Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

Regarding my opinion, there is almost no mention of the forefathers outside of Genesis, so Genesis seems to be entirely exilic or later. Here we part company. This criterion is too unquantifiable, too vague, too subjective for me. My point is that perhaps we shouldn't expect the Genesis patriarchs ...

The point of the Elohist is that the guy was from the north before the Assyrians took over. I suppose that could have happened, and it probably is much more likely than space aliens writing the stuff, but it just doesn't seem like a serious view anymore except in a synagogue. What makes you say tha...

In the newly released History, politics and the Bible from the Iron Age to the media age there is a chapter, "The Present Crisis in Biblical Scholarship", where John Van Seters discusses in detail scholarship relating to the DH but at no point addresses any viewpoint that denies outright ...

In connection with Deuteronomy, it might be worth mentioning the Suzerainty Treaty structure. When we speak of an academic consensus of a 7th century origin, that seems to be mainly a consensus that Israel's relationship to YHWH is modeled on an Assyrian Suzerainty Treaty format as opposed to a Hitt...

http://lisbethfried.com/wp-content/uploads/downloads/2012/10/The-High-Places-Bamot-and-the-Reforms-of-Hezekiah-and-Josiah-An-Archaeological-Investigation1.pdf Sort of amazing that the DH sort of seemed to weather these storms but the lack of younger adherents will eventually make its obsolescence o...

It seems to me that any biblical writing during the time of King David is quite dubious. That's because the existence of King David is questionable and there is no evidence that a united kingdom ever existed at Jerusalem. That's a DH problem that is political/religious. There are apparently some bib...

My semi-educated guess about the Jahwist is that "he" (probably goes without saying it was more than one guy) is more or less exilic. A number of current theories place J even later, in the exilic and/or post-exilic period (6th–5th centuries BCE).[16] That means he is writing at approximat...

Of course, for all we know that stuff might even be accurate, but if it is, it's an accident - they just want to date crap as early as possible for political/religious reasons (obviously just my wild opinion). Dr. Friedman's human interest pesach story that I mentioned is a somewhat outrageous exam...

I mentioned the issues are technical. For example, the aging Jewish semi-religious academics with no clear younger adherents. Most of their work is decent, so it's not like the DH is refuted but important parts are questionable. For example, the existence of an E source and dating J to around King D...

My sense is that the DH is in some technical trouble. The main DH supporters are typically Jewish scholars that seem to be getting old. Personally, I'm not aware of a whole lot of younger adherents. There is at least one Richard Elliot Friedman Passover thread from a year or two ago. That recounts t...