Hey guys, Darwin and John… sorry I haven’t gotten back to you in quite a while, I have recently changed

my e-mail address <ssg@hotmail.com> and no longer have my old address book; thus, I am responding with a quick clarification – by memory – of your last reply [, John]. You mentioned that you don’t know much about the Documentary Hypothesis (the Graf-Wellhausen theory) dealing specifically with the J and P, and why I say that it was thrown out over 100 years ago. All authors, from the 1800’s on up, when saying there are two authors for Genesis 1 and 2, are referring to Jean Astruc and authors from the German school of higher criticism that “proved” the Bible to be a bunch of mythology. These critics were merely philosophers, and when the hypothesis they proposed was finished, it was merely a thesis based not on science (archaeology), but merely on supposition (musings). The part about the J and P authorship [as well as E and D authorship] come from Jean Astruc, a French physician from the time of the French Revolution (about the time God was rejected and the guillotine accepted). All, I repeat, all the multiple authors referred to by modern writers and those from the German school of critics (about the time of the rejection of God, leading to the philosophies of world conquest) are based on Astrucs’ “findings,” which are merely guesses. The reason I mentioned people like A. N. Sherwin-White, William Ramsay, Dr. Nelson Gleuck, Dr. John A. T. Robinson, Dr William F. Albright, Sir Frederic Kenyon, and the like, is because they accepted this hypothesis (which is just one facet of the Documentary Hypothesis), but later rejected it because of archaeological finds. Why? Because the hypothesis of the J and P authorship was based on the belief that writing did not exist in Moses day, and so the natural answer to such a Biblical “dilemma” was that centuries (over a thousand years) later the story was concocted for political reasons. However, as these atheist / agnostic archaeologists set out to disprove the Bible, they came across battles, writings, etc., that were well before Moses day and the time they purported to be was verified. Writing, in fact, went farther back than Moses, thus disproving the foundation, or basis of the hypothesis. What have I shown in this, and past letters? A. Archaeology supports the names and places of early Genesis; B. The style of writing that is displayed in Genesis 1 and 2 is common to one-author in ancient – contemporary – Jewish writings; C. The style of writing that is displayed in Genesis 1 and 2 is common to one-author in ancient – contemporary – Mesopotamia writings; D. Archaeologists and Linguists who believed in the Documentary Hypothesis [it was taught to them at places like Oxford, Princeton, etc.] left academia only to find evidence to the contrary out in the real world; E. I quoted Kenneth Kitchen (bio below), an expert in Mesopotamia studies, Semitic Languages, texts and epigraphy, and the like, as showing the validity of the one-person authorship of Genesis 1 and 2. What you haven’t shown! A. That archaeology does NOT support the names and places mentioned in early Genesis; B. That the style of writing that is displayed in Genesis 1 and 2 is NOT common to ancient – contemporary – Jewish writings; C. That the style of writing that is displayed in Genesis 1 and 2 is NOT common to ancient – contemporary – Mesopotamia writings; D. That writing did not exist prior to Moses, thus verifying the theory that there were multiple authors of Genesis centuries later when writing became available (which is the foundation – supposition / a priori – of the multiple author theory); E. Nor did you give expert testimony, such as Kitchen, to the contrary that is based NOT on an a priori theory that the Bible is wrong and then trying to prove that belief. You can say what you wish about the Genesis 1 and 2 accounts. You can use modern ways to explain the dual authorship without understanding the ancient texts (whether Jewish or Mesopotamian). You can quote authors who still rely on the findings of Jean Astruc and others from the German schools (Graf-Wellhausen theory), even though their musings are disproven. Etc., Etc.. In fact, you must reject all of the above in order to hold to your unfounded belief, however sincere. Sincerely wrong though you may be.

