TEC Documentary hypothesis (page 11)

PSacramento

Oh I don't doubt that Mr. Schweitzer saw it that way, I just dont' agree with that view.

The prob is nearly every story you thought you knew from the Bible, often when you actually examine the content in contrast with your thoughts its quite different. Also many stories in the OT are repeated twice. Deutoromony the name literally means Second law. If you read and compare it with past accounts in Ex, Le & Num you will notice lots of edits. The obvious reason for the rewrite was to change things. Now given its supposed to be a message from God, why would anyone need to eidt that ?

This fine traditon of edits continues all the way to the end. The four gospels tell us often four different contradictory accounts of the same Jesus story. Did Judas die by hanging or did his guts fall out while he walking down the road ? Did Jesus speak during his trial or was he silent ? etc.

mP

TEC:

Im quoting JGNAT:
tec, are the following statements from the bible, consistent with the mind of Christ?
“and I assure you that everyone who has given up house or brothers or sisters or mother or father or children or property, for my sake and for the Good News, 30 will receive now in return a hundred times as many houses, brothers, sisters, mothers, children, and property—along with persecution. And in the world to come that person will have eternal life. 31 But many who are the greatest now will be least important then, and those who seem least important now will be the greatest then"
...

mP:

If you tally Jesus good messages with his bad messages, guess which comse out on top ? The only good line Jesus ever had was his love thy neighbour. His own disciples were thugs. MOst of them were violent, carried swords and members of terrorist of groups. Iscariot = Sicarri, John sons of Thunder (Maccabees = Thunder in Hebrew), and so on. He never condmened slavery, pedophila, rape, abuse of women and was racist.

What is exactlyis there to be impressed with ? WIth all the evil in the world at those times, the most important social topic he can commentary on after the kingdom and loving his father is to pay tax.and be an obedient slave ? WTF is going on here ?

mP

Jesus himself nearly always followed the law of Moses.

TEC: No. He always followed the Law. (stop adding 'of Moses'... because Moses made some allowances for the people, of

MP:

Please dont get dirty about semantics, i add Law of Moses to help focus on what we are talking about removing all ambiguity. Im sure we all know that it refers to the Torah and the laws it contains. Its not a commentary, its a instrument of convenience.

mP

TEC:

But I do SEE the the evidence of the truth of that from what is written. I have not heard anything to contradict it.

mP:

How can htere be any truth in a book that writes every major story twice with contradictions ? WIth so many doubles which is truth ? If one author takes the work of a previous one and edits it surely that means that anything associated with them is suspect and must be deleted. Once a liar always a liar right ?

If we start examining the bible with that in mind, we can virtually delete 75% of it in a few moments. There are 4 gospels that all contradict each other. Only one can be right, so the other three must be removed. GIven there are two creation accounts and Jesus didnt know about this, he must be wrong. Either the author is making the quote up or Jesus didnt know his Bible. Which do we believe ? Either way major portions of the book must be removed.

I can continue this exercise all over the BIble. 1&2Chronicles is a rewrite of 1&2Kings it changes many major stories to make theological points. Given these changes and errors or lets call it for what is is rewrites or blasphemy we can thus remove 1&2Chronicles.

Duet is a rewrite of Ex,Le & Num so it must be deleted as well. SOmeobody hwere is simply making stuff up just like Mohammad made stuff up . Mohammad quoted parts of the Jewish BIble and added his own convenient thoughts. He wanted a 9 year old virgin for a wife so he made up some text that God gave it to him. THis is the same as the Joshua author writing that God said the Jews can go kill the Caananites so they can rob and rape the virgins.

mP

MP: THe rich men who wrote the bible made stuff up in Gods name to justify their positions and scare their subjcts.

TEC

Your proof?

Your scholars that back this for you?

mP:

Tell me of a poor man who contribute to the BIble. THis is such a sinple exercise anybody can do it. GO thru the list of all books and look at the authors. It doesnot matter if the named person actually wrote the book, the point is the author is obviously using that name as an authority because they share that position and want the associated respect and benefits.

Of course my assertion is not perfect but the eveidence is overwhelming.

Moses = prince leader

Gen, Ex, Le, Num, Deu supposedly JOb.

Joshua = leader

Josh

Samuel = High Priest

1K, 2K, 1Sa, 2Sa

Ezra = High Priest

Ez, Neh, 1&2Chr

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Ezra

n the 20th century views on the composition of Ezra revolved around the competing views that either it was written by Ezra himself, who may also have been the author of the Books of Chronicles , or alternatively, that the author of Chronicles was also the author of Ezra. [15] More recently it has been increasingly recognised that Ezra, Nehemiah and Chronicles all have extremely complex histories stretching over many stages of editing, [16] and most scholars now are cautious of assuming a unified composition with a single theology and point of view. [17] As an indication of the many layers of editing which Ezra has undergone, one recent study finds that Ezra 1-6 and Ezra 9-10 were originally separate documents, that they were spliced together at a later stage by the authors of Ezra 7-8, and that all have undergone extensive later editing. [18]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psalms

major portions: David, Solomon

Isaiah, Jeremiah, both had frequent audeicnes with the King etc so must have been prominent. Kings dont listen to unimportant nobodies.

In 5 minutes i have practically shown over half the Bible was written by extremely elite men.I could nt find one humble man, but then again considering only elites the top 1-2% got an education to write its not surprising.

We can also delete Esther, which doesnt mention God or Jehovah once and is mostly about a queen and her uncle the cheif minister.

I could continue but i think ive made my point.

mP

MP: THe rich men who wrote the bible made stuff up in Gods name to justify their positions and scare their subjcts.

TEC

Your proof?

Your scholars that back this for you?

mP:
Lets examine the actual laws in the OT.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/613_Mitzvot

Go thru and for each law write down which social group they benefit. The overwhelming number is rich kings and priests. We have entire books devoted to sacrifices and this and that for priests. How man y books do we have to orphans or raped virgins ?

Pistoff

from tec:

"Pay heed or don't pay heed, as you choose. Better yet, if you choose, then just look to Christ."

But whose Christ? You say you only look at and listen to Christ, but for a fact your belief is informed in the biblical concept of the sacrificed child, the first born, Jesus.

That sacrifice was a concept that came out of Judaism, where blood had to be sacrificed to an angry God who loved the smell of burning sacrifice.

The Christ, not to say messiah, is viewed as a step up and forward from the Jewish system, but how? The Jesus of the Bible (according to Matthew anyway) was an observant Jew who fulfilled the law and one upped it: he gave himself as a sacrifice, so Paul claims.

But it is still the idea that we are born bad and need saving. No longer saved by sacrifice with the help of priests, but from Jesus.

The Jesus of Q would have rejected this idea, and said that we don't need priests or saving, just to learn to live by the rule of god, avoid the hypocrisy of religious power and take care of the poorest among us, the outcasts.

Pistoff

from mP:

"He never condmened slavery, pedophila, rape, abuse of women and was racist."

What a ridiculous statement. Where do you see Jesus passive about these subjects??

Jesus had women friends, single women friends. That is unheard of in that culture; is it why Mary was called a whore? That is the custom in mideast culture: an unattached woman who goes out of the house alone is called a whore. Jesus spoke to the Samaritan woman (loathed minority AND a woman) at the well, and was kind. But you say he is a racist and misogynist?

Where does rape occur and Jesus remain silent? Or slavery? Are you thinking of Paul? Are you thinking that the issue of pedophilia was discussed in ancient times like it is today?

Your portrayal of Jesus as a racist and misogynist is completely without merit and support. Not even scholars who hold only to a historical view of Jesus instead of a theological one think this is true.

EntirelyPossible

That is unheard of in that culture; is it why Mary was called a whore?

She wasn't, not in the Bible, that is a later story.

Where does rape occur and Jesus remain silent?

Jesus never said anythingt about them. The is the definition of "silent".

Your portrayal of Jesus as a racist and misogynist is completely without merit and support.

12 apostles and not one of them a woman? Jesus support of women is completely missing. Jesus condemnation of slavery is missing. Jesus condemnation of women as property is missing. Jesus condemnation of all sorts of things is missing. He wasn't terribly supportive of anything other than following him to heaven.

TEC Documentary hypothesis

Share this