Christian Forums

i do have things to say but as i pointed out, what is given in response is stifling not aiding such discussion.  i also need to know what you know so i do not insult or say something everyone aware of already.

arch, you're alienating people at a record pace. 

Quoteyou're alienating people at a record pace. 

i didn't realize that avoiding insulting or telling you what you already knew were reasons to  be alienated

but let's give this a test run:

topic:  the documentery hypothesis or commonly known as the J, E, P, D sources.

contention:  these documents are the sources for the pentateuch and possibly some other books of the Bible.  writtten by unknown authors over centuries of time.

conclusion: moses did not write the first five books of the Bible but were written at a time when writing was known to have existed in the hebrew nation (roughly 7-8th centuries b.c.)  also, passages could be copied from known myths, i.e. gilgamesh epic, etc.

this is the basic secular position but now:

rebuttal:  dr. kaiser discusses this hypothesis in his editorial work Te Archaeological Study Bible and entions a bit of their history, i am doing this fom memory so i won't be long here, and discusses their validity.  K.a.Kitchen talks about this hypothesis in his work "On The Reliability of the Old Testament' and in this work he points out one very important and vital fact:

'there are no J, E, P, D documents.'  never have been.  they are a complete fabrication of , i believe his name was, welhausen back in the 19th century.  This originator of the hypothesis probably looked at the different writing styles in the Bible and concluded this was what took place.

problem was he had no physical proof.  he had nothing, but this thought has taken hold not only in the copenhagen school (minimalists) but in other areas of archaeological thought.  William Dever puts it in his books, Henry Rietz puts it in his lectures and so on.  this is a widely accepted idea based upon nothing but thin air and a attitude of disbelief.

importance: these same archaeologists and researchers  dismiss the biblical accounts on the fact that there is no physical evidence to prove their historicity or one has to use faith BUT these same people will use the lack of physical evidence and faith to support their arguments against the Bible.  they have no physical evidence for these documents to have ever existed yet cite them by faith that they existed at some point in time.

in other words, these supporters of this hypothesis will resort to hypocrisy to make an argument and is one sign that they do not have the truth nor are reading the past correctly.

conclusion: believers have to start with the Bible and stay with its account if they want to know the truth and see where these 'experts' err. we cannot rely on the secular world to present the truth nor apply reality to its work.  we have to examine the evidence ourselves with the help of The Holy Spirit to see what it is truly saying and draw our own conclusions even if it means  receiving derision and ridicule from those have spent decades studying biblical archaeology and think they have the answer.

'conclusion: believers have to start with the Bible and stay with its account if they want to know the truth and see where these 'experts' err. we cannot rely on the secular world to present the truth nor apply reality to its work.  we have to examine the evidence ourselves with the help of The Holy Spirit to see what it is truly saying and draw our own conclusions even if it means  receiving derision and ridicule from those have spent decades studying biblical archaeology and think they have the answer.'

i think most here will agree with examining all evidence ourselves.  how does the Spirit help YOU w/this?

dj

you failed.

Not your place to judge.

i failed what because i agreed w/you?

dj

Quote'there are no J, E, P, D documents.'  never have been.  they are a complete fabrication of , i believe his name was, welhausen back in the 19th century.  This originator of the hypothesis probably looked at the different writing styles in the Bible and concluded this was what took place.

That is exactly how the hypothesis was developed.  It is the same thing that leads most scholars to reject claims that the same person who wrote the letter to Corinth also wrote the letters to Timothy.  Writing styles and word usage are important in determining authorship. 

QuoteThat is exactly how the hypothesis was developed.  It is the same thing that leads most scholars to reject claims that the same person who wrote the letter to Corinth also wrote the letters to Timothy.  Writing styles and word usage are important in determining authorship. 

but that assumption that a person writes the exact same way to everybody is the problem.  i certainly do not write the same here as i would write at a non-christian forum.  there are differences and that goes to writing to churches as well.

i wrote several pastors for awhile, all whom i had known for 30 years and my letters were not the same in each case.  it all depends upon topic, situation and so on.

this is a danger when we rely on secular methods or criteria to identify something, the truth gets clouded or hidden.  they are looking at things with an unregenerated mind using human logic and lack the insight God grants believers.

plus you have to take into account their unbelief, bias and ability to accept what God can and will do.

Quotefailed what because i agreed w/you

no, because you missed the point of the exercise.  it is not about me

Quotehow does the Spirit help YOU w/this?

never is.

QuoteNot your place to judge.

sure it is, it was my test example.  don with a plan was the only one who was able to make a good point

'conclusion: believers have to start with the Bible and stay with its account if they want to know the truth and see where these 'experts' err. we cannot rely on the secular world to present the truth nor apply reality to its work.  we have to examine the evidence ourselves with the help of The Holy Spirit to see what it is truly saying and draw our own conclusions even if it means  receiving derision and ridicule from those have spent decades studying biblical archaeology and think they have the answer.'

so you DON'T want folx to agree with your statement above?
who said anything was about you?  i asked how the Spirit helped you do this.  that's about the Spirit.

dj

i hesitate to post this here given the nature of the responses i get but here is an article that speaks volumes and i wonder if you all can pick up on what is being suggested.  i have read cline's book and he is a firm believer in physical evidence before existence is accepted, a very dangerous position to be in but none the less his comments get published.

i should mention that in part i agree with him on some things but would not extend it totally in the direction he would like to see it go.

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/2007/09/30/raiders_of_the_faux_ark/

i wonder if you all can pick up on what is being suggested.

a sweet, bolded aspersion.  i also have doubts regarding you.
you probably would have better luck just posting the link and saying you think it's important.

and to answer your query - everyone here who wants to read it will pick up on what is being suggested.

dj

it is obvious to me that you think you know more than you do so i will withdraw from this thread and use my knowledge elsewhere with peole who want to discuss roperly and learn something.

i'll be happy to learn what a roperly is. 

dj

So much for the opportunity to actually get into some archeology.   Historical evidence is immensely interesting.  Try sticking to archeology archeologist and we will all profit.