2.4 Deconversion: The Bible (Part 2)
|
|
 |
I explain how the professor’s knowledge of the Bible’s construction brought into question my belief that it was divinely inspired. Verses Mentioned: 2 Kings 2:24 (Children killed by bears) Deut. 20:16 (Leave alive nothing that breathes) The Documentary Hypothesis en.wikipedia.org The Bible with Sources Revealed en.wikipedia.org www.amazon.com All excerpts used in this video are either copyright-free or covered under “fair use” in Title 17 ยง 107 of the USC. Music: “Mass for Four Voices: Agnus Dei” by The Sixteen .
Related posts:
I’ve had long intense conversations with utube users like Cartesian , pple who uses their philosophy background to confound and confuse their opponents..
Your intellect will be invaluable in our efforts to speak some good senses to the world about the religious hurt that have been inflicted on humanity for centuries which is onece again on the rise in this new millenium..
@Evid
Your inquisitive nature and honesty in search for truth makes it inevitable that u will deconvert from Christianity , just like how Darwin did ..
You are in good company ..
I admire yr bravery not to succumb to religious doctrinal threats.
I was told many of the things your were. All this seems so familiar.
is not that he is intelligent, its a antrened hypnosis tehnique. watch the video again and hear the words that are describing the feeling. u will find the source of ur illness. the whispering tipe is a very deep tipe of hipnosis.what can i say, maybe he is “the professor”. if u say that u believe in god, what is the devil job if not working on the image of god and the salvation of man that are described in the biblie. oh whait ur doing it!
@Evid3nc3
As far as the Suzerain-vassal treaty goes, it explains some of the differing language (you’re going to write different in a legal document than you would in a letter, narrative, poetry, apocalypse, etc.) as well as a good deal of the retold stories in that one is the narrative version, one is the “legal” version. Arguing that different names for God shows differing authorship always seemed strange to me. I bet you have a friend whom you sometimes call by one name and then by another.
@Evid3nc3
Even if you believe it it, you have to admit the rather shaky ground the documentary hypothesis stands on. One might be able to read through all my comments on YouTube and come to the conclusion that three different people wrote them under the same handle while they still could come from me. Would I be wrong in saying that was a very real possibility?
@Evid3nc3 First, the DH theory is based entirely around the assumption that modern men can read a 4-3,000-year-old document and interpret/analyze it properly. First that claim seems a little outrageous, but whatever. Second, without using the Suzerain-vassal treaty hypothesis (for now, give me time to dig something up) different genres and ideas demand different word choices and different voice and tone which is why differences could occur in the Pentateuch.
@CalebDWilliams
2) From what I have read, modern Christians either accept the DH, are ignorant of it, or reject it for theological (not academic) reasons.
No widely-accepted, well-supported academic “Christian” alternative has been presented. The fact that you can’t find a competent academic source for the Suzerain-vassal hypothesis (while I could find enough competent academic sources to support fragmentary hypotheses to fill a library bookshelf) further confirms this to me.
@CalebDWilliams
“You do this because of your values and worldviews.”
No, I support fragmentary explanations like the DH because they are what the majority of all academic? Biblical scholars support.
“You act? as if the Christan view hasn’t had just as much study and analysis as your view.”
1) It was 18th century CHRISTIANS who created the original DH and the field of textual criticism.
@Evid3nc3
“Alternatively, the DH perspective is based on premises that ALL people agree on…1) The hands of human beings wrote the words of the Torah”
This is not a belief of orthodox Jews and arguably of the majority of Jews until the advent of the Reform and conservative movement in the era of the Jewish enlightenment about 200 years ago. But as I began “As an orthodox Jew…”
@Evid3nc3
It sounds like you think I am saying that the inconsistencies somehow present a proof of G-d or of authorship and you are using the razor to disprove this philosophy.
What I am saying is, someone who is already a theist- specifically Jews whose beliefs already entail the divine origin of the Oral Torah- do not have to feel threatened that the DH presents a proof against the divine authorship of the Written Torah as the Oral Torah already deals with the issues presented by the DH.
@WaysOfMan
Alternatively, the DH perspective is based on premises that ALL people agree on and therefore are not unwarranted assumptions:
1) The hands of human beings wrote the words of the Torah
2) Humans make mistakes
3) Humans have political motives
4) Human language changes over time
Using only these and a few other premises (that EVERYONE agrees on), the DH explains the Torah. So, by Occam’s Razor, why add the extra assumptions if we don’t need them to explain how it was made?
@WaysOfMan
“However there is a prerequisite that the person believe that the? Pentateuch was dictated word for word by G-d and that the inconsistencies were intentional”
In philosophical logic, the phrase “a person would have to believe” translates to an “assumption”.
