Biblical Hebrew Forum

[K Randolph <kwrandolph AT gmail.com>]

Lloyd:

On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 4:59 PM, LM Barre <l_barre AT yahoo.com> wrote:

>
> --- On *Thu, 2/5/09, K Randolph <kwrandolph AT gmail.com>* wrote:
>
> From: K Randolph <kwrandolph AT gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Many scholars accept the documentary sources
> To: "B-Hebrew" <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
> Date: Thursday, February 5, 2009, 1:39 AM
>
> Ted:
> Aren't you being a bit uncritical? Look at the works you listed!
>
> Who wrote Kings or Chronicles?
>
> Kings was authored/edited by what scholars call the Deuteronomistic 
> Historian.  Chronicles is thogut to have included Ezra and Nehemiah and is 
> so called "The Chronicler."
>
> Where are your sources for this claim?

Haven't you noticed the stylistic differences between the writing of Ezra
and Nehemiah on one hand, and the different style utilized by the author(s)
of Chronicles? Doesn't that stylistic difference render your claim very
unlikely?

>  Their authorship is not listed. Furthermore,
> what sources did they use? Some were listed, but how many were
> merely plagiarized without attribution? As such, are these good examples?
>
> Or how about Psalms? It openly admits multiple authors.
>
> Right.  So?
>
> Why do you think that its open admission of multiple authors doesn't
disqualify it as an example proving the accuracy of the Documentary
Hypothesis?

Karl W. Randolph.