Kenneth Kitchen – (1932 - ), B. A., Ph.D., educated at the University of Liverpool, kitchen is known for his scholarship in the areas of archaeology, Hebrew Bible, New Testament, Egyptology, Mesopotamian studies, Semitic languages, texts and epigraphy, and other subjects. Kitchen is also a veteran of numerous archaeological excavations. Also a prolific writer, Kitchen is the author of [the famous works] Pharaoh Triumphant (Rameses II), and Ramesside Inscriptions, as well as more than 100 other books and articles. William F. Albright – (1891-1971), Ph.D., Litt. D., was an archaeologist and scholar. He was the W. W. Spence Professor of Semitic Languages and chairman, Oriental Seminary at John Hopkins University. He taught Semitic languages at John Hopkins from 1929 to 1958. He was president of the International Organization of Old Testament Scholars, Director of the American School of Oriental research in Jerusalem, and led a number of archaeological expeditions in the Middle East. He was the author of more than 1,000 publications on archaeological (all peer reviewed), Biblical, and Oriental subjects. He played a prominent role in discrediting the Graf-Wellhausen theory of Pentateuch origins. Sir Frederic George Kenyon – was a British scholar and administrator. He was assistant keeper of manuscripts in the British Museum (1898-1909). He then became director of the museum, an office held until 1930. He published numerous works including: The Paleography of Greek Papyri; Our Bible and Ancient Manuscripts; Handbook of Textual Criticism of the New Testament; and The Bible and Archaeology. Sir William Ramsay – (1851-1939), was a British archaeologist. Educated at Aberdeen, Oxford, and Gottingen, he served as professor of classical archaeology and art at Oxford University (1855-1886), and professor of humanity at Aberdeen University (1886-1911). Knighted in 1906, he made discoveries in geography and topography of Asia Minor and its ancient history. He is author of The Historical Geography of Asia Minor, The Cities of St. Paul, and The Letters to the Seven Churches in Asia. A. T. Robinson – (1919-1983), was an Anglican bishop and theologian. After earning his Ph.D. from Cambridge, he served as dean of Clare College, Cambridge. Robinson wrote a number of books, including The Human Face of God and The Priority of Man. Robert D. Wilson – (1856-1930), was an Old Testament scholar. Wilson was educated at the College of New Jersey (now Princeton University), Western Theological Seminary, and the University of Berlin. He was professor of Semitic philology and Old Testament introduction at Princeton Seminary. He was an advanced linguist (in fact, no one has equaled his capabilities to this day), being fluent in forty-five languages and dialects. He has said: “Now I consider that what was necessary in order to investigate the evidence was, first of all, to know the languages in which the evidence is given. So I… determined that I would learn all the languages that throw light upon the Hebrew, and also the languages into which the Bible had been translated down to 600 A.D., so that I could investigate the text myself. Having done this I claim to be an expert. I defy any man to make an attack upon the Old Testament on the ground of evidence that I cannot investigate. I can get at the facts if they are linguistic. If you know any language I do not know, I will learn it” (quoted in Answers to Tough Question Skeptics Ask About the Christian Faith, by Josh McDowell). He authored Is the Higher Criticism Scholarly?, and Scientific Old Testament Criticism. Edwin M. Yamauchi – is a graduate of Shelton College (B. A.), and Brandeis University (M. A., Ph.D.). He has been professor of history at Miami University (Ohio) for more than 30 years, and his specialty is archaeology, Hebrew Bible, and Semitic languages. His books include Pre-Christian Gnosticism, New Testament Cities in Western Asia Minor, Harper’s World of the New Testament, and Persia and the Bible.  P.S. I do not cite these people for an argument from authority, rather, I cite them as experts in a case that disproves the dual authorship of Genesis. Any one of the above books mentioned would shed light on the subject that you have already decided to be true, or false, as the case may be (a priori, I might add). I find it interesting that “scholars,” and lay-people alike, that reject the Bible as God’s word do so merely on an a priori assumption that it cannot be true because God (in the Judeo-Christian belief) doesn’t exist. They neither read the best and most current positive literature on the subject, but instead choose to reject it by reading only negative writings on the subject. Again, I comment on the very last response you sent me, where you admitted that you haven’t read Faith on Trial, but after that admission, you had a paragraph of why it was wrong!? Thus fortifying my position with every letter you send.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful