Reddit reviews Who Really Wrote the Bible?

Counter book,if you are interested in counter arguments. http://www.amazon.com/Really-Wrote-Bible-Eyal-Rav-Noy/dp/0980076307/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1331092982&sr=1-2

> I'll call my friends cross multiple universities world wide and tell them some poloni on the internet knows more than their decade + time devoted to the subject.

actually, why don't you call your friends at multiple universities around the world and ask them what the scholarly consensus is on the documentary hypothesis. feel free to post the results here. or not. you probably won't, because i think we both know what they will say.

> No one needs to argue it because it's a dead topic.

evidently, they do, because even though this has been the dominant view in secular academia for years, religious motivated individuals have felt hard done by the argument, and tried to argue against it.

> another thing you can learn if you talk to people with masters and doctorates in theological studies from different parts of the world.

gosh, i'm sorry. i didn't realize that dr. richard elliot friedman, ThD from harvard, or dr. harold bloom, PhD from yale, didn't count. nor did my professors in college. nor do those i read online.

> I'm ignorant and you won't read a book on the topic to actually learn on it.

did i say i wouldn't read it?

> Can you read Hebrew? Do you study Torah? Or do you just deal with translations and see the words as arbitrary?

note that in my other post, which you replied to skeptically, i posted the masoretic hebrew text of a verse, followed by the corresponding fragment of the DSS.

i'd be lying if i said i was anywhere near fluent in hebrew, but i have studied it a little. if i find some more time, i'll study it more.

> I've read the criticisms DH people bring up. I don't see them.

this sounds like a personal failing. i think even in translation (at least, good translations) some of the differences are obvious. but surely in hebrew you can tell see some stylistic differences. i think the repetitive nature of the genealogies sticks out like a sore thumb. you don't agree? you don't see a difference between repeated roots in genesis 1 and repeated sounds in genesis 2?

> I give them a real chance, but I see their failings in their arguments. Unfortunately my notes on this were on an old computer that crashed so I have nothing to show on it, but I've done research myself and know where I'm going to settle.

fantastic. i've debated a fair number of people before who have insisted that -- if i were just to refer to this book they can't find, or haven't published -- all of my criticisms will be addressed. and there's no sense arguing it, it's in the book! most of these people, of course, were fond of headwear made of maleable sheets of thin aluminum.

> Just make sure you follow up with http://www.amazon.com/Really-Wrote-Bible-Eyal-Rav-Noy/dp/0980076307 so you get the whole argument and not continue living in your bubble dude.

the religiously motivated and biased arguments are the bubble, dude.

> DH is moot. I have university professors who attest to this. In fact, just google search a university with a decent theological studies dept and ask to speak to a professor and ask, "where does academia stand with the DH?" Shouldn't take much time.

aren't we lucky that there's a community of bible scholars right here on reddit, and people routinely ask exactly this question?

>they are if they are telling you a lie like that documentary hypothesis isn't widely accepted as the academic basis for torah studies.

I'll call my friends cross multiple universities world wide and tell them some poloni on the internet knows more than their decade + time devoted to the subject.

>i'm serious. look into this a bit more. there's some debate as to what constitutes specific documents here and there, but only in minute details. nobody seriously argues that the torah is not made of separate documents.

No one needs to argue it because it's a dead topic. It's like the people arguing for the round earth because the flat earth society exists. No one needs to argue for the round earth because it's over. It's as dead as the non sense Reza Aslan brings up in his book Zealot that the academic world rejected over 50 years ago, another thing you can learn if you talk to people with masters and doctorates in theological studies from different parts of the world.

>that is, in fact, not what they are doing. thank you for continuing to prove your ignorance on this matter.

I'm ignorant and you won't read a book on the topic to actually learn on it. Bizarro world much?

>it is based on linguistic style, which is much more complex than simple choices of words. breaking it apart based on writing style leads to answers about word choices (for instance, the differing ways of referring to god) but is not based on those word choices.

I study Torah. I've read the criticisms DH people bring up. I don't see them. I give them a real chance, but I see their failings in their arguments. Unfortunately my notes on this were on an old computer that crashed so I have nothing to show on it, but I've done research myself and know where I'm going to settle.

Can you read Hebrew? Do you study Torah? Or do you just deal with translations and see the words as arbitrary?

>and i'd highly recommend "who wrote the bible?" and "the bible with sources revealed" by richard elliot friedman. they are rebuttals to the books written well after cassuto was discredited.

Just make sure you follow up with http://www.amazon.com/Really-Wrote-Bible-Eyal-Rav-Noy/dp/0980076307 so you get the whole argument and not continue living in your bubble dude.

As for me, I have bigger fish to fry. DH is moot. I have university professors who attest to this. In fact, just google search a university with a decent theological studies dept and ask to speak to a professor and ask, "where does academia stand with the DH?" Shouldn't take much time.