Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

So let's recap:

1. I asked in another thread for you to give an explanation how the Jews could written a holy religious text which seems to argue for Gerizim primacy.
2. You create a thread on the "Current State of Samaritan Studies" and proceed to engage in group attacks

This is not an academic forum. In the glory days of this site (when spin was here). There was a conscious effort to avoid "argument by citation or reputation." The idea of this forum (I was one of the first members) was that:

a. we would speak frankly
b. avoid argument by citation and name, rank etc

If you can't explain how the Jews wrote a text glorify Samaria in order to found an altar at Jerusalem just admit that you only care to engage with arguments which help your thesis. The facts are (i) scholars avoid this discussion and (ii) I think it develops from their lack of imagination. I think you have imagination. I mean that as a complement. Unfortunately you didn't factor in the Samaritans when developing your imaginative theory and didn't contextualize the Pentateuch narrative as a means to establish a sacrificial cult IN A PARTICULAR PLACE as well as factoring Deuteronomy as a later composition (necessarily AFTER the publication of the Hexateuch) and then a subsequent move of both texts FROM Gerizim TO Jerusalem. This process necessarily took at least a century to complete and makes the likelihood that the author(s) went to Alexandria to develop Genesis unlikely.

As writing a story about the Patriarchs working to establish an altar at Gerizim doesn't make sense as a 'set up' for Jerusalem and only makes sense as a set up for a cult at Gerizim - a position which is still put forward by the surviving Samaritans, I wish you well taking pot shots at people in the forum and finding distractions of any sort from the question of the Samaritans. You have an interesting theory. Best of luck.

I don't understand the obsession with the Samaritans or Gerizim. Correct me if I'm wrong, but Gerizim is only mentioned a couple of times in Deuteronomy. Nothing about Genesis-Numbers shows any focus on either Samaria or Jerusalem. Indeed, it is noted by scholars that the Pentateuch is somewhat peculiar in that it shows little interest in the regions that later came to be dominated by the Jews and Samaritans. Most of the story takes place in Egypt and Arabia, and even east of Palestine.

It does not seem to me that the Pentateuch was written "in order to establish a cult at Gerizim," rather Gerizim is a one of many places mentioned. It is sort of the final location of the blessings in the story, where the journey sort of comes to an end, but really even the end of Deuteronomy does not really appear to be the end of the story. Its clear that everything is not resolved.

Clearly Moses does not enter the promised land. Joshua is established as his heir. The story at the end of Deuteronomy seems setup for continuation, as happens in Joshua, which is not accepted by the Samaritans. But it is not as if Deuteronomy ends with a clear final declaration of anything, other than the status of Moses as the Lord's ultimate prophet. But even the Samaritan Pentateuch still mentions Mt Sinai and Mt Paran.

It seems to me that the Pentateuch was not "designed" for the purpose of establishing either the Jerusalem cult nor the Samaritan one. Both groups used the text in ways that were unforeseen by the writers.

Secret Alias wrote: ↑Mon Nov 07, 2022 7:02 am So let's recap:

1. I asked in another thread for you to give an explanation how the Jews could written a holy religious text which seems to argue for Gerizim primacy.
2. You create a thread on the "Current State of Samaritan Studies" and proceed to engage in group attacks

This is not an academic forum. In the glory days of this site (when spin was here). There was a conscious effort to avoid "argument by citation or reputation." The idea of this forum (I was one of the first members) was that:

a. we would speak frankly
b. avoid argument by citation and name, rank etc

If you can't explain how the Jews wrote a text glorify Samaria in order to found an altar at Jerusalem just admit that you only care to engage with arguments which help your thesis. The facts are (i) scholars avoid this discussion and (ii) I think it develops from their lack of imagination. I think you have imagination. I mean that as a complement. Unfortunately you didn't factor in the Samaritans when developing your imaginative theory and didn't contextualize the Pentateuch narrative as a means to establish a sacrificial cult IN A PARTICULAR PLACE as well as factoring Deuteronomy as a later composition (necessarily AFTER the publication of the Hexateuch) and then a subsequent move of both texts FROM Gerizim TO Jerusalem. This process necessarily took at least a century to complete and makes the likelihood that the author(s) went to Alexandria to develop Genesis unlikely.

As writing a story about the Patriarchs working to establish an altar at Gerizim doesn't make sense as a 'set up' for Jerusalem and only makes sense as a set up for a cult at Gerizim - a position which is still put forward by the surviving Samaritans, I wish you well taking pot shots at people in the forum and finding distractions of any sort from the question of the Samaritans. You have an interesting theory. Best of luck.

There are some serious issues of basic reading comprehension going on. I have stated repeatedly as plain as plain can be that I believe (along with other scholars) that the main authors of the Hexateuch were the Samaritans, not the Jews. I have also written plainly and repeatedly that the Hexateuch refers to the Samaritan religious sites of Gerizim, Ebal and Shechem, and that there are no references to the altar at Jerusalem. Nor is there any "set up" of Jerusalem in Genesis.

I haven't avoided this discussion. I'm a leading scholar on Samaritan elements in the Hexateuch. Nor do I have a lack of imagination with respect to the Samaritans. Nor do any of the scholars whose books and articles I cited who have argued that Samaritans were the primary authors of the Hexateuch that I listed up front on this thread.

Let me suggest that you may have a lack of imagination, since you evidently can't picture the possibility that residents from Judah could have also made minor contributions to the Hexateuch. Nor did you respond to the eight points I raised that Judah played a supporting role in creating the Hexateuch. Is it because you can't imagine Jews and Samaritans getting along? If so, this is a second failure of imagination.

Let me also point out that Genesis had numerous episodes with the patriarchs setting up altars in various places throughout Judah and Samaria: in Shechem (Gen. 12.7-8; 33.18-20), Bethel (Gen. 12.8; 13.3-4; 28.11-19; 35.1-3. 6-7. 9-15), Salem (Gen. 14.18-20), Hebron (Gen. 13.18), Beer-Sheba (Gen. 22.33; 26.23-25, 29), Jehovah-Jireh (Gen. 22.13-14) and Mahanaim (Gen. 32.1-2). Neither Jerusalem nor Gerizim nor Ebal even appear in this list. This destroys the notion that the Hexateuch was aimed at promoting any one religious site.

You seem to be stuck in an argumentation mode, promoting your own particular viewpoints, rather than an information-sharing and evidence-analyzing mode that is associated with learning and growth. This is particularly ironic, since I largely share your views on Samaritans as Hexateuchal authors and the primacy of Gerizim, although I do not share your--animosity?--towards Jews and Jerusalem's temple that disallows the Jews any authorial role in the Hexateuch, despite Judah appearing there literally a hundred times or more. I've been a student of the Samaritans and their literature since the 1990s. It's unfortunate that we are still unable to find common ground.

Secret Alias wrote: ↑Mon Nov 07, 2022 7:02 am
The idea of this forum (I was one of the first members) was that . . . we would . . . .avoid argument by citation and name, rank etc

SA on 3rd Nov:

My best friend in the scholarly world Rory Boid and Benyamim Tsedaka a Samaritan were my instructors on these principles of purity. Rory wrote . . .

SA on 2nd Nov:

Not only my friend Robert Cargill but too many to name . . .

SA on 14 Oct:

my friend Boid wrote a monograph on this

SA on 21 Sep:

my friend and teacher I R M Boid of Monash assumes that

SA on 11 Aug:

Agamemnon T. is even better qualified to comment on the Voss inscription than was QQ. Yes he is one of a handful of experts and the best friend of one of my friends.

SA on 5th Aug:

Baarda wasn't a mythicist. He was a friend of mine

SA on 3 Apr:

go to Holon talk to my friend Benny

SA on 1 Apr:

tradition reported by Bowman and Boid (and which my friend Benny always

SA on 8 Jan:

discussed in detail in my friend Benyamim Tsedaka's English translation of the SP

SA on 8 Dec:

see my friend I R M Boid's various monographs

He's my friend. When I was living in Florida I would just talk to him as a friend. He happens to be an expert on Hebrew, Samaritanism, Judaism etc. But these were conversations. Informal conversations.

Secret Alias wrote: ↑Mon Nov 07, 2022 1:40 pm He's my friend. When I was living in Florida I would just talk to him as a friend. He happens to be an expert on Hebrew, Samaritanism, Judaism etc. But these were conversations. Informal conversations.

Yet you take informal conversations and introduce them here to authenticate/authorize your views! That's arguing by citing names and authorities.

I don't understand the obsession with the Samaritans or Gerizim. Correct me if I'm wrong, but Gerizim is only mentioned a couple of times in Deuteronomy. Nothing about Genesis-Numbers shows any focus on either Samaria or Jerusalem.

Really? I can't believe someone said this. Really. So ...

Abraham "goes somewhere." Where doesn't matter. Why doesn't it matter?

And then ...

His sons continue to "hang out" in the same place. But that doesn't matter. Why? Because we never looked at things that way.

And then Jacob goes to Gerizim and continues the sacrifices started by his grandfather and sees God walking down from a ladder. Again nothing here just move on.

And then God keeps showing up everywhere in the territory. Doesn't matter.

Then Joseph is walking in a field near Gerizim and God directs him to get captured taken to Egypt and his bones are brought back ... where? Doesn't matter.

Then Deuteronomy confirms Gerizim. No matter.

Then Joshua concludes the Pentateuch with a covenant at Gerizim.

What's the proper conclusion?

The Pentateuch/Joshua was/were written to start a covenant AT JERUSALEM. Of course it was! Why else mention Gerizim as God's home? Perfectly natural.

Yet you take informal conversations and introduce them here to authenticate/authorize your views! That's arguing by citing names and authorities.

Let's start at the beginning. I've here at the forum from the start. That's why I have the 15,000 posts. The forum was intended as an INFORMAL discussion group. It wasn't meant to be "here's an article" or "read this paper." Never was the intention. It was intended for "here's an argument" and what follows is self-contained. There was never supposed to be a "you haven't read this? Oh well, if you read this then you'd know ..." No.

The forum was designed for an exchange of ideas. When I cite a conversation or a book or a this or a that you don't need to speak or read the book unless you want to.

Mr. Price

The problem with book knowledge is that it often misses the whole experience. For instance, you can read the Pentateuch "the Torah" and miss the underlying "natural" exegesis which is that it is about land. THE LAND. For both Jews and Samaritans. I only got that understanding when I visited Israel doing a documentary back in the day. Christians read the text (undoubtedly being prompted by John chapter 2) and they think God isn't about land. But for the Jews it's about "Israel" and for the Samaritans it's about the land around Gerizim because this is where God lives. Why do they think this? Because it's fucking obvious. God lives here. Why do they know God lives here? Because the fucking Torah tells us so? Why the fuck is the place God is seen descending called "Bethel." For us Bethel is foreign word. For Hebrew speaking people it means God's fucking house. Why else is a place called God's fucking house unless the supposition that God lives at Gerizim.

This is like a coaching a special Olympics team in Biblical exegesis.

What do I have to do cite the fucking chapters and go verse by verse. Ok. Chapter 12

He took his wife Sarai, his nephew Lot, all the possessions they had accumulated and the people they had acquired in Harran, and they set out for the land of Canaan, and they arrived there. 6 Abram traveled through the land as far as the site of the great tree of Moreh at Shechem. At that time the Canaanites were in the land. 7 The Lord appeared to Abram and said, “To your offspring[c] I will give this land.” So he built an altar there to the Lord, who had appeared to him. 8 From there he went on toward the hills east of Bethel and pitched his tent, with Bethel on the west and Ai on the east. There he built an altar to the Lord and called on the name of the Lord.

What do you think is happening here? He's going to Pittsburgh? It says in the fucking text that he is at Gerizim. At Gerizim is a place called God's fucking house. What do you think this is? Where do you think he sets up the altar?

So Abram went up from Egypt to the Negev, with his wife and everything he had, and Lot went with him. 2 Abram had become very wealthy in livestock and in silver and gold. 3 From the Negev he went from place to place until he came to Bethel, to the place between Bethel and Ai where his tent had been earlier 4 and where he had first built an altar. There Abram called on the name of the Lord.

Do have to continue?

Bethel means God's fucking house. You get it now, right? So when Tal translates Marqe he doesn't refer to the place as "Bethel" but "God's fucking house" throughout, right? Do you see why that is? That was an editor's choice.

https://books.google.com/books?id=-DrED ... od&f=false

So not just the Samaritans but a Hebrew speaking Jew who happens to be a scholar just references Bethel as "the house of God" because that's the way it reads. That's the way the Samaritans read the text too.