Evidence for the JEDP theory and the late-dating of the Torah

[Quantum Weirdness]

What evidence supports the above viewpoints? I would like to know.

[shunyadragon]

There are a lot of sources for the JEDP theory and possibly some variations. I at present consider it the best argument for the origins of the text. The is definitely nothing in terms of pre exile Hebrew text and the fact that Hebrew evolved as a separate language beginning no earlier than 1000 BCE. The ground work is set with no known pre exile text and a great deal of evidence of OT Biblical text of evidence text in Canaanite and Babylonian sources.

Wikipedia gives a good over view of the argument for the Documentary Hypothesis for the origins here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JEDP_theory

[Quantum Weirdness]

There are a lot of sources for the JEDP theory and possibly some variations. I at present consider it the best argument for the origins of the text. The is definitely nothing in terms of pre exile Hebrew text and the fact that Hebrew evolved as a separate language beginning no earlier than 1000 BCE. The ground work is set with no known pre exile text and a great deal of evidence of OT Biblical text of evidence text in Canaanite and Babylonian sources.

Wikipedia gives a good over view of the argument for the Documentary Hypothesis for the origins here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JEDP_theory

Ok shunyadragon
What specifically supports the Documentary Hypothesis? I haven't seen much evidence for it.

[Kbertsche]

What evidence supports the above viewpoints? I would like to know.

I think the main evidence for the documentary hypothesis is probably the alternation of language in the Flood account (Gen 6-9). The account alternates between YHWH and Elohim, for example, as if two sources have been merged.

I think the main evidence for a late date is parallels to Babylonian mythology and culture.

But the Pentateuch also contains a number of Egyptian names and parallels to Egyptian culture, suggesting an early origin in an Egyptian context.

[37818]

I hold the view that the original autographs were not JEDP as such. But do to the editing and gathering of the texts between the tribes in the time of Ezra resulted in what can account for the JEDP theory.

"And all the people gathered themselves together as one man into the street that was before the water gate; and they spake unto Ezra the scribe to bring the book of the law of Moses, which the LORD had commanded to Israel. And Ezra the priest brought the law before the congregation both of men and women, and all that could hear with understanding, upon the first day of the seventh month. nd he read therein before the street that was before the water gate from the morning until midday, before the men and the women, and those that could understand; and the ears of all the people were attentive unto the book of the law. . . ." -- Nehemiah 8:1-3.

"For Ezra had prepared his heart to seek the law of the LORD, and to do it, and to teach in Israel statutes and judgments." -- Ezra 7:10.

[Quantum Weirdness]

I think the main evidence for the documentary hypothesis is probably [B]the alternation of language in the Flood account (Gen 6-9). The account alternates between YHWH and Elohim, for example, as if two sources have been merged.

http://www.biblearchaeology.org/post...9-15b91e573342
I think that this article sufficiently debunks this.

I think the main evidence for a late date is parallels to Babylonian mythology and culture.
But the Pentateuch also contains a number of Egyptian names and parallels to Egyptian culture, suggesting an early origin in an Egyptian context.

What are the parallels to Babylonian mythology and culture?

[robrecht]

What evidence supports the above viewpoints? I would like to know.

There is no external evidence, only internal evidence, which is more interpretive than external evidence. The best defense written for lay people is probably still be Who Wrote the Bible?, written by Richard Elliott Friedman back in the 80s. It is extremely well written and easy to follow. European scholars at the time thought Friedman's work was the last gasp of a dying theory but it has survived. This approach is diachronic, focusing on the historical factors and process behind the current text. More modern synchronic approaches focus on the final form of the text as we have it now, but there is no reason why one cannot combine both approaches, eg, emphasizing the interpretive work of the final editors and even copyists.

[Kbertsche]

http://www.biblearchaeology.org/post...9-15b91e573342
I think that this article sufficiently debunks this.

You will also see a link from this blog post to a scholarly article by Eugene Merrill, which is quite good.

