Who wrote the Torah?

a reply to: Utnapisjtim

Text Wellhausen is not the only one who has proposed or embraced the idea that the Torah was written by others than Moses.

It is permissible for anyone to believe whatsoever they want to believe but when it comes to influential writers they should be honest in their approach to a subject. I am also a writer (retired) of over twelve nonfictional books and two novels and I can say with certainty that delivery and styles do change with most writers. My entire identification changed with maturity (age).

What I have observed in anti biblical expounders is that most do not offer any proof of claims but instead demand proof of any one who objects or questions their proposals. That to me is disingenuous to say the least. I have some thought as to Torah and that is that Torah was not authored totally by Moses but was compiled by Moses in conjunction with his own writings. I also believe that there are some indications that Moses gathered much of Torah from the traditions of the other tribes but that it was not an evolutionary procedure such as Wellhausen proposes. Now for me to prove my proposal would require me to produce the original literature and I cannot do that any more than Wellhausen could. That is why I say that the entire hypothesis should be changed to Wellhausen's Theory.

I also do suspect that Moses' father in law, Jethro, had much influence in producing Torah as it was originally. Jethro was a priest of Midian but was also a close friend and adviser to Moses. We are not certain of exactly what the Midianites believed but whatever the belief it most certainly was accepted by Moses. We do understand that Midianites came from Midian who was the son of Abraham and being a priest would have given him much information and perhaps literature in producing Torah. Abraham was not only a man of great wealth but also a man of great knowledge. Now that is only supposition on my part but seems logical to me.

Another misconception of Torah is that in which one considers to be the Torah or what one considers to be the Torah Law. It depends upon the understanding of the author. Some will insist that all five books of Torah are considered Law while other will contend that some of Torah is narrative and only about one half is actually Law. So when an author defines Torah it is impossible to actually know what portion was the intent of Moses. This is why it is all guess work on the behalf of everyone. The dead sea scrolls do not offer the solution of this matter in this discussion. The Dead Sea Scrolls only verify certain aspects of accuracy and do not offer a complete time line of the author or authors. Wellhausen was as much in the dark as we are today and in fact was not alive when the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered. To consider him to be an authoritative source in this matter is ridiculous

originally posted by: Murgatroid

originally posted by: CB328
...it's obviously not a divine document.

The odds of Scripture NOT being a divine document are statistically nonexistent.

Scripture IS God-breathed, the laws of probability prove that this is a fact.

The 100% accuracy of prophecies are irrefutable proof that it is scientifically IMPOSSIBLE for anyone to have fulfilled them by chance.

lol. I'm sorry, but it's funny when people say stuff like this.

"Earlier in this book, it said something was gonna happen. Then later in the book, it said that it did happen! That is proof that God wrote it!"

A story written 2,000 years ago with specifics that match up with lines written over 2,000 years ago that were already accepted as scripture, and therefore anyone wanting to write a story trying to get people to accept the character would utilize them, is so far from proof it's not even funny. So lines in the new testament coincide with lines from the old testament? Well duh, you would want to throw stuff like that in, to convince the people who believed in the 'old testament.' But since there is no proof of any of these 'fulfilled prophecies' other than the book which was written to convince people of the 'fulfilled prophecies' contained within, then it is so far away from being proof of anything that it's beyond ridiculous, but it is funny.

"A text that I have to just believe was written after another text I'm supposed to just believe, and one that was written more recently says things happened that the older text said would happen! PROOF OF GOD!" lol. Please don't throw around the word 'proof' like it's meaningless.

originally posted by: AutumnWitch657
I don't believe it was ever claimed that the bible or Torah had only one author. a reply to: CB328

Do you know what the Torah is? Because it obviously is claimed all the time that Moses was the sole author...hence them often being called 'the Books of Moses.'

originally posted by: Seede
I believe that from some of this you will see the fraud of this hypothesis and realize that this is not hypothesis but theory at the best.

...this also makes no sense. A hypothesis is basically a plausible idea. A theory is a hypothesis with significant substantiating evidence. So 'this is not hypothesis but theory at best' translates 'This is not just a plausible idea, but an idea with significant substantiating evidence at best.'

originally posted by: Seede
a reply to: Utnapisjtim

Text Wellhausen is not the only one who has proposed or embraced the idea that the Torah was written by others than Moses.

It is permissible for anyone to believe whatsoever they want to believe but when it comes to influential writers they should be honest in their approach to a subject.

This is not so much about what we believe, but what we can know. How do we develop systems for knowledge, how do we discern between what is utterlu BS and what is probable, thinkable, and even plausible? And where does these metods suddenly challenge doctrine and dogma? Thing is we don't know, really, we can only trust the things we know. And one of those things we can know, is that the Torah was indeed written by many people over quite a stretch of time. How canwe know? Method and things like falsification and scientific study.

I am also a writer (retired) of over twelve nonfictional books and two novels and I can say with certainty that delivery and styles do change with most writers. My entire identification changed with maturity (age).

As it tends to change.

What I have observed in anti biblical expounders is that most do not offer any proof of claims but instead demand proof of any one who objects or questions their proposals. That to me is disingenuous to say the least. I have some thought as to Torah and that is that Torah was not authored totally by Moses but was compiled by Moses in conjunction with his own writings. I also believe that there are some indications that Moses gathered much of Torah from the traditions of the other tribes but that it was not an evolutionary procedure such as Wellhausen proposes. Now for me to prove my proposal would require me to produce the original literature and I cannot do that any more than Wellhausen could. That is why I say that the entire hypothesis should be changed to Wellhausen's Theory.

If there is one thing that threatens the falsification of the Torah, it is people who claim without knowledge or study that the infallible word of the omnipresent god of Jahveh Elohim or something threatens the coarse of sense and the way we think! Why is it that what people thought 3500 years ago shall be copied and pasted rigorously, without err, to satisfy some group of dead stoneagers that just recently, just before they died, got the idea that water inside homes is actually OK? Even though it is the invention of Satan?

I also do suspect that Moses' father in law, Jethro, had much influence in producing Torah as it was originally. Jethro was a priest of Midian but was also a close friend and adviser to Moses. We are not certain of exactly what the Midianites believed but whatever the belief it most certainly was accepted by Moses. We do understand that Midianites came from Midian who was the son of Abraham and being a priest would have given him much information and perhaps literature in producing Torah. Abraham was not only a man of great wealth but also a man of great knowledge. Now that is only supposition on my part but seems logical to me.

Jethro was a son of Cain. A Kenite. Thing is. Don't hate the devil, just because a book apparently teaches so. The language is preoccupied with peoples' thoughts, but things like consequence and preoccupied delivery, well, we like too believe we shall hate the devil, but Jesus tells us not to. Bible actually displays Satan as a beautiful, correct and a decent fella. He doesn't want to be thrown down to Earth to destroy it, he likes us too much and loves to see us make it. And he proves our ground again and again. Still it is through our bias of HATE that Satan comes to mind. It is only language. And Bias. Angels will suffer.

Another misconception of Torah is that in which one considers to be the Torah or what one considers to be the Torah Law. It depends upon the understanding of the author.

Indeed. There are §§§'s and there is story. That's where I come in. Showing you that there is a part of legal matter and there is the epic, the story made to accomplish the Law. Stuff like Abraham and Cain, Moses and David. This is nothing much law, so very much mythical programming. Through the Torah we are programmed to react decently to proper dilemmas. And the answer is given in the sound of the words.

Some will insist that all five books of Torah are considered Law while other will contend that some of Torah is narrative and only about one half is actually Law. So when an author defines Torah it is impossible to actually know what portion was the intent of Moses. This is why it is all guess work on the behalf of everyone. The dead sea scrolls do not offer the solution of this matter in this discussion. The Dead Sea Scrolls only verify certain aspects of accuracy and do not offer a complete time line of the author or authors. Wellhausen was as much in the dark as we are today and in fact was not alive when the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered. To consider him to be an authoritative source in this matter is ridiculous

My incentive here isn't to make people realise the Torah is all bullcrap and should be considered bullcrap. But we should understand that it is not the infallible word of God, that is a person, and that word will never exist, that is the prophecy. At Jesus' time, the expectancy of him had grown like a flood to eliminate the possibility of him ever being real. Jesus fulfilled all my expectations, but I don't include anything but Torah. Moses is enough. Jesus did well and he is the daddy. But added the Prophets and the Church, Jesus is impossible, a character of myth and makebelieve, majick and lies. My friend Jesus, lived and lives, the god of the Church cannot live. It's limits are designed never to let Jesus enter reality, for if he did, they , the Church would loose their divine rights and woud be understood and they woud simply just dissapear in a puff of logic. Church is hate in system. Jesus is understanding and survival. Freck he church, frech anything trying to diminsh sense and critical thought. Jesus is Humanism and science, not myth and legend.

originally posted by: TheJourney

originally posted by: AutumnWitch657
I don't believe it was ever claimed that the bible or Torah had only one author. a reply to: CB328

Do you know what the Torah is? Because it obviously is claimed all the time that Moses was the sole author...hence them often being called 'the Books of Moses.'

