Documentary Hypothesis Resource

Page 1 of 1 (13 items)
This post has 12 Replies | 1 Follower

Posts 2344
Ronald Quick | Forum Activity | Posted: Sun, Jun 24 2012 7:40 PM

Does anyone know of a resource (preferably in Logos) that identifies which passages in Genesis - Deuteronomy belong to which source (Jahwist, Elohist, Deuteronomist and Priestly)?

Thanks.

Posts 9947
George Somsel | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Jun 24 2012 9:57 PM

Ronald Quick:

Does anyone know of a resource (preferably in Logos) that identifies which passages in Genesis - Deuteronomy belong to which source (Jahwist, Elohist, Deuteronomist and Priestly)?

Thanks.

While Wellhausen's Prolegomena to the History of Israel and Driver's An Introduction to the Literature of the Old Testament do deal with this somewhat, it is more in the principles by which this is determined rather that laying out the sections belonging to each source.  What is really needed is an introduction to the Old Testament from a critical standpoint from a critical position such as Eissfeldt's The Old Testament:  An Introduction.  The results of his study are available through AFAT.  In L4, however, it is necessary to mouse-over to reveal the source to which each section is assigned unless you have highlighted the sections according to the source given in the mouse-over (There is a highlighting option, but I have found it to be somewhat wanting).  If you have L3 you can enable "Color by Eissfeldt" to display the sources through color coding. 

george
gfsomsel

יְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן

Posts 1880
Philana Crouch | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Jun 24 2012 10:31 PM

George,

Could a visual filter be created to do this?

Posts 9947
George Somsel | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Jun 24 2012 11:41 PM

Philana Crouch:

George,

Could a visual filter be created to do this?

As I recall, there is one, but I wasn't satisfied with it.

george
gfsomsel

יְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן

Posts 1680
Jerry M | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Jun 25 2012 4:37 AM

George Somsel:
As I recall, there is one
Yes there are instructions to do this in the Wiki.  The link is on the Table of Contents page under Extended Tips for Highlighting and Visual Filters.  On that page it is under Examples of Visual Filters and AFAT Source.

Extended Tips for Highlighting and Visual Filters

"For the kingdom of God does not consist in words but in power"      Wiki Table of Contents

Posts 2964
tom | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Jun 25 2012 5:51 AM

George Somsel:
I wasn't satisfied with it.
Same here

Posts 204
Oldnewbie | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Jun 27 2012 8:55 AM

Ronald Quick:

Does anyone know of a resource (preferably in Logos) that identifies which passages in Genesis - Deuteronomy belong to which source (Jahwist, Elohist, Deuteronomist and Priestly)?

Thanks.

I've heard that John J. Collins subscribes to a version of the Documentary Hypothesis and he has a book in Logos:

http://www.logos.com/product/5098/introduction-to-the-hebrew-bible

According to some of the reviews on Amazon he addresses this.

It isn't in Logos (yet) but Richard Elliot Friedman wrote a volume some years back called "The Bible with Sources Revealed" where he claimed he could identify the patterns (if that is the correct word).  He expressed his theory through using different colors of ink in the book to distinguish the different sources.  I have no idea if his version of the theory is generally accepted or not.  I hope this helps.

Posts 9947
George Somsel | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Jun 27 2012 9:16 AM

Oldnewbie:
I've heard that John J. Collins subscribes to a version of the Documentary Hypothesis and he has a book in Logos:

Most prominent OT scholars do accept some form of the Documentary Hypothesis.  There are some exceptions such as Umberto Cassuto and Yehezkael Kaufmann, and they aren't living.

george
gfsomsel

יְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן

Posts 6484
Forum MVP
Lynden Williams | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Jun 27 2012 9:39 AM

Ronald Quick:

Does anyone know of a resource (preferably in Logos) that identifies which passages in Genesis - Deuteronomy belong to which source (Jahwist, Elohist, Deuteronomist and Priestly)?

Thanks.

The closest thing that I could find is the Andersen-forbes Analyzed text of the Hebrew Bible. logosres:afheb10;ref=BibleBHS.Ge1.1

 

Everything ever written in Religion and Theology formatted for Logos Bible Software.Logos Youtube Channel

Posts 2344
Ronald Quick | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Jun 27 2012 12:10 PM

Thanks for the input. 

Posts 204
Oldnewbie | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Jun 28 2012 9:14 AM

George Somsel:

Oldnewbie:
I've heard that John J. Collins subscribes to a version of the Documentary Hypothesis and he has a book in Logos:

Most prominent OT scholars do accept some form of the Documentary Hypothesis.  There are some exceptions such as Umberto Cassuto and Yehezkael Kaufmann, and they aren't living.

Could you be more specific?  I've primarily been exposed to the term in reference to Julius Wellhausen.  How do current forms differ? (I realize that could be a big, wide question for a forum platform)  He rejected Mosaic authorship altogether and suggested various original authors (unless he somewhere proposed Moses under one of classifications he put forth (J,E,D,P) .  I'm primarily aware of critiques of his work as opposed to his original work, though I do have it in another format.  According to Wikipedia (yes, in no way definitive) the theory "remained the dominant model among biblical scholars until later in the 20th century."  Based on what you are saying this applies to his specific version of the theory.  Do all current forms reject the idea of editing/redaction of a single original source?

Posts 9947
George Somsel | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Jun 28 2012 9:48 AM

Oldnewbie:
Could you be more specific?  I've primarily been exposed to the term in reference to Julius Wellhausen.  How do current forms differ? (I realize that could be a big, wide question for a forum platform)  He rejected Mosaic authorship altogether and suggested various original authors (unless he somewhere proposed Moses under one of classifications he put forth (J,E,D,P) .  I'm primarily aware of critiques of his work as opposed to his original work, though I do have it in another format.  According to Wikipedia (yes, in no way definitive) the theory "remained the dominant model among biblical scholars until later in the 20th century."  Based on what you are saying this applies to his specific version of the theory.  Do all current forms reject the idea of editing/redaction of a single original source?

There have been a number of variations on a theme among OT scholars with regard to the various strands of the pentateuch, but in the main there is agreement.  Look, e.g. at the sources detailed in AFAT following Eissfeldt.  Probably the biggest difference currently is that whereas the sources were originally viewed more as written (note the term "Documentary Hypothesis"), there is a tendency now to view these as strands of tradition rather than as written sources.

george
gfsomsel

יְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן

Posts 10228
Denise | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Jun 28 2012 9:11 PM

Regarding  Richard Elliot Friedman's coloured text, if you want to take a step back in time, download the Polychrome Bible (pdf). It did just that though I suppose far earlier. Kind of demostrates how times have changed with Bible readers.

On my own software, I include several versions in my verse attribute table (though the normal assignments often are partial verses). I've run pattern affinities on the assignments. The J/E ones are difficult to distinguish mathematically but the P/D ones are extremely easy.


Page 1 of 1 (13 items) | RSS