiance (or whatever the terms of the treaty are, anyways). then, the terms are listed.after a certain amount of time, the explanations of the parts dropped, and it became "i am ___ of ____ who did this thing for you. do this, do this, do this, do that, don't do this." this is a LATER form treaty.now go read the ten commandments. there's your treaty. where did the authors of deuteronomy get it? it's called the book of exodus. because when someone writes "these are the words which moses spoke" they're probably not moses. books of the prophets use this convention, btw. think about it for a second: why do we have books called matthew, mark, luke, and john, but no gospel of jesus? the teachings of prophets seem to have been collected by followers, not penned by the prophets themselves.since this book treats moses like a prophet from the divided kingdom period, it also stands to reason that that is when the book was written. indeed, the style is consistent with books like isaiah and jeremiah, NOT genesis and exodus.

---

אָרַח

OK, you need more evidence, that's fine -
Gospel of Mark: Polycarp (c. 110-150), Hermas (c. 115-140)Gospel of Matthew: Iraneaus (AD 175). It is interesting to note however, that no other apostle was ever suggested as writing this Gospel. And the earliest citations of it are from Ignatius (AD 110) and this Gospel is quoted more than either Mark or Luke by the early church fathers.

Yes, I am familiar with the JEPD theory. Now if we had manuscripts J, E, P and D, you would have a strong case but we don't, we just have Genesis. One of the reasons the Wellhausen school of critics
(19th century) developed the JEDP hypothesis was because it was thought back then that written languages didn't exist in Moses time. Just one of the many assumptions we have since discovered are false.
I find it curious that 'scholars' would make up four manuscripts that don't exist anywhere on their own, in order to criticize a manuscript that does exist. Too funny.Re. Genesis 1 & 2, they are complementary, not contradictory, so why attribute two authors??? On the basis that they use 2 different names for divinity?? Since when have Jews believed that they worshipped two Gods?? I think those two chapters having 2 different authors is reading way too much into the text.Re. Gen. 36:31, I thought I'd covered this before, but let me try again. Evangelical scholars stress the difference between minor editorial changes in accordance with the original author's meaning and later redactional changes that are contrary to the meaning of the original text. Here is the difference between the two -Evangelical view/ Critical viewEditing the text/ Redacting the text
Grammatical changes/ Theological changes
Changes in form/ Changes in fact
Transmitting truth/ Tampering with truth
Changing the medium/ Changing the message
Updating names/ Redacting eventsGen. 36:31 falls into the evangelical view, no big deal. Bottom line is, the bulk of the text was written by Moses (though I acknowledge he got his info from various sources), with minor changes like the ones on the above left added later.Why are there four Gospels? Well, they each have a different emphasis, both in theology and audience -
Matthew - Jesus as King, to the Jews
Mark - Jesus as Servant, to the Roman Christians
Luke - Jesus as Son of Man, to the Gentiles
John - Jesus as Son of God, to the Greeks
Surely, it's better to have four different eyewitness accounts than one??Re. camels, they would only have been useful to Moses if there had been enough for everybody, otherwise, they could only go as fast as the slowest person on foot. No idea what the camel population was back then in that area but it would seem there weren't enough for everybody.Sure, there may be some parallels between Christianity and other religions that you mentioned in the area at the time. That doesn't explain why they all died out, and Christianity has survived for two millenia.Anyway, I have a ton of reasons to believe why the writer of Genesis must have been around in the time of Moses and be familiar with Egypt but our posts are getting too big and I would like to answer your other points. I suggest we split our posts up, one for OT and one for NT.Sorry, my spacing for my table about views disappeared in the preview, I put a '/' instead to seperate the two views.

Re. the Law, it was set in Jesus' day as five books, that's the way it was in the Hebrew canon and everything that's quoted as 'Moses said' etc. is from those books.
Re. the book of Moses, the Hebrews had a tendency to bundle books together, some canon lists counted 1 & 2 Kings as one book for example etc. Not an uncommon practice.
I find it weird that you argue the books weren't that way in the beginning, then they were that way in Jesus' time, now again, they shouldn't be. I still think the folks who were closer to the times of the OT would know better.Re. Deuteronomy and the book found by Josiah, here is a link -Page not found | Bible.orgBottom line is, I think the burden of proof lies with the higher critic at this point. Btw, I thought you were assuming they had no book of the Law of any kind when Josiah found that book and that he made it up from scratch, sorry I misunderstood your point.I didn't quite follow your logic re. the Gospel of Jesus. We have a book called Daniel about Daniel the prophet, we have a book called Ezekiel about Ezekiel the prophet, we don't have a Gospel of Jesus about Jesus...so...why not?...if we are following a pattern from the OT?? Not quite sure I follow the logic of your argument here.

How about HISTORY?Look up when quintaris first became govenor of syria, and juddah became part of the providence of SYria.Read up on when Herod the King died.I mean, when did people come up with the date that the civil war happened??

Tradition. Look at the way that the Jewish scripture is organised.TORAH (The Law):* Bereishith (In the beginning...) (Genesis)
* Shemoth (The names...) (Exodus)
* Vayiqra (And He called...) (Leviticus)
* Bamidbar (In the wilderness...) (Numbers)
* Devarim (The words...) (Deuteronomy)NEVI'IM (The Prophets):* Yehoshua (Joshua)
* Shoftim (Judges)
* Shmuel (I &II Samuel)
* Melakhim (I & II Kings)
* Yeshayah (Isaiah)
* Yirmyah (Jeremiah)
* Yechezqel (Ezekiel)
* The Twelve (treated as one book)
o Hoshea (Hosea)
o Yoel (Joel)
o Amos
o Ovadyah (Obadiah)
o Yonah (Jonah)
o Mikhah (Micah)
o Nachum
o Chavaqquq (Habbakkuk)
o Tzefanyah (Zephaniah)
o Chaggai
o Zekharyah (Zechariah)
o MalakhiKETHUVIM (The Writings):* Tehillim (Psalms)
* Mishlei (Proverbs)
* Iyov (Job)
* Shir Ha-Shirim (Song of Songs)
* Ruth
* Eikhah (Lamentations)
* Qoheleth (the author's name) (Ecclesiastes)
* Esther
* Daniel
* Ezra & Nechemyah (Nehemiah) (treated as one book)
* Divrei Ha-Yamim (The words of the days) (Chronicles)Written Torah is often referred to as the Tanakh, which is an acrostic of Torah, Nevi'im and Ketuvim.