JEPD Evidence

peter_kirk at sil.org peter_kirk at sil.org
Mon Dec 20 16:38:29 EST 1999



Dear Jonathan,

In answer to the first question remaining below and also the snipped 
points about sources within the toldot, I would refer you in addition 
to William of Occam's Razor. Now I don't think Thomas Aquinas thought 
much of that principle. But my preference is to go for the simple 
explanation unless there is evidence for the more complex one, rather 
than vice versa which is what you are doing.

As for "sepher" in Genesis 5:1, well, it was a written record after 
Moses or whoever had written it down. But I agree that this does 
somewhat support your position.

Peter

PS As Ian says, I prefer to be referred to as "Peter", or perhaps "Mr. 
Kirk", rather than just "Kirk". Thanks, Ian.


______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re[6]: JEPD Evidence
Author:  <jonathan.bailey at gmx.de> at Internet 
Date:    19/12/1999 21:21

<snip>

Basically, the only evidence that you have given for Genesis being a single 
composition is that it is unlikely that Moses would have had written records. Wh
y do
you see this as unlikely?

Also, what do you do with the use of the word sepher in Gen 5:1?

Thanks for clarifying your personal position. I also have no axe to grind for Ge
nesis
being a composite of sources. And I am becoming aware of treatment received for 
not
bowing before the "scholarship cannot involve God" mindset here. (Imagine what 
Thomas Aquinas - or heaven forbid, Anselm - would have had to say about that!)




Jonathan Bailey
Hochschule fr Jdische Studien
Heidelberg
---------- Original Message ----------

<snip>




More information about the b-hebrew mailing list