N
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
To prove Christianity is true we must first prove Judaism is true. Right?
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
N
nmgauss
Guest
There is now general agreement that Joshua was composed as part of a larger work, the Deuteronomistic history, stretching from Deuteronomy to Kings.[14] In 1943 the German biblical scholar Martin Noth suggested that this history was composed by a single author/editor, living in the time of the Exile (6th century BCE).[15] A major modification to Noth’s theory was made in 1973 by the American scholar Frank M. Cross, to the effect that two editions of the history could be distinguished, the first and more important from the court of king Josiah in the late 7th century, and the second Noth’s 6th century Exilic history.[16] Later scholars have detected many more authors/editors than either Noth or Cross allowed for.
Since the second half of the 20th century most scholars have agreed with Martin Noth’s thesis that the books of Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Samuel and Kings form parts of a single work.[4] Noth maintained that the history was written in the early Exilic period (6th century BCE) in order to demonstrate how Israel’s history was worked out in accordance with the theology expressed in the book of Deuteronomy (which thus provides the name “Deuteronomistic”).[20] Noth believed that this history was the work of a single author, living in the mid-6th century BCE, selecting, editing and composing from his sources to produce a coherent work.[21] Frank Moore Cross later proposed that an early version of the history was composed in Jerusalem in Josiah’s time (late 7th century); this first version, Dtr1, was then revised and expanded to create a second edition, that identified by Noth, and which Cross labelled Dtr2.[22]
Scholars agree that the Deuteronomists’ hand can be seen in Judges through the book’s cyclical nature: the Israelites fall into idolatry, God punishes them for their sins with oppression by foreign peoples, the Israelites cry out to God for help, and God sends a judge to deliver them from the foreign oppression. After a brief period of peace, the cycle repeats. Scholars also suggest that the Deuteronomists also included the humorous and sometimes disparaging commentary found in the book such as the story of the Ephraimites who could not pronounce the word “shibboleth” correctly (12:5-6).[23]
Since the second half of the 20th century most scholars have agreed with Martin Noth’s thesis that the books of Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Samuel and Kings form parts of a single work.[4] Noth maintained that the history was written in the early Exilic period (6th century BCE) in order to demonstrate how Israel’s history was worked out in accordance with the theology expressed in the book of Deuteronomy (which thus provides the name “Deuteronomistic”).[20] Noth believed that this history was the work of a single author, living in the mid-6th century BCE, selecting, editing and composing from his sources to produce a coherent work.[21] Frank Moore Cross later proposed that an early version of the history was composed in Jerusalem in Josiah’s time (late 7th century); this first version, Dtr1, was then revised and expanded to create a second edition, that identified by Noth, and which Cross labelled Dtr2.[22]
Scholars agree that the Deuteronomists’ hand can be seen in Judges through the book’s cyclical nature: the Israelites fall into idolatry, God punishes them for their sins with oppression by foreign peoples, the Israelites cry out to God for help, and God sends a judge to deliver them from the foreign oppression. After a brief period of peace, the cycle repeats. Scholars also suggest that the Deuteronomists also included the humorous and sometimes disparaging commentary found in the book such as the story of the Ephraimites who could not pronounce the word “shibboleth” correctly (12:5-6).[23]
P
pocohombre
Guest
pocohombre;11368434:
Sorry, I thought you meant that they had no scripture at all with your words of, " no written scripture during the days of", as if they had no scripture to guide them. I think you meant “no scripture was written” during their time . Not sure. When were Psalms and Proverbs written,was it not around David’s and Solomon’s time ?Can you give references to the writings attributed to Joshua, Saul, David, and Solomon?
L
Linusthe2nd
Guest
It is hard to imagine how we could claim Christianity was true if Judaism as revealed in the Old Testament were not true because Christ himslef and the Apostles used the Old Testament to prove His Divinity. I have never had any problem believing it was true myself.
Linus2nd
Linus2nd
P
pocohombre
Guest
Not sure about this . Not sure what “form parts of a single work mean”. I thought that Joshua certainly wrote some of “Joshua”, and the rest around his time (1300 bc) Judges/Samuel around 1000bc , Kings 5-600 bc.,Chronicles 420 bcThere is now general agreement that Joshua was composed as part of a larger work, the Deuteronomistic history, stretching from Deuteronomy to Kings.[14] In 1943 the German biblical scholar Martin Noth suggested that this history was composed by a single author/editor, living in the time of the Exile (6th century BCE).[15] A major modification to Noth’s theory was made in 1973 by the American scholar Frank M. Cross, to the effect that two editions of the history could be distinguished, the first and more important from the court of king Josiah in the late 7th century, and the second Noth’s 6th century Exilic history.[16] Later scholars have detected many more authors/editors than either Noth or Cross allowed for.
P
pocohombre
Guest
Agreed. I also have no problem saying I am Jewish,spiritually speaking. We have been grafted in to the Jewish Vine. “Salvation is of the Jews”.It is hard to imagine how we could claim Christianity was true if Judaism as revealed in the Old Testament were not true because Christ himslef and the Apostles used the Old Testament to prove His Divinity. I have never had any problem believing it was true myself.
Linus2nd
N
nmgauss
Guest
I think what the scholars refer to as the first Hebrew scripture is the collection of writings adopted by the Hebrews as canon at about the time of the exile to Babylonia (598-586 BC) and available to Jesus and the writers of the four Gospels. Certainly there was source material available to the anonymous authors of the Deuteronomistic History (Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, 1 Samuel, 2 Samuel, 1 Kings, and 2 Kings) and also oral stories. But the latest interpretation of scholars is that they were sections in a single work designed to cover the entire period.Not sure about this . Not sure what “form parts of a single work mean”. I thought that Joshua certainly wrote some of “Joshua”, and the rest around his time (1300 bc) Judges/Samuel around 1000bc , Kings 5-600 bc.,Chronicles 420 bc
According to the most recent studies, the Book of Joshua was not written by Joshua, although accepted as tradition by Orthodox Jews. Also the two books of Samuel were not written by Samuel. Modern scholarly thinking is that the books originated by combining a number of independent texts of various ages when the larger Deuteronomistic history was being composed in the period c.630-540 BCE. There were probably writings of Samuel among the sources of the anonymous authors.
Chronicles is not part of the Deuteronomic History and was probably composed between 400-250 BC, with the period 350-300 BC.
P
pocohombre
Guest
OK. Thank you. Are these the right type of scholars, that is do they have the disease of “liberalism”, even unbelief ?I think what the scholars refer to as the first Hebrew scripture is the collection of writings adopted by the Hebrews as canon at about the time of the exile to Babylonia (598-586 BC) and available to Jesus and the writers of the four Gospels. Certainly there was source material available to the anonymous authors of the Deuteronomistic History (Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, 1 Samuel, 2 Samuel, 1 Kings, and 2 Kings) and also oral stories. But the latest interpretation of scholars is that they were sections in a single work designed to cover the entire period.
According to the most recent studies, the Book of Joshua was not written by Joshua, although accepted as tradition by Orthodox Jews. Also the two books of Samuel were not written by Samuel. Modern scholarly thinking is that the books originated by combining a number of independent texts of various ages when the larger Deuteronomistic history was being composed in the period c.630-540 BCE. There were probably writings of Samuel among the sources of the anonymous authors.
Chronicles is not part of the Deuteronomic History and was probably composed between 400-250 BC, with the period 350-300 BC.
H
HardRockGTR
Guest
Well that’s not offensive at all.OK. Thank you. Are these the right type of scholars, that is do they have the disease of “liberalism”, even unbelief ?