Youre utterly wrong. Only certain orthodox Jews (because they have to) and some uneducated Christians (because they simply don't know better) still believe Torah was written by Moses. Internet is a perfect arena for trolls and unfortunately it has brought us to this stance. Torah IS the work of many hands and not in a million years could it havebeen the product of one man's writings. Clear. Check. And any objection dismissed.

originally posted by: TheJourney

originally posted by: Seede
I believe that from some of this you will see the fraud of this hypothesis and realize that this is not hypothesis but theory at the best.

...this also makes no sense. A hypothesis is basically a plausible idea. A theory is a hypothesis with significant substantiating evidence. So 'this is not hypothesis but theory at best' translates 'This is not just a plausible idea, but an idea with significant substantiating evidence at best.'

You wouldn't understand the difference between a hypothesis and a theory if people told you. And that's what they do, ey? Tell you what to think? Isn't that what Catholicism and spiritual New Age is all about? Religion? Here's science with a system of knowing wrong from right, but that is Satan right? Since it shows the devil shine through the words of the pastor and they don't want that!

originally posted by: Utnapisjtim

originally posted by: TheJourney

originally posted by: Seede
I believe that from some of this you will see the fraud of this hypothesis and realize that this is not hypothesis but theory at the best.

...this also makes no sense. A hypothesis is basically a plausible idea. A theory is a hypothesis with significant substantiating evidence. So 'this is not hypothesis but theory at best' translates 'This is not just a plausible idea, but an idea with significant substantiating evidence at best.'

You wouldn't understand the difference between a hypothesis and a theory if people told you. And that's what they do, ey? Tell you what to think? Isn't that what Catholicism and spiritual New Age is all about? Religion? Here's science with a system of knowing wrong from right, but that is Satan right? Since it shows the devil shine through the words of the pastor and they don't want that!

...do you disagree with what I'm saying about the difference between a hypothesis and a theory..? You think hypothesis means it has more evidence than than a theory? I mean...basic English definitions agree with me...just google 'difference between a hypothesis and a theory.'

originally posted by: Utnapisjtim

originally posted by: TheJourney

originally posted by: AutumnWitch657
I don't believe it was ever claimed that the bible or Torah had only one author. a reply to: CB328

Do you know what the Torah is? Because it obviously is claimed all the time that Moses was the sole author...hence them often being called 'the Books of Moses.'

Youre utterly wrong. Only certain orthodox Jews (because they have to) and some uneducated Christians (because they simply don't know better) still believe Torah was written by Moses. Internet is a perfect arena for trolls and unfortunately it has brought us to this stance. Torah IS the work of many hands and not in a million years could it havebeen the product of one man's writings. Clear. Check. And any objection dismissed.

People who believe in the literal truth of the bible believe Moses wrote the Torah...it's the traditional interpretation...I never said I believed it, but for you to act like noone says that is inaccurate.

originally posted by: TheJourney

originally posted by: Utnapisjtim

originally posted by: TheJourney

originally posted by: Seede
I believe that from some of this you will see the fraud of this hypothesis and realize that this is not hypothesis but theory at the best.

...this also makes no sense. A hypothesis is basically a plausible idea. A theory is a hypothesis with significant substantiating evidence. So 'this is not hypothesis but theory at best' translates 'This is not just a plausible idea, but an idea with significant substantiating evidence at best.'

You wouldn't understand the difference between a hypothesis and a theory if people told you. And that's what they do, ey? Tell you what to think? Isn't that what Catholicism and spiritual New Age is all about? Religion? Here's science with a system of knowing wrong from right, but that is Satan right? Since it shows the devil shine through the words of the pastor and they don't want that!

...do you disagree with what I'm saying about the difference between a hypothesis and a theory..? You think hypothesis means it has more evidence than than a theory? I mean...basic English definitions agree with me...just google 'difference between a hypothesis and a theory.'

All I know is that you challenge a well founded hypothesis, calling it what was it again? You kind of showed in an instant that you were unknowing and unable. Sorry pal. I guess Einstein and Newton are fools in your universe? Devils?

originally posted by: TheJourney

originally posted by: Utnapisjtim

originally posted by: TheJourney

originally posted by: AutumnWitch657
I don't believe it was ever claimed that the bible or Torah had only one author. a reply to: CB328

Do you know what the Torah is? Because it obviously is claimed all the time that Moses was the sole author...hence them often being called 'the Books of Moses.'

Youre utterly wrong. Only certain orthodox Jews (because they have to) and some uneducated Christians (because they simply don't know better) still believe Torah was written by Moses. Internet is a perfect arena for trolls and unfortunately it has brought us to this stance. Torah IS the work of many hands and not in a million years could it havebeen the product of one man's writings. Clear. Check. And any objection dismissed.

