Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Documentary Hypothesis’ Category

I have been working on a video series since last year and this weekend finished a response regarding Exodus 6:3 and the Documentary Hypothesis. ¬†This is as exhaustive of a response that I could muster at this time and it is only with regard to Exodus 6:3! ūüôā

I hope you enjoy this conservative response to the liberally infected Biblical worldview.

ūüôā

Advertisements

Read Full Post »

The “J” source is dead.¬† The “E” source has breathed its last¬†breath.¬† The “D” source has become a phantom with no reality and the “P” source never existed.¬† The hypothesis which¬†was hailed as the pinnacle¬†of biblical criticism¬†has fallen.¬† It’s foundations¬†have crumbled and the walls have toppled to the ground.

The¬†four source theory never had¬†substantial reasons to begin with.¬† It took some time but those reasons have all been addressed and the arguments¬†no longer stand.¬† Over a hundred years of argumentation and debate and proponents of the DH are starting to concede that the DH isn’t what it used to be.¬† In fact the DH has morphed into a general idea that cannot be assigned a place in “scientific” Biblical Studies.

The DH has revealed the rebellious heart of man and our unwillingness to accept when a theory is clearly dead and dying.  The wave of scholarship still has not crested and crashed but it will.  In the meantime, new students and teachers will continue to add momentum to this wave, but for those of us surfing this wave, we know it is dying.

The following reasons are why the DH has terminal status and will eventually collapse:

1.¬† It was started on a faulty understanding of Hebrew thought regarding the “Name” of the Lord.

2.  The theory was based solely on interpretation of the content of the texts of the scriptures, with regard to where their sources came from.  All other possible interpretations essentially were nullified by default, or rather simply ignored by the critics.

3.¬† The four sources over the last 100 years were slowly accepted as “fact” when they were never substantiated by anything other than speculation.

4.  The speculation of the four sources is reduced to a belief that certain schools of thought existed which produced each section of the scriptures, but none of these communities have ever been proven to have existed.

5.¬† There was never a solid standard given by the critics whereby the student could give reasons why each “school” of thought revealed themselves in the scriptures.¬† In other words, if there was a “J” and “E” source, then why couldn’t there have been any number of other sources related to other contra ideals?¬† Why stop at “D” and “P”?¬† Why not have more?¬† This is precisely why many of the critics themselves created multiple redactor agents to account for holes in the DH theory.

With the DH theory dying a slow and painful death, why don’t we just put it out of its misery.¬† Let’s face it, the DH is a horse with a broken leg.

Read Full Post »