[b-hebrew] Documentary Hypothesis - Just a Bit More

Harold R. Holmyard III hholmyard at ont.com
Sat Jun 5 13:29:10 EDT 2004


Dear George,

>You ask for a copy of J, E, and P knowing full well that given the
>climatic conditions of Palestine such will never be found.  You certainly
>like to hedge your bets, don't you?  Perhaps we should cut some tablets
>and take them to Sinai to see if we can get them engraved.

HH: The fact is that I owe nothing to the JEDP theory.

>I don't think the disagreement is as much as you would like to pretend
>that it is.  I went to a very conservative seminary myself.  Yes, it was
>brought up that there were differences, but such is hardly surprising.
>There are many things in the physical sciences that are a matter for
>disagreement -- and I'm not referring to some of the items which are
>controversial in religious circles.  I was recently chastised privately
>for making a comment regarding a simple acceptance of the statements of
>the Bible.  I do not intend to belittle those who accept the Bible at its
>face value, but that is not enough.  If it were, many scholars would be
>unemployed.  A reasonable account must be given.  It is not sufficient to
>simply repeat its words by rote.

HH: The JEDP theory initially grew from apparent doublets in Genesis, 
if I remember correctly. There are a number of hypotheses simpler 
than JEDP to explain those. The documents are thousands of years old. 
There are various ways that phenomena could occur in the text. The 
highly speculative and evolutionary "history of religions" origins of 
JEDP testify against it, as do its results, which undermine the 
authority of God's word.

The mandate the Bible presents is that of making disciples and 
teaching them the whole counsel of God. The mandate is not to foster 
unbelief in the reliability of God's word and to erect an explanation 
for its existence that contradicts what the text claims for itself.

				Yours,
				Harold Holmyard




More information about the b-hebrew mailing list