User talk:Kenneth W. Shafer
Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 Y
|
Topic: Documentary Hypothesis. I have conclusive evidence of the identity of J. I would be interested in discussion. kwshafer (talk) 16:39, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
For purposes of definition, categorize an
argument as Indicative, Persuasive, or
Conclusive. Buy my book on Amazon
(Searching for J), and if you do not agree
that the evidence for Michal as J is
Conclusive, I will return your money.
kwshafer
(talk) 02:49,
6 December 2007 (UTC)
DOCUMENTARY HYPOTHESIS (DH) DEFINITION The DH consists of an initial hypothesis, and also a process for analysis and continuing refinement. The first observation (circa 1850) was that there were a number of duplications and contradictions in Genesis that might be resolved if there was more than one source involved in writing the book. The initial hypothesis was that there were three primary sources (documents) for the book of Genesis, labeled J, E, and P. The process for analysis and refinement was restricted to the field of “Higher Criticism”, which is analysis restricted to the text of the bible; that is, not dependent on external evidence. The process is iterative -- that is, it can be re-applied whenever more discoveries are made. This successive refinement results in continuous improvement to the DH. An example of a very early iteration is worthwhile here to illustrate the concept. The first source identified was P (for Priestly), separated
by a writing style that is identifiable even in English
translation. The remaining two sources were separated by
the manner in which they referred to God. In narration,
one source used Yahweh (in German this starts with a J,
much as our Jehovah), and is known as J. The other source
only used Elohim, and is known as E. This was the first
iteration, and resolved the initial duplications and
contradictions.
Several lines of investigation were possible from here:
Are the same sources identifiable beyond Genesis?
Are the writing styles of the three sources identifiable?
Are there clues regarding the theology of the three sources?
Are there clues regarding the dates of authorship?
Can passages that were previously unassigned be attributed
to the sources as we learn more about them?
How did separate sources come to be combined?
Answers to most of these questions began to emerge, and the
new findings were then put through another iteration. Each
iteration generates new questions, prompting continued analysis.
This process of iteration continues until no new findings can be
developed. As of 2007, there are still new findings appearing,
and the DH continues to improve.
CURRENT STATUS OF THE DOCUMENTARY HYPOTHESIS As the DH is continuously evolving, a complete description should
include a snapshot of the state of the Documentary Hypothesis on
some specific date of interest.
This is a summary of where the DH stands today (2007). Asterisks
show where references are available to identify and locate the
underlying analysis.
J, E, and P continue through Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, and
Numbers.
A fourth source is identified in Deuteronomy, known as D.
To account for the combining of various primary sources, some
Redactors were identified. For notational purposes, Rd would
be the D redactor.
DH source analysis continues through the books of Joshua, Judges,
Ruth, I and II Samuel, I and II Kings, I and II Chronicles, Ezra,
Nehemiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, and more.
Summary of major sources: J
J is the great storyteller*. For purposes of this discussion,
divide the J narrative into ancient history (Adam and Eve, Noah
and the flood, Abraham and the other patriarchs), recent history
(the conquest of Canaan), and eyewitness accounts (events during
the early monarchy). The ancient history comes down to Israel
through a long oral tradition*.
Presumably J did not invent the ancient stories, but J wrote
them down, along with the recent history and eyewitness accounts.
The recent history accounts are found in the battle of Jericho*,
the book of Judges*, and the book of Ruth*.
In the 1980’s, Friedman* and then Bloom* proposed that J was a
woman. More recently, she has been identified as Michal* (first
wife of David).
P
As with the J documents, some of the P documents are very old.
A case in point is the “Book of Generations”, beginning in
Genesis 5. According to Friedman*, this is at least a little
older than the J document (more or less 1000 BC). Friedman* has
recently placed the author of the P narrative during the reign
of Hezekiah.
The P redactor (Rp) combined the P narrative with the combined
JED document, along with other P documents to form something
that looks very much like our Old Testament from Genesis through
Lamentations, and perhaps farther. Friedman* has identified
Rp as Ezra, who wrote I and II Chronicles, Ezra, and Nehemiah.
Ezra took the Book of Generations*, and spread it throughout the
first five books, to serve as a benchmark of chronology.
E
The E material was never a complete narrative* (as opposed to
J and the P narrative). The usual assumption is that a redactor
(Re) combined J and E into a single document*. It is also
possible that E himself combined the E material with J, so that
E acted as his own redactor*. More analysis would be useful
here.
E was probably located in the north* (Israel) as opposed to J,
who was in the south* (later Judah). Stories in Joshua that
emphasize the actions of Joshua himself undoubtedly show the
hand of E*. Stories in I and II Samuel which show the monarchy
in a negative light are probably E*. He wrote near the end of
Solomon’s reign, or later*. E has not yet been identified.
D
D wrote the core of the book of Deuteronomy (probably the laws)
near the reign of Hezekiah. This book was likely the one
discovered later, during the reign of Josiah*.
The D redactor (Rd) combined the D document with the JE document,
and added linking material and an introduction tying together
Deuteronomy, Joshua, and Judges. Friedman* identifies Rd as a
combination of Jeremiah and his scribe Baruch, who wrote
Jeremiah and Lamentations. After the death of King Josiah, Rd
went back and adjusted the earlier descriptions to fit*.
D and Rd appear to be in the tradition of the Levitical
priesthood, and were located in the north (Israel)*.
CONCLUSION The DH continues to be a useful tool in biblical analysis. Over
time, the DH continues to improve, and becomes more accurate.
|