Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

The Samaritan Book of Exodus is different from the Masoretic text and agrees in substance with the shape of Qumran and (I would argue) the text of Exodus known to R Ishmael the earliest commentator on Exodus in the Jewish tradition. How can 'the Pentateuch' be though of in such monolithic terms? Also the Book of Joshua is another issue. Which Exodus? Which Joshua?

Secret Alias wrote: ↑Wed Sep 14, 2022 3:45 pm The Samaritan Book of Exodus is different from the Masoretic text and agrees in substance with the shape of Qumran and (I would argue) the text of Exodus known to R Ishmael the earliest commentator on Exodus in the Jewish tradition. How can 'the Pentateuch' be though of in such monolithic terms? Also the Book of Joshua is another issue.

Well, even if changes were made by Jews to Ezra's Torah up to or during Hasmonean times (as I imagine), the textual stream behind the Samaritan Torah appears to have continued on within Judaism down to the Tannaitic period (as per Qumran and R. Ishmael). But perhaps we can say that the MT (or proto-MT) was the "mainstream" version since maybe Hasmonean times.

As for Joshua, while I can see that being more acceptable to the Samaritans than the rest of the OT since it complements the Torah, I reckon it wasn't included as part of Ezra's "Book of the Law of Moses" and thus has a secondary status for both Samaritans and Jews.

"Acceptable"? The Samaritans only accept the earliest books hence their "guarding" of the Pentateuch and Joshua. The theory is mountainman 2.0.

Secret Alias wrote: ↑Wed Sep 14, 2022 8:38 pm "Acceptable"? The Samaritans only accept the earliest books hence their "guarding" of the Pentateuch and Joshua.

I understand that the Samaritans only accept the earliest books, it's only a question of why that is. And while my guesses seem reasonable to me, I'm open to hearing other ideas.

No its not. They are called 'guardians' because they 'guard' the original tradition. There is no other reasonable explanation. The Pentateuch was the earliest book. It purports to be the story of the dispensation of the Torah the central event in world history according to Israelites. The Pentateuch is the beginning and no wonder it begins with "in the beginning." Genesis isn't only the beginning of the Pentateuch it is the beginning of all things viz. nothing comes before the Pentateuch. They "guard" the origins (of all things) because origins are sacred. https://books.google.com/books?id=dhDlz ... ah&f=false

Secret Alias wrote: ↑Thu Sep 15, 2022 12:03 pm No its not. They are called 'guardians' because they 'guard' the original tradition. There is no other reasonable explanation. The Pentateuch was the earliest book. It purports to be the story of the dispensation of the Torah the central event in world history according to Israelites. The Pentateuch is the beginning and no wonder it begins with "in the beginning." Genesis isn't only the beginning of the Pentateuch it is the beginning of all things viz. nothing comes before the Pentateuch. They "guard" the origins (of all things) because origins are sacred. https://books.google.com/books?id=dhDlz ... ah&f=false

I don't have any issue with what you are saying. I would only define "the original tradition" as being Ezra's Torah, and I stand by my guesses as to how Ezra's Torah came to be and why the Samaritans accepted (or "guarded") it (along with Joshua).

You can lead a horse to water but you can't make them drink.

You can lead a mythicist to facts but you can't make them think.

John T is done with this thread.

John T wrote: ↑Thu Sep 15, 2022 4:40 pm You can lead a horse to water but you can't make them drink.

You can lead a mythicist to facts but you can't make them think.

John T is done with this thread.

Before you go, can you tell me who this is addressed to and why? I don't know what to make of it.

John2 wrote: ↑Thu Sep 15, 2022 4:45 pm

John T wrote: ↑Thu Sep 15, 2022 4:40 pm You can lead a horse to water but you can't make them drink.

You can lead a mythicist to facts but you can't make them think.

John T is done with this thread.

Before you go, can you tell me who this is addressed to and why? I don't know what to make of it.

The archeological evidence is fairly clear regarding the origin of the Samaritans.

What is the difference between cognitive dissonance and mythicism? One is a reaction to feeling guilty about doing something wrong, the other is a tactic to spread falsehoods.

Who on this thread is honestly seeking historical truth and who is spreading falsehoods?

Now take a wild guess who is going to chime in and say that I got it all wrong? That I'm the one trying to spread falsehoods?

Got it now?

John T wrote: ↑Sat Sep 17, 2022 6:44 am

John2 wrote: ↑Thu Sep 15, 2022 4:45 pm

John T wrote: ↑Thu Sep 15, 2022 4:40 pm You can lead a horse to water but you can't make them drink.

You can lead a mythicist to facts but you can't make them think.

John T is done with this thread.

Before you go, can you tell me who this is addressed to and why? I don't know what to make of it.

The archeological evidence is fairly clear regarding the origin of the Samaritans.

Feel free to tell us what this archaeological evidence is.