There are traditions concerning who wrote each of the biblical books—the Five Books of Moses are supposed to be by Moses, the book of Lamentations by the. Richard Elliot Friedman, a renowned biblical scholar, and author of, devoted Catholic, wrote a book in which he explained that Moses may have been the. Who Wrote the Bible Richard Elliot Friedman - Download as PDF File .pdf) or view presentation slides online.

Who Wrote The Bible Friedman Pdf

Language:English, Indonesian, Portuguese
Genre:Personal Growth
Published (Last):27.08.2016
ePub File Size:26.88 MB
PDF File Size:12.51 MB
Distribution:Free* [*Registration needed]
Uploaded by: MARIANA

Friedman has written that most rare of books: a legitimate intellectual contribution that is also a good read. The field of biblical studies will be enriched by this. Pentateuch [First five books appearing in the Old Testament]: Friedman suggests that Ibn Ezra recognized that these passages confirmed ibn Yashush's claim. Who wrote the Bible? byFriedman, Richard Elliott. Publication date For print- disabled users. Borrow this book to access EPUB and PDF files.

In commentaries on Genesis, Exodus, and Numbers, in so far as they include a translation, differentiation according to the sources of the Pentateuch is the rule. The very authors who offer a version of the pentateuchal sources without a commentary are apt to overvalue the persuasive power of this presentation. It could not have been better invented by the opponents of the hypothesis themselves.

This considerable claim can only relate to the fact that the compilation deviates from earlier work by now including the whole of Leviticus, the law-related parts of Numbers, and the whole of Deuteronomy.

Get a FREE e-book by joining our mailing list today!

Admittedly, the evidential value of this expansion is limited, because a differentiation of sources does not in any case come into question in these texts or—as in the main section of the book of Deuteronomy—is related not to the Documentary Hypothesis but to the redaction history of the Deuteronomistic History.

An erroneous impression is even given when, for example, the whole of Leviticus is assigned without differentiation to the Priestly Code, with the exception of the commandment about booths, Lev —43, and the mention of the exile at the close of the curse in Lev —45, both of which are assigned to the redaction R for historical reasons, not literary ones.

The Holiness Code is only referred to in a footnote on p. An over-simplification of this kind gives a false impression of the literary character of the sources. Earlier research never distinguished the sources in as undifferentiated a way as Friedman, and anyone who has eyes to see can perceive even on the basis of the English translation that the simple coherence that Friedman suggests through the typography does not in fact exist.

On the one hand, these make the book interesting for the discussion, but on the other they are a problem. To take one example, Friedman assumes a separate source for Gen —28, 30—32; ; —29; —26, 32a: the Book of Records.

This hypothesis, which is based on Gen 5, can be found in earlier research as well. It is based on the deviating toledot formula in Gen sefer toledot instead of toledot , but Friedman does not define the Book of Records as a source within the framework of P which would make sense but as a source parallel to P that was only linked to the other sources by R. In this way he destroys a fundamental premise of the Documentary Hypothesis: the genealogical and chronological framework of P.

Who Wrote the Bible? Summary & Study Guide

The toledot formula usually counts as characteristic of P, but Friedman now assigns it to R Gen a; ; ; , 27; , 19; ; a. It is supposed to have been taken over in imitation from the Book of Records.

Only is left to P, no reason for this being given. The fact that Friedman has examined the share of R is undoubtedly useful. Earlier the customary procedure was to distribute the text between the sources without any remainder, and this was one of the contestable aspects of the Documentary Hypothesis.


There are numerous texts in the Pentateuch to which the proven criteria of source differentiation cannot be applied, because they combine the characteristics of several sources. In such cases it is better to dispense with forced analyses and to accept that these passages already presuppose the redactional combination of the pentateuchal sources. For Friedman, the Documentary Hypothesis is, essentially speaking, self-evident.

For more information on obtaining a subscription to RBL, please visit http: These arguments are of varying force.

This is not by chance. This, too, is not fortuitous.

Who Wrote the Bible Richard Elliot Friedman

Again, P prevails. This argument can also be read as a pointer to a certain weakness in the Documentary Hypothesis.

The direction of the dependence is not as certain as Friedman seems to think. For example, it can be shown that P was originally dependent on Ezekiel, not vice versa. Surprisingly, he dates J as belonging to the period of the divided kingdom, thereby taking too little account of the fact that most of the stories about the patriarchs are set in the northern kingdom of Israel and that the tribes are there presented as a unity, which was no longer the case after Israel and Judah had separated 18ff.

Closer to the customary view is the dating of the Elohist, which is placed in the northern kingdom of Israel. What is strange is the proposal 21—24 that P should be dated as belonging to the period of Hezekiah B.

Friedman ignores many cogent arguments according to which P did not precede Deuteronomy but succeeded it. On the other hand, as regards the connection between Deuteronomy and Josiah, he follows the generally accepted arguments 24— The same is true of the sequence JE—P 24—26ff.

About the relationship of the Elohist to Deuteronomism which was an important question in earlier research , the reader learns nothing. The Deuteronomistic redaction is presented according to F M.

Other solutions are not mentioned. But this also is true only with some reservations.

It is not without justice that the existence of the source E has been questioned by many scholars since W. Rudolph and P. Ein Irrweg der Pentateuchkritik? Giessen, There were almost from the beginning several comparable presentations of the text differentiated according to sources.

An early example was K. Ilgen presented the sources in German translation, as E. Friedman proposes that Ezra is R. Ancient Jewish history is central to Friedman's arguments. Two major areas develop, the Kingdom of Israel and the Kingdom of Judah.

The Kingdom of Israel begins its own Temple in order that people there can more conveniently bring their livestock for sacrifice. While the Temple in Jerusalem uses cherubs to form the throne of God, the Temple in Israel uses cast golden calves for the same purpose.

This split becomes contentious between the two priesthoods, the northern Israeli that honors Moses and the southern Judah that honors Aaron. These differences become reflected in the Bible and help to determine which text was written by whom.I think the book helped me gain an appreciation for the Old Testament as far as understanding why and by whom it was likely written.

Skip to main content. Uploaded by Craig.

The next time period spans from to B. Internet Archive Books.