In the past few hundred years, the Bible has been under severe attack by scientific and philosophical skeptics of all sorts. In this scientific age the most-attacked book of the Bible has arguably been Genesis, particularly the first 11 chapters. Long-age geology, big-bang cosmology, secular archaeology, liberal theology, and philosophical attacks on miracles in the Bible have deceived many people to believe that the Bible is not true and therefore cannot be trusted.[1]Notice the paranoid nature of this view. Not only does he just dogmatically charge any scholarship that disagrees with his view as an attack. It's not wrong, it's an attack aimed at subverting God's truth. But they go even further in blaming even Christians. They are blaming Christians for attacking the Bible:
"One of the major attacks on the Bible in the past three hundred years has been directed against Moses and his authorship of the Pentateuch, the first five books of the Old Testament (Genesis–Deuteronomy). Such attacks on these foundational books of the Bible comeboth from non-Christians as well as professing Christians."[2] It's not enough to profess Christ, one must see everything their way.
Here again christians are rebelling and seeking to undermine the word of God? Why? They can't tolerate scholarship since it doesn't work at keeping them in power. They rebuke ordinary views of scholarship when they fail to tow the party line. They charge that "Seminary courses, theology books, introductions to the Pentateuch in Bibles, and the secular media have promoted the man-made idea that Moses did not write the Pentateuch..."[3] They need the Bible to have authority strong enough to underpin the evangelical world and to write off liberal and other theological views. So, therefore, Moses must have authored the Pentateuch because that would give them that authority and defending Mosaic authorship drives the idea home. Thus they hate theories like JEDP. They quote from an ordinary introduction to JEDP and bring the accusations:
Despite its unity of plan and purpose, the book is a complex work, not to be attributed to a single original author. Several sources, or literary traditions, that the final redactor used in his composition are discernible. These are the Yahwist (J), Elohist (E), and Priestly (P) sources which in turn reflect older oral traditions....The introduction to the Old Testament in another Bible translation says that the J document was written by someone much later than Moses in the southern kingdom of Judah and the E document was written by someone in the northern kingdom of Israel.[4]JEDP is a fine theory. As I have said before, I prefer to use other methods. JEDP was almost universally accepted in the 60s but now has collapsed. Yet the Evangelicals are still fighting it. That for a time the vast majority of scholars were trying to destroy God's word but now the attack collapsed but evangelicals are still warning of the danger.Next they will be digging trenches to fight the Keiser.[5] but I have no real problem with JEDP. The thing is that theory is not an attack. Nor is it an attempt to undermine the word of God.As a theory of Biblical study it's no worse that the synoptic problem. But then there are evangelocas who also suspect the synoptic problem as well.
Moseic authorship is one of their major ralleying points:
The attack on the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch is nothing less than an attack on the veracity, reliability, and authority of the Word of Almighty God. Christians should believe God, rather than the fallible, sinful skeptics inside and outside the Church who, in their intellectual arrogance, are consciously or unconsciously trying to undermine the Word so that they can justify in their own minds (but not before God) their rebellion against God. As Paul says in Romans 3:4, “Let God be true but every man a liar” (NKJV).[6]Mosaic Authorship is not in the Bible. It is doubtful that he wrote about his own death. so there have been other writers for the Pentatuch in addition to Moses. The right wing thinkers we're discussing have dubbed Mosaic authorship as the truth of God but they have no real basis for deeming it so. Their assertion of Mosaic authorship is no more the world of God than is JEDP. Apparently their real criteria is whatever lines up with their view of God and all else is an attack on God.
The issues they choose to define the battle lines are just the outlines of scholarly progress in the modern world. Authorship, date of composition, redaction, these are the basics. If we followed their kind of "scholarship" Biblical understanding would be stagnant. It has nothing to do with belief or with the Christian faith. I believe in all the basic things any Christian sees as the outlines of the faith: Deity of Christ, his death,burial and resurrection, salvation by grace. The insistence upon Mosaic authorship is like worrying about using instrumental music.There is no passage that says "make a Bible'' or that tells us how to interpret how to do Biblical study. There is no passage that mandates Mosaic authorship.
When they speak of "the word of God" they really mean their opinion of the Bible. Disagreement with them is the major sin. They are idolizing their own world view.
Notes
[1]Dr. Terry Mortenson and Bodie Hodge,"The Documentary Hypothesis: Moses, Genesis, and the JEDP? Appendix C," Answers in Genesis, website (December 3, 2016) https://answersingenesis.org/bible-characters/moses/documentary-hypothesis-moses-genesis-jedp/ accessed April 1,2022.
[2] Ibid.
[3] Ibid.
[4] Ibid quoting: The New American Bible(Nashville, TN: Memorial Bible Publishers, 1976), 1.
[5] David M.Carr, "Changes in Pentateuchal Criticism" PDF,2014, 434
https://www.academia.edu/25470455/Changes_in_Pentateuchal_Criticism
JEDP aka "Wellhausen hypothesis" (named for Julius wellhausen) was almost universally accepted for most of the 20th century.The consensus has now collapsed.
[6] Mortensen and Hodge, "The Documentary Hypothesis..." op cit.
Joe Hinman
3 comments:
You sketch things in well. Terry Mortenson is not someone that I'm familiar with but someone making Mortenson's arguments may be in a conversation with a few dozens scholars with similar views. So, the problem isn't actually the problems that it causes within academia. It's not impacting the scholarship and standing of those who Mortenson attacks. He is providing support for other academics and intellectuals who find his views appealing. And that provides a foundation for a large group of pastors and literalist evangelicals. The way Mortenson "elevates" his critiques into demonizing attacks is the kind of stance that John Wesley actually described, when speaking of some of his own people, as Bigotry. Wesley's biggest concern was not the Bigoted attack per se but the way that it undermines the overall mission of the universal Church. If those with two views in disagreement are still contributing to that overall mission to redeem and transform all creation, it is a net good. The danger here is the reinforcement of the ideological war within scholarship and how it drives the larger cultural and ideological drive seen between news networks and across social media.
he is turning away from learning about scholarship those who look to his knowledge thinking that is the true scholarship of the believer. I know he's not affecting real scholars.
There's something wrong with urging belief in a thing for any other reason than because it's true. In this case, the message is not "believe in Mosaic Authorship because it's true, and here is the evidence," but "believe in Mosaic authorship because to do otherwise undermines God's authority." Which is patently ridiculous. The authority they are really guarding is their own.
Post a Comment