In this case, assuming that there is a God and assuming that he wrote the Torah and assuming that the inconsistencies are intentional are all unwarranted assumptions.
@Evid3nc3
2, 3: Variations in political emphasis? Because it is completely unreasonable to believe these could just be emphasis in the Bible, right? Again why is it unreasonable to think that God inspiring the writing of these books would be unable to weave themes across the entire work? You’re taking a rather narrow view of the Christian God. As for Suzerain-vassal treaties, there’s way to much bad information out there for me to feel comfortable linking.
@Evid3nc3
It would certainly help your argument if you knew him personally and knew his prowess first hand. As for your concerns:
1: Hebrew is just as divers a language as English, you can say the same thing many ways, why wouldn’t the author be able to do so or who is to say what “dialect” it was originally written it, perhaps the best preserved sections are what we have, there are a lot of arguments that could be made, though I’m not going to take the time.
@Evid3nc3
I understand the distinction between assumption and argument, I was using the term loosely to mean support for one argument over another. You do this because of your values and worldviews. You act as if the Christan view hasn’t had just as much study and analysis as your view.
@Evid3nc3
My intention was that a person can find answers to these questions in the Oral Torah. However there is a prerequisite that the person believe that the Pentateuch was dictated word for word by G-d and that the inconsistencies were intentional. Not that being a theist will somehow magically resolve these problems. Someone who maintains uncertainty in G-d or disbelief that the Pentateuch was written by Him will by necessity have to fall to the DH.
“Do you know anyone who [reads Hebrew] on a regular basis?”
Richard Friedman, the author of the book in the video. Is it necessary that I know him personally to be confident in his ability to read Hebrew? I don’t see why it would be.
Please give me a source for the Suzerain-vassal structure. I’m not convinced that it accounts for (1) variations in hebrew dialect (2) variations in political emphasis (3) connections to other OT books that wouldn’t have been written yet if Moses was the author.
@CalebDWilliams
“your assumption”
It’s not an assumption, it is an ARGUMENT. Assumptions are baseless assertions. Arguments are a structured form of reasoning based on premises (evidence in this case).
Assumptions are a dime a dozen; anyone can make one in a matter of seconds. Arguments on the scale of the DH are the accumulation of centuries of study by multiple generations of scholars amassing and analyzing hundreds of pieces of evidence.
@WaysOfMan
“I would say the Hypothesis begins after atheism starts”
Yeah. Just one problem with that idea: Richard Friedman (one of the strongest modern proponents of the DH) is a theist.
See: The Hidden Face of God by Richard Friedman.
As an orthodox Jew, from what I understand about the DH, I would say the Hypothesis begins after atheism starts. To explain the inconsistencies of the Pentateuch, atheism developed the Documentary Hypothesis. (Orthodox) Jews though, use many of these same inconsistencies as a proof that the Oral Torah was given with the Written Torah (Pentateuch). The DH then, is an extension of atheism and not the absolute approach to critical rendition of the text.
@Evid3nc3 I wonder, can you actually read Biblical Hebrew? Do you know anyone who can/does on a regular basis? I will admit, I don’t know Hebrew, but I have a number of acquaintances who study the text in its original Hebrew and according to them at least, there is no variation of the sort which you refer. My question was given the argument of a Suzerain-vassal structure, your assumption that there are different authors is just as large a leap of faith as mine that it was written by one person.
@Evid3nc3 I completely understand JEDP theory and your argument and it is a compelling one, but it isn’t correct. While one could argue that the structure makes it seem like there were multiple authors, the Pentateuch is really structured like a Suzerain-vassal treaty. This structure would have been widely recognized in the ancient near east, it is only our culture that hides it from us. This makes perfect sense given the Hebrew belief that the Pentateuch was God’s covenant with them; it fits.
@CalebDWilliams
This can all seem very distant and abstract because the Bible was written so long ago.
Imagine you are reading a Stephen King novel and suddenly the text busts into 17th century English and starts talking about what a great king Charles II is. Then a few lines later, it busts into 19th century English and starts making arguments about why the South should have won the Civil War. Then it returns to sounding like Stephen King. Those are the kinds of markers we are talking about.
@CalebDWilliams
For example: you will find the Biblical Hebrew LANGUAGE is only used in the P verses. If you look at those same verses, you find the word “chieftain” used there and nowhere else. You’ll find claims that only descendants of Aaron can be priests, which contradicts the D verses. You’ll find similarities to Ezekiel. You’ll find political motivations related to Hezekiah. All in these verses and nowhere else. This is strong evidence of an independent author.