What are the parallels to Babylonian mythology and culture?

The commonly cited parallels are to Babylonian accounts of the creation and the flood. However, all of these ancient near eastern cultures had similar accounts, and it's been argued that the biblical parallels to the Egyptian creation account are just as strong, if not stronger.

[Rational Gaze]

What evidence supports the above viewpoints? I would like to know.

None. JEDP and the late-dating of the Torah are derived from the faulty assumptions of form criticism.

[shunyadragon]

None. JEDP and the late-dating of the Torah are derived from the faulty assumptions of form criticism.

Not sufficient to support a claim of an alternate earlier claim other then the 'Documentary Hypothesis.' You need more support then the text of the Bible text from a specific religious agenda. You need a more comprehensive platform of support based on the actual archeological evidence.

[Quantum Weirdness]

Not sufficient to support a claim of an alternate claim other then the 'Documentary Hypothesis.' You need more support then the text of the Bible text from a specific religious agenda. You need a more comprehensive platform of support based on the actual archeological evidence.

The same could be said of the documentary hypothesis though.

[shunyadragon]

The same could be said of the documentary hypothesis though.

The archeological and linguistic evidence supports the documentary hypothesis. What you cited so far did not cite any archeological evidence. It only described an apologetic text interpretation argument, which is weak. The linguistic text argument supports the 'Documentary Hypothesis.'

A gave you a pretty good review of the 'Documentary Hypothesis' original developed by Christian Academics' here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JEDP_theory

Have you read it? You have not responded to it.

Question: What archeological evidence supports your view?

[Quantum Weirdness]

The archeological and linguistic evidence supports the documentary hypothesis. What you cited so far did not cite any archeological evidence. It only described an apologetic text interpretation argument, which is weak. The linguistic text argument supports the 'Documentary Hypothesis.'

What archaeological evidence? Can you cite specifically what is the archaeological evidence? As for linguistic evidence, what is it?

A gave you a pretty good review of the 'Documentary Hypothesis' original developed by Christian Academics' here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JEDP_theory

Have you read it? You have not responded to it.

Yeah I have. It just tells me what the hypothesis is, not what evidence there is for it.

Question: What archeological evidence supports your view?

What possible archaeological evidence could there be for either theory?

[shunyadragon]

What archaeological evidence? Can you cite specifically what is the archaeological evidence? As for linguistic evidence, what is it?



Yeah I have. It just tells me what the hypothesis is, not what evidence there is for it.


What possible archaeological evidence could there be for either theory?

The early texts found in Canaanite cuneiform tablets (ie psalms), and the Babylonian and pre Babylonian cuneiform tablets showing the evolving texts of creation and flood stories is evidence of the origins of Biblical texts. The archeological evidence of the evolution of Hebrew from other languages after 1000 BC, and vocabulary in the Hebrew text related to the older Canaanite and Babylonian texts found in the tablets. The evidence that all known Hebrew texts were post exile.

Where is the archeological evidence for your case? Still waiting . . .

[Quantum Weirdness]

The early texts found in Canaanite cuneiform tablets (ie psalms), and the Babylonian and pre Babylonian cuneiform tablets showing the evolving texts of creation and flood stories is evidence of the origins of Biblical texts. .

Flood traditions are quite old. Some like Atrahasis are are at least 1700B.C.
See here

As for creation see Glenn Miller's articles here

The archeological evidence of the evolution of Hebrew from other languages after 1000 BC, and vocabulary in the Hebrew text related to the older Canaanite and Babylonian texts found in the tablets. The evidence that all known Hebrew texts were post exile.
Where is the archeological evidence for your case? Still waiting . . .

The language that I believe the Torah was written in wasn't Hebrew but transliterated into Hebrew from another (closely-related) language.
From this, I don't think there is archaeological evidence for your position either though.
Can you please clarify what is in bold though? Thanks.