nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW
13,254
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 542:
Line 542: − + + + + + +
→Intentions: Pentateuchal authorship
Call the creation account auto-biography if you like that better. However there is no account how the auto-biography was transferred into written form, it might be Adam, it might be Moses, it might be someone else, and we do not only not know who it was, we don't even know if he is reliable. It was been said that Moses wrote down the laws, but for the rest on the Pentateuch it is mostly unclear who wrote it. When police makes a record of an eyewitness account, they make sure that they got a signature of witness and interrogator. A report of a person claiming to have heard an eyewitness account isn't an eyewitness account anymore.
Call the creation account auto-biography if you like that better. However there is no account how the auto-biography was transferred into written form, it might be Adam, it might be Moses, it might be someone else, and we do not only not know who it was, we don't even know if he is reliable. It was been said that Moses wrote down the laws, but for the rest on the Pentateuch it is mostly unclear who wrote it. When police makes a record of an eyewitness account, they make sure that they got a signature of witness and interrogator. A report of a person claiming to have heard an eyewitness account isn't an eyewitness account anymore.
And the colophon that you mentioned doesn't say that it was written by Adam, it simply says that it was about Adam and his line. [[User:Order|Order]] 07:35, 9 December 2007 (EST)
And the colophon that you mentioned doesn't say that it was written by Adam, it simply says that it was about Adam and his line. [[User:Order|Order]] 07:35, 9 December 2007 (EST)
:"Modern scholars" are rejecting that the Bible is what is says it is and think that they know better. The idea that it wasn't written by Moses started with, among other things, the idea that writing hadn't been invented then, which has since shown to be wrong. It also assumes that different terminology means different authors, rather than (a) different purpose by the same author, or (b) the same author changing his style over time. In other words, those ideas that it was written later than Moses don't hold water. I don't really disagree with the traditional/biblical view. The Bible refers to the Pentateuch as "the books of Moses", and whether he is the original author or the editing compiler they are still his books.
: Under the Moses-as-compiler idea, the author of the creation account (Genesis 1:1 to 2:4a) could be God Himself, Who might well have written that part and handed it to Adam with the instruction to keep the history going. In any case, God was the ultimate author of the entire Bible (using various human "ghost writers"), and by definition He is reliable. They didn't have police in those times, or more to the point, they didn't have the same practices as today. But that doesn't mean that they don't qualify as eyewitness accounts.
: The colophon was, as I said, like the "signature" of the writer. So when it says that this is the account of Adam, it means that it's Adam's account; that Adam is the author of it.
: [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 08:25, 10 December 2007 (EST)
===Scientific Claims===
===Scientific Claims===
:"''From you wording it seems like you take personal offense at scientists developing theories that contradict your reading of the bible.''": What I object to is the scientists who didn't witness past events claiming superiority over God who did witness those events.
:"''From you wording it seems like you take personal offense at scientists developing theories that contradict your reading of the bible.''": What I object to is the scientists who didn't witness past events claiming superiority over God who did witness those events.