People who believe in the literal truth of the bible believe Moses wrote the Torah...it's the traditional interpretation...I never said I believed it, but for you to act like noone says that is inaccurate.

Torah means Law in Hebrew. It wasn't until after babylon that Torah became the name of the Pentateuch. The Law as edited over several hundred years, and the people behind this organised intention of getting better laws and better people, well, it reached status quo a few thousand years ago. The rest of the world continued, while religion suddenly said pass and ended up in oblivion and politics. Hm.

originally posted by: Utnapisjtim

originally posted by: TheJourney

originally posted by: Utnapisjtim

originally posted by: TheJourney

originally posted by: Seede
I believe that from some of this you will see the fraud of this hypothesis and realize that this is not hypothesis but theory at the best.

...this also makes no sense. A hypothesis is basically a plausible idea. A theory is a hypothesis with significant substantiating evidence. So 'this is not hypothesis but theory at best' translates 'This is not just a plausible idea, but an idea with significant substantiating evidence at best.'

You wouldn't understand the difference between a hypothesis and a theory if people told you. And that's what they do, ey? Tell you what to think? Isn't that what Catholicism and spiritual New Age is all about? Religion? Here's science with a system of knowing wrong from right, but that is Satan right? Since it shows the devil shine through the words of the pastor and they don't want that!

...do you disagree with what I'm saying about the difference between a hypothesis and a theory..? You think hypothesis means it has more evidence than than a theory? I mean...basic English definitions agree with me...just google 'difference between a hypothesis and a theory.'

All I know is that you challenge a well founded hypothesis, calling it what was it again? You kind of showed in an instant that you were unknowing and unable. Sorry pal. I guess Einstein and Newton are fools in your universe? Devils?

I don't even know what you're talking about... I was just saying that theory means it has more evidence than hypothesis, whereas the person I was responding yo( you?) said it was opposite... Which is really just a non-debatable fact, so idk what you're trying to debate me about...

originally posted by: TheJourney
I don't even know what you're talking about...

And there you go...
Format is at best challenging another format.

a reply to: [post=18177818]Utnapisjtim[/post

Text Youre utterly wrong. Only certain orthodox Jews (because they have to) and some uneducated Christians (because they simply don't know better) still believe Torah was written by Moses. Internet is a perfect arena for trolls and unfortunately it has brought us to this stance. Torah IS the work of many hands and not in a million years could it havebeen the product of one man's writings. Clear. Check. And any objection dismissed.

Once again you have made a broad statement and you cannot prove or even introduce this in the field of common sense. You need to realize that a claim of penning a literature and gathering literature would be different in that era of Moses. The claim that Genesis is the first book of Moses does not necessarily mean that Moses penned the entire literature. You know better than that and this leads me to believe that you are not genuine at all. Moses had no practice of quoting another source in literature as is practiced today. When you gather other author's writings and introduce them in your book that is not dishonest if the quoted authors are given recognition. The Internet is a good source if you do not have the material in your library and can lead one into many great works that one can purchase. You have not one bit of evidence that Torah was evolutionary except through other authors who you have relied on and they certainly have no more evidence than what is being touted today as "I believe."

Text Jethro was a son of Cain. A Kenite.

Are you serious? Kenites were a sect of Midianites and are regarded as the same peoples. Abraham propagated the Midianites through his son Midian. He was not the son of Cain as you stated. That is why I said that Jethro was the son of Abraham simply because that is his ancestral seed. I should have said that he was from the house of Abraham but nevertheless He most certainly was not of the seed of Cain.

Gen 25:1 Then again Abraham took a wife, and her name was Keturah.
Gen 25:2 And she bare him Zimran, and Jokshan, and Medan, and Midian, and Ishbak, and Shuah.
Gen 25:3 And Jokshan begat Sheba, and Dedan. And the sons of Dedan were Asshurim, and Letushim, and Leummim.
Gen 25:4 And the sons of Midian; Ephah, and Epher, and Hanoch, and Abida, and Eldaah. All these were the children of Keturah.

originally posted by: Murgatroid

originally posted by: CB328
...it's obviously not a divine document.

The odds of Scripture NOT being a divine document are statistically nonexistent.

Scripture IS God-breathed, the laws of probability prove that this is a fact.

The 100% accuracy of prophecies are irrefutable proof that it is scientifically IMPOSSIBLE for anyone to have fulfilled them by chance.

Over a quarter of all the verses in the Bible contain a prediction about the future. Altogether, 737 separate forecasts are made, from some only mentioned once, to others mentioned hundreds of times.

