The Book of Deuteronomy

[Blake Reas]

I like to discuss the Documentary Hypothesis and it's various problems that it has with it as of now.

I have read some stuff by kenneth Kitchen and various other scholars that compare them to 2nd Millenium Suzerean treaties others will date it to the 1st millenium do to similarities with treaty forms in the first millenium.

I will try and state the general outline in the next post but I would like GrayPilgrim to jump into this, since I know he knows a lot about the OT.

In Christ,
Blake

[Socrates]

Documentary Hypothesis

Yeah, I think Kenneth Kitchen blows the Wellhausen-Graf nonsense away.

J.P. Holding has a good article Dealing with Deuteronomy (http://www.tektonics.org/tekton_05_03_04_D.html), and Answers in Genesis has a number of articles, including links to outside URLs, at Who really wrote Genesis? (http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/genesis.asp#jedp)

[Dee Dee Warren]

What a great subject...

[Blake Reas]

Socrates:
Documentary Hypothesis

Yeah, I think Kenneth Kitchen blows the Wellhausen-Graf nonsense away.

J.P. Holding has a good article Dealing with Deuteronomy (http://www.tektonics.org/tekton_05_03_04_D.html), and Answers in Genesis has a number of articles, including links to outside URLs, at Who really wrote Genesis? (http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/genesis.asp#jedp)

I know I am a frequent visitor of Tektonics. I think that there are better treatments than what AIG can give www.christian-thinktank.com

In Christ,
Blake Reas

[Blake Reas]

Socrates:
Documentary Hypothesis

Yeah, I think Kenneth Kitchen blows the Wellhausen-Graf nonsense away.

J.P. Holding has a good article Dealing with Deuteronomy (http://www.tektonics.org/tekton_05_03_04_D.html), and Answers in Genesis has a number of articles, including links to outside URLs, at Who really wrote Genesis? (http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/genesis.asp#jedp)

I know I am a frequent visitor of Tektonics. I think that there are better treatments than what AIG can give www.christian-thinktank.com

I think maybe the most absurd thing about the JEDP theory of Deut. is the conspiracy theory that the Temple Priest planted the book of the Law in the temple for Josiah to find it. What does everyone else see about this. I will give more detailed post about this later.



In Christ,
Blake Reas

[Socrates]

Blake Reas:
I know I am a frequent visitor of Tektonics. I think that there are better treatments than what AIG can give www.christian-thinktank.com

What, is it a contest? :argue: As I said, AiG links to outside articles about JEDP, and indeed in other places they have linked to www.christian-thinktank.com articles. So it looks like they are on the same side in many areas.
:cheers:

[Blake Reas]

Socrates:


What, is it a contest? :argue: As I said, AiG links to outside articles about JEDP, and indeed in other places they have linked to www.christian-thinktank.com articles. So it looks like they are on the same side in many areas.
:cheers:

My bad! I like AIG I thought you where talking about there treatment of JEDP. Oh well, talk to you later.

In Christ,
Blake Reas :yipee:

[J. J. Ramsey]

What's funny is when I first encountered a book that presumed JEDP, I initially thought from the way its author was writing that the documents which he referred to as the Early Judean (J), Northern (E), and Priestly (P) had actually existed and had been dug up. I was doing a report on the Exodus, so the D of JEDP (Deuteronomy) didn't come up. As I researched further, I found that there were no such documents, and that their existence was presumed from stylistic differences--which seemed a pretty weak basis on which to base JEDP.

I would think that the simplest explanation of why the author (or authors?) of the Torah would refer to God varyingly as YHWH or Elohim would simply be to help keep the prose from getting too monotonous!

[Faramir]

J. J. Ramsey:
What's funny is when I first encountered a book that presumed JEDP, I initially thought from the way its author was writing that the documents which he referred to as the Early Judean (J), Northern (E), and Priestly (P) had actually existed and had been dug up. I was doing a report on the Exodus, so the D of JEDP (Deuteronomy) didn't come up. As I researched further, I found that there were no such documents, and that their existence was presumed from stylistic differences--which seemed a pretty weak basis on which to base JEDP.

I would think that the simplest explanation of why the author (or authors?) of the Torah would refer to God varyingly as YHWH or Elohim would simply be to help keep the prose from getting too monotonous! :argh:

You would think it would be obvious.

:duh:

[Blake Reas]

Meridith Kline along with other OT scholars have argued that Deuteronomy bears resemblance to 2nd millenium Law Codes that have been found in Archaeological digs. Here is the Structure with Deutronomy verses beside it:



I. Preamble (1:1-5)
II. Historical Prologue (1:6-3:29)
III. Stipulations (4-26)
A. Basic (4:1-11:32)
B. Detailed (12:1 - 26:19)
IV. Curses Blessings, Ratification (Chap 27 - 30)
V. Sucession Arrangements ( Chaps. 31-34)
A. Invocation of Witnesses
B. Provision of Public reading.

I will write some more on it at a later time I am going to go and read:read:! I got this out of "An Introuduction to the Old Testament by Raymond B. Dillard and Tremper Longman III. I will post some more about the curses and blessings as I go to consult more out of my OT library.

P.S. If Kline is right it puts the date of Deuteronomy at the time of Moses.

In Christ,
Blake

[Pilgrim]

I had to dig through Klines "Kingdom Prologue" at Gordon-Conwell. It was kind of like reading a DOS manual. ;)

But I totally buy into his ideas. It was a major thrust of thought at Gordon-Conwell in the OT department. Huegenburger, Pratico and Stewart all taught that understanding. As you can guess, covenantal theology in general is the dominant school of thought at GCTS.