N
nmgauss
Guest
To arrive at reasonable conclusions while doing biblical research, there should be no agenda based on ones belief. If one is trying to prove that God wrote the Bible, that is different from trying to find out who wrote the Bible. The first is deductive and the latter is inductive. The first approach establishes a premise that is universally accepted as being true and then trying to find convincing evidence, while the second is to discover evidence that one can use to formulate conclusions.OK. Thank you. Are these the right type of scholars, that is do they have the disease of “liberalism”, even unbelief ?
The first approach is a priori and the second is a posteriori.
G
Gary_Sheldrake
Guest
What are the “right” types of scholars?OK. Thank you. Are these the right type of scholars, that is do they have the disease of “liberalism”, even unbelief ?
When did liberalism become a disease?
N
nmgauss
Guest
Why is it necessary to prove that anything is right? Why not gather data, look at it, evaluate it, and come to a conclusion based on the data?
G
Gary_Sheldrake
Guest
Sure - what is the data on whose ideas about God are right and whose ideas are wrong?Why is it necessary to prove that anything is right? Why not gather data, look at it, evaluate it, and come to a conclusion based on the data?
N
nmgauss
Guest
nmgauss;11369456:
What is scripture and what are miscellaneous scrolls and letters found in a haphazard manner? Scripture consists of writings accepted as sacred by authorities.Sorry, I thought you meant that they had no scripture at all with your words of, " no written scripture during the days of", as if they had no scripture to guide them. I think you meant “no scripture was written” during their time . Not sure. When were Psalms and Proverbs written,was it not around David’s and Solomon’s time ?
“1 Scripture or the Scriptures : the books of either the Old Testament or the New Testament or of both : the Bible
2 scriptures [plural] : the sacred writings of a religion”
A miscellaneous letter or scroll found in a private library that has not been declared sacred is not scripture. The Gospel according to St. Thomas is not scripture. Neither are the writings of Plato, or the Gnostics, or Arius.
Although there may have been written material on which to base Biblical writings, this material was not scripture. Biblical writings became scripture long after they were written. They had to be blessed by religious authorities before they could become scripture.
The Books of Psalms and Proverbs are anthologies compiled from a variety of oral traditions and written sources. Verses attributed to David may have been written down somewhere or may have been propagated by oral tradition. Nobody knows for sure.
When the huge library at Alexandria was destroyed, much documentary evidence was lost. According to a recent biographical film, Hypatia was teaching science that contradicted the Christian dogma. So mobs of Christians were persuaded to ransack the library. So, much source material was lost.
P
pocohombre
Guest
Those who are well are in no need of a “Physician” and offense rolls off like water on a duck’s back. But sorry if you are offended. I would say I suffer from disease myself, of one sort or another at times, so I empathize.Well that’s not offensive at all.
P
pocohombre
Guest
Thank you . Not sure any human is free from having an “agenda”. All have faith, just differs on or in what.To arrive at reasonable conclusions while doing biblical research, there should be no agenda based on ones belief. If one is trying to prove that God wrote the Bible, that is different from trying to find out who wrote the Bible. The first is deductive and the latter is inductive. The first approach establishes a premise that is universally accepted as being true and then trying to find convincing evidence, while the second is to discover evidence that one can use to formulate conclusions.
The first approach is a priori and the second is a posteriori.
P
pocohombre
Guest
Not sure. The ones that get it right ?or have the best chances to get it right ?What are the “right” types of scholars?
Not sure. When did liberalism stray from the truth ?When did liberalism become a disease?
P
pocohombre
Guest
Man is extremely gifted in gathering data. It’s the conclusions that can be comical to God.Why is it necessary to prove that anything is right? Why not gather data, look at it, evaluate it, and come to a conclusion based on the data?
N
nmgauss
Guest
How does humor enter into it? How can a conclusion be comical to God?Man is extremely gifted in gathering data. It’s the conclusions that can be comical to God.
P
pocohombre
Guest
I guess you have never had kids. They say the funniest things. How about this, monkeys evolved from humans.How does humor enter into it? How can a conclusion be comical to God?
- Status
- Not open for further replies.