Of these, 594 (over 80%) have already come true. Since those that have not, are all concerned with the end of the world, which obviously has not happened yet, the Bible has actually achieved 100% accuracy. All that could have taken place already has done so, which should be ample grounds for confidence that the rest will also be fulfilled. www.danielpipes.org...

"Perhaps the most compelling of evidences demonstrating that the Bible is the word of God is its unswerving ability to accurately predict future events, often in minute details. Specific prophesies are conspicuously absent from the 26 other religious books that claim to be scripture, including the Muslim's Koran, the Book of Mormon, the Hindu Vedas, and Buddhist writings. This in itself should be a major eye-opener to the honest skeptic. " Accuracy Of Prophecy

Professor Emeritus of Science at Westmont College, Peter Stoner, has calculated the probability of one man fulfilling the major prophecies made concerning the Messiah. The estimates were worked out by twelve different classes representing some 600 university students.

After examining only eight different prophecies (Idem, 106), they conservatively estimated that the chance of one man fulfilling all eight prophecies was one in 10^17.

Mathematical Probability that Jesus is the Christ

Another attestation to the Bible’s divine authorship is the vast number of detailed biblical prophecies that have come true exactly as foretold. We see the psalmist, for example, telling of the crucifixion of Jesus Christ nearly a thousand years before it occurred (Psalm 22), and hundreds of years before crucifixion was even invented! Simply put, it would be impossible for human beings to have seen so far into the future with such precision and accuracy hundreds of times. Indeed, it would be completely illogical to believe these proven prophecies are anything other than the work of God. Incidentally, and amazingly, probability experts tell us the mathematical odds of just forty-eight prophecies regarding one person (i.e. Christ) coming true as foretold are one in ten to the 157th power!

Is the Bible a fairy tale?

The chances of just 48 out of the 456 prophecies being fulfilled in one person are 1 in 10 to the 157 power.

That's — 1 in 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,
000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,
000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000.

"All this illustrates why it is absolutely impossible for anyone to have fulfilled the Messianic prophecies by chance. In fact, a leading authority on the probability theory, Emile Borel states that once we go past one chance in 10 to the 50th power, the probabilities are so small it's impossible to think they will ever occur."

LINK

"...once we go past one chance in 10 to the 50th power, the probabilities are so small it's impossible to think they will ever occur....Mathematicians generally agree that, statistically, any odds beyond 1 in 1050 have a zero probability of ever happening.... This is Borel's law in action which was derived by mathematician Emil Borel....

Here is one last illustration of the immensity of the number 10 to the 157th power and why the science of probability shows we are dealing with the miraculous… Imagine one ant traveling at the speed of only one inch every 15 billion years. If he could only carry one atom at a time, how many atoms could he move in 10 to the 157th power of years?

He would, even at that incredibly slow speed, be able to move all the atoms in 600,000 trillion trillion trillion trillion universes the size for our universe, a distance of 30 billion light years! Again, by the laws of probability, all of this means that it is simply impossible for 48 prophecies to be fulfilled by chance. LINK

Very amazing that they could predict the stars so accurately !!

And even more so that a whole lot of completely brainwashed yet smart people could follow this evil script so nicely, all the while believing that they are being guided by a higher source....such circular logic.

Anyone can follow a plan, it seems no one can differentiate the obvious, THEY

Your GOD, is so far different than you believe, and has not been "conscious" or "aware" for said TRILLIONS of years.

Time to awaken a FAR deeper eye, that can actually look for the truth instead of being limited by books designed to do just that.

Either way, you cannot prove a dam thing about any of the religions, or books, and you dare not actually find WHAT IS GOING ON TOTALLY, because you believe this is how it is "supposed to be".

originally posted by: Seede
a reply to: [post=18177818]Utnapisjtim[/post

Text Youre utterly wrong. Only certain orthodox Jews (because they have to) and some uneducated Christians (because they simply don't know better) still believe Torah was written by Moses. Internet is a perfect arena for trolls and unfortunately it has brought us to this stance. Torah IS the work of many hands and not in a million years could it havebeen the product of one man's writings. Clear. Check. And any objection dismissed.

Once again you have made a broad statement and you cannot prove or even introduce this in the field of common sense. You need to realize that a claim of penning a literature and gathering literature would be different in that era of Moses. The claim that Genesis is the first book of Moses does not necessarily mean that Moses penned the entire literature. You know better than that and this leads me to believe that you are not genuine at all. Moses had no practice of quoting another source in literature as is practiced today. When you gather other author's writings and introduce them in your book that is not dