I’ll attempt to destroy their logic:
1) “The Bible says in Rom. 1:18-21 that men suppress the truth of God's word in their unrighteousness. This is what is happening here. They are suppressing the truth. They are devising elaborate methods to deny the inspiration and authenticity of the Bible, particularly the Pentateuch.”
This is the pot calling the kettle black. The people behind the documentary hypothesis are not atheists or agnostics out to disprove God’s existence, although I’m sure some are. No, the team is composed of Christians, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, i.e. a cross-cultural, cross-theological team whose goal is not iconoclastic, but to search for better understandings.
The above quote is also a blatant twisting of scripture. This New Testament passage abhors men denying the truth within themselves and the natural world, “that which God has revealed to them” and is “already evident.” Nowhere does it mention scripture. And since when is pursuing wisdom against God’s interests? Always, you say? No, it’s just against dogmatic interests. Without their dogma and rhetoric, they lose means of control—power and fear.
2) “The Pentateuch was written centuries ago in a different language, in a different culture, and a different land. The critics are claiming that "they are able to decide exactly what a writer could or could not say, and on this basis to determine what part of the document belongs or does not belong to him."1 In other words, the critics are basing their argument on their own ability to read a document that is 3000 years old, divide it up into word usage groups, and assert hidden divisions and separate authors. And not only this, but they are claiming they can do it on a consistent basis. This is hardly an exact science, and is open to a wide range of error, depending upon the presuppositions and purposes of the critic.”
There are two valid points here, one being the margin for error, and second for it hardly being an exact science. Yet, how many of these Christian apologists have devoted their entire lives to studying these ancient manuscripts? Better yet, how many of them can get their hands on the manuscripts? Even better, how many of them would want to get their hands on the manuscripts for either suppressing truth or running in fear from their shaken beliefs? Look, I know many apologists study the Bible, but the ones being heard are not Biblical scholars. They have English translations, so many times removed from their original languages and intent that their motives are clouded by what they have not and choose not to see. Go ahead, dismiss the scholars who’ve spent years educating themselves, researching, and deciphering these texts. Just don’t depend on your mechanic to know what may be wrong with your brakes due to a margin of error.
3) “What writer writes with a consistent style? Yes, there are styles to writers, but the subject matter affects the content. A technical work is different from a narrative or historical piece. The Pentateuch has components of all of these. Therefore, different styles are expected. Additionally, what the writer has in mind can easily cause him to use a different concentration of words. Should the intention change, so would the word usage. Did Moses sit down at one sitting and write everything out? Of course not. Upon reflection, reading, prayer, etc., his focus and purpose within sections of Scripture can change as he moves to a new subject.”
This is the most illogical to me. Writers have different styles, but you can tell a Roth from a McCarthy to a Faulkner, even when they change content. Subject matter does affect content—but the documentary hypothesis looks at language, vocabulary, and content. The old English word for “whitewash” is much different than in ancient Greek (if they had such a word). That’s what scholars find. Did Moses sit down and write it in one night? Of course not—because he didn’t write it! If he did and chose his work as the definite account to sway unbelievers into the faith, why contradict the creation account within the first few chapters? It takes a hell of a writer to keep writing after one dies—apparently Moses does such a thing in Deuteronomy.
4) “WordPerfect has a Grammar Analyzer for readability. I ran both the paper explaining the Documentary Hypothesis and this paper refuting it through the analyzer. The results are interesting. We could conclude that though there are similarities, there must be two authors due to definite differences. After all, the first paper has both more complex sentences and more verb complexity than the second as well as being 13th-grade level. The funny thing is, I wrote this in two sittings: One before church and the other after church on the same day.”
Because a WordPerfect analyzer is exactly what the documentary hypothesis does. Oh, and doing it in English is just what I expected you to do, crazy Christian. Don’t set up the actual variables of the experiment. Keep them as narrow as you can to prove your point. While I see what he is going for, he is pounding his head on a tree without realizing he stands in a forest.
5) “Whether or not a biblical critic wants to take Jesus' word for anything is up to the individual. But no less a person than Jesus authenticated the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch.”
This is a good one, considering Jesus was a Jew taught Jewish scripture interpretation by Jewish authorities in his Jewish youth in his Jewish nation state. Of course, Jesus had access to biblical scholarship because they had the internet, easy world travel, ability to understand complex notions of language, etc. This line of logic is similar to: “I worship the long-dead King of Spain. He said the world was flat. That’s all the proof you need no matter what science, space travel, or your elementary school education tells you.” Again, here is the problem with loudmouth Christian sects today: they ignore Jesus’ history, probable childhood and rearing, and socio-economic position in the Roman state in favor of pushing their rhetoric down your throats.
If Jesus could read this website today, I’m sure he’d smack his forehead and go, “Oy vay.” Well, maybe he’d do that after he got over his shock of our technology, such witchcraft and wizardry that could only be fashioned by demons.
No comments:
Post a Comment