Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
394 bytes added ,  01:24, April 5, 2007
Line 121: Line 121:     
:::::You just answered it. "not really debunked, just changed 'round a bit."  Who's doing the changing, I wonder?  And just who are these "real" Bible scholars who know these several authors they claim wrote it?  Just what were these scholars' motives?  And who exactly were these authors?  Don't you even see what is going on?  A bunch of scholars have made a claim that certain people wrote the Bible according to the "documentary hypothesis", and they cannot even name them, let alone prove their theory.  [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 21:15, 4 April 2007 (EDT)   
 
:::::You just answered it. "not really debunked, just changed 'round a bit."  Who's doing the changing, I wonder?  And just who are these "real" Bible scholars who know these several authors they claim wrote it?  Just what were these scholars' motives?  And who exactly were these authors?  Don't you even see what is going on?  A bunch of scholars have made a claim that certain people wrote the Bible according to the "documentary hypothesis", and they cannot even name them, let alone prove their theory.  [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 21:15, 4 April 2007 (EDT)   
 +
 +
::::: One need not give them names like "Charles" or "Franklin" - they didn't sign their works as such.  As to the scholars: R.E. Friedman, "Who Wrote the Bible?", P.C. Craigie, "The Old Testament: Its Background, Growth & Content" and Rev. Ken Collins, "The Torah in modern scholarship" (the last can be found on the [http://www.kencollins.com/Bible-p2.htm web]). --21:24, 4 April 2007 (EDT)
    
:::It can't reflect ''all'' the research; it has to be selective and only reflect the most relevant and accurate research.  Of course there will still be disputes about what qualifies, but a lot of the "research" is not worth including.  [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 06:30, 4 April 2007 (EDT)
 
:::It can't reflect ''all'' the research; it has to be selective and only reflect the most relevant and accurate research.  Of course there will still be disputes about what qualifies, but a lot of the "research" is not worth including.  [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 06:30, 4 April 2007 (EDT)
1,129

edits

Navigation menu