“Prior to the
discovery of the [Dead Sea] scrolls, there was an assumption that the text of
the Hebrew Bible was simply equated with the Masoretic Text. The Samaritan
Pentateuch and the Septuagint were generally delegated to the sidelines and
used primarily to "fix" the MT when there was a problem; the
Targums and Peshitta also added overwhelming witness to the form of text as in
the MT. But the scrolls have illuminated an unsuspected stage in the
history of the biblical text: a period in which the text of the books of
scripture was pluriform and still creatively developing, prior to the period of
a single text for each book. The composition and compilation of each book was a
lengthy, diachronic development, from its earliest sources up through its
latest literary editions. The process usually involved more than one major
author (cf. J, E, D, P for the Pentateuch; the Deuteronomists and their sources
for Deuteronomy to Kings; First, Second, and Third Isaiah; the many composers
of Psalms and Proverbs; and so forth) in addition to a series of minor authors,
redactors, and contributing scribes. Qumran demonstrates that the textual form
of most books was still in that state of creative development until at least 70
C.E. and possibly as late as 132. Now, when considering the books of scripture
in the period of the late Second Temple and the origins of Christianity and
rabbinic Judaism, we must distinguish between the book or literary opus and the
particular wording or literary edition of that opus which may still have been
in the stage of creative development.” (“The Canon Debate”, pages 31-32,
McDonald and Sanders, editors.)
Doug Mason
JoinedPosts by Doug Mason
-
27
New light!, says JW-Archive. The inspired word can have mistranslations, says Dec 2015 WT
by StarTrekAngel insorry, i know i posted this earlier but i believe the title did not gather enough attention.
i think is a topic worth discussing.. http://www.jw-archive.org/post/127866869178/new-light-the-inspired-word-of-god-can.
-
-
-
27
New light!, says JW-Archive. The inspired word can have mistranslations, says Dec 2015 WT
by StarTrekAngel insorry, i know i posted this earlier but i believe the title did not gather enough attention.
i think is a topic worth discussing.. http://www.jw-archive.org/post/127866869178/new-light-the-inspired-word-of-god-can.
-
-
Doug Mason
Any translation, such as the Septuagint (LXX), introduces the translators' biases, and the situation was very fluid, since there were several Greek translations produced by redactors and commentators over time. And the NT writers quoted from the range available to them, including some we do not have access to.
Even though Jesus (Yeshua) would have spoken in Aramaic, the Gospel writers have him citing the text from the LXX - often using Pesher interpretation (that is, a commentary, rather than a literal citation). Not that any of the NT writers ever saw Jesus or heard him speak.
The early Christians, indeed, seemed to settle on the translation by Theodotian (especially of Daniel - part of which was written in Aramaic and part in Greek - as is attested by the DSS).
The variants in the DSS provide one testimony to the fluidity of the texts.
The manner in which the Watchtower amends the text to suit its biases replicates in a small way the manner in which the Hebrews were prepared to amend the text over time.
The Hebrew text that is available today (I possess two English translations of the Tanakh) is about 1000 years old (plus and minus a century or three). It was produced by Jews known as Masoretes and they took the variant Hebrew texts, producing the current single Hebrew version. In doing so, they set previous errors in concrete - and we lost the earlier Hebrew versions.
The text of the LXX is based on a Hebrew text that was about 1500 years earlier than the Hebrew Masoretic Text (MT) - the earlier text was written in palaeo Hebrew characters - see the use of those characters with "YHWH" in the Greek DSS.
It is impossible to know what the original writers wrote (the autographs).
For an analysis of the manner in which the NT writers used the Scriptures (our "Old Testament") read: "Biblical Exegesis in the Apostolic Period" by Richard Longenecker.
Doug
-
18
Oh my God, I now have proof that Adam was made from dust.
by James Mixon inbro.
e. soriano set matters straight for me.. you people alleged that the creation of adam is an "anti-scientific nonsense; and god did not.
create adam from a handful of dust, like the bible says, (ok maybe a bucket full).
-
-
Doug Mason
Adam was the only man without a navel. -
20
Clarifying This Weeks Watchtower...CTR Reference
by freemindfade inwhat the sunday watchtard said.... in 1876, an article written by charles taze russell was published in the magazine bible examiner.
that article, gentile times: when do they end?, pointed to 1914 as a significant year.
the article linked the seven times of daniels prophecy with the appointed times of the nations spoken of by jesus.. what gentile times: when do they end?
-
-
Doug Mason
My picture of the WT's chariot is actually a donkey (the typical JW) being ridden by the GB holding a carrot on a stick in front of the JW's eyes.
Doug
-
20
Clarifying This Weeks Watchtower...CTR Reference
by freemindfade inwhat the sunday watchtard said.... in 1876, an article written by charles taze russell was published in the magazine bible examiner.
that article, gentile times: when do they end?, pointed to 1914 as a significant year.
the article linked the seven times of daniels prophecy with the appointed times of the nations spoken of by jesus.. what gentile times: when do they end?
-
-
Doug Mason
My comments on CTR's article is available at:
http://www.jwstudies.com/How_Many_Mistakes_in_one_Paragraph.pdf
Note that Russell had two parallel fulfilments for 1914:
(1) Jerusalem would ceased to be trodden on by the Gentiles and
(2) Gentile nations would be dashed to pieces.
In that article, Russell said that Nebuchadnezzar symbolised the fate of the Gentile nations; today the WTS says that Nebuchadnezzar symbolised the fate of God's kingdom.
He might have pointed to 1914 (among a number of other dates - such as 1874 for the Parousia and 1878 for the closing of the door) but the WTS is very coy about revealing the what the significance was.
Doug
-
18
GOD in the Beginning
by Doug Mason inthe ancient hebrews left two bequests:.
a universal, single god named yahweh;.
a series of writings identified as sacred scripture..
-
-
Doug Mason
I find it difficult to accept that Yahweh was sexless/neutered.
The environment does not appear to lend itself to any sexless/transgender god.
The ancients considered that El and his consort Asherah had 70 sons (the Elohim) through normal sexual activity.
In my Study, I did not enumerate the characteristics of El, but they were of the kindlier nature, the Ancient of days, the Creator God. On the other hand, Yahweh was an angry, warrior, fierce God, who was only "tamed" when characteristics of El were merged into Yahweh, and at the same time El's female consort Asherah was assigned to Yahweh.
There is no doubt that Asherah was a female as she is depicted with large breasts, usually with her hands beneath them to hold then out. This indicated sustenance and fertility.
The Israelites worshiped several female goddesses along with a few male gods (symbolised with bulls or calves).
Doug
-
18
GOD in the Beginning
by Doug Mason inthe ancient hebrews left two bequests:.
a universal, single god named yahweh;.
a series of writings identified as sacred scripture..
-
-
Doug Mason
Thank you Phizzy and others for your kind words.
I learned a lot, especially placing the Biblical texts into the context of the evolution of the Hebrew culture during the 12th to 6th centuries,
I sincerely hope that people will be motivated to read the books I cited and some of those that I referenced.
Doug
-
18
GOD in the Beginning
by Doug Mason inthe ancient hebrews left two bequests:.
a universal, single god named yahweh;.
a series of writings identified as sacred scripture..
-
-
Doug Mason
eyeuse2badub,
If you read my Study you will see that history agrees with you. The Bible was written by a small group of men for men about men who had a male God. The vast majority of the Hebrews worshiped several gods and many more goddesses, and the women played a significant role in that worship, family based. However, these people, being illiterate, did not write their story, and so we have been left with a biased account of true Hebrew worship.
Maybe women should now stand up and write their accounts,
Doug
-
18
GOD in the Beginning
by Doug Mason inthe ancient hebrews left two bequests:.
a universal, single god named yahweh;.
a series of writings identified as sacred scripture..
-
-
Doug Mason
Crazyguy,
The Gods such as El, Asherah, Baal, and so on came from the north, from the Canaanites. Yahweh apparently came from the south, from the Midianites.
The stories you read, such as the introduction of Yahweh in the Moses' story, are religious "histories", not literal ball-by-ball literal records. The story you refer to was a mechanism for introducing the change of name to Yahweh.
The purpose of these stories was to create the power base of the writing group. Those who came from Israel wrote of "El", hence their documents are known as "E"; those from Judah, who were intent in having Jerusalem as the center of all religious activities, wrote of "Yahweh", hence their documents are known as "J". (I shall comment on that below).
Each of the other sources of documents (DTr; P, etc) also sought to legitimize their own power base. Chronicles was written well into the Persian Period because the writer wanted to "correct" the record at the Books of Kings.
The introduction of Yahweh started with a minority of Hebrews during the 8th century BCE. It took until the Babylonian Exile (6th century) and the Persian Period for them to evolve their focus on Yahweh and at that time they moved Yahweh from Israel's god to the sole universal God. They placed the story back into the past to make it look as if they were always monotheists. They were not.
(Comment: the letter "J" in German, which is the source of this nomenclature, is pronounced as if it were the letter "Y" - as in Yahweh. My mother's maiden surname was Jellinek and it was always pronounced as "Yellinek").
Doug
-
18
GOD in the Beginning
by Doug Mason inthe ancient hebrews left two bequests:.
a universal, single god named yahweh;.
a series of writings identified as sacred scripture..
-
-
Doug Mason
Crazyguy,
My position is far more simple than the suppositions you propose.
I understand that the Hebrews were hill-dwelling Canaanites, that they were always there. The Patriarchs would have lived during the late Bronze Age but the earliest likely historical evidence comes from the "Tribal/Judges" period of the subsequent Iron Age I.
Their worship evolved from and remained consistent with their Canaanite roots. The Hebrews shared the gods and goddesses of the Canaanites and of their neighbours, although the size of the Hebrew pantheon was smaller.
The Scriptures we now read come from the latter part of the Babylonian Exile and the subsequent Persian Period. These authors were Yahweh-aloneists (see their Isaiah 40-55) demanding all worship to be centralised in Jerusalem. Hence their skew of the "historical" record. However, in their denunciations, such as of the god Baal, the writers inadvertently reveal that the Hebrews were worshiping that god, other gods and several goddesses.
I find it interesting how the Watchtower complains that the word "LORD" hides "Jehovah" yet they inconsistently ignore the fact that in many cases (such as at Genesis 1) the word "God" hides the name of "EL" (the supreme god of the pantheon - the "Elohim").
I am not in the position to state which of the Babylonian gods were espoused by some of the exiles.
You ask specifically about my views on the Exodus: I doubt that it took place; I doubt there was a Hebrew known as Moses (an Egyptian name), since there is no archaeological evidence of that person nor is there any archaeological evidence of an exodus, despite millions of people and animals supposedly moving in an area for 40 years. The source of the final story is open to speculation but I suspect that its purpose was to ensure the authority of the people writing the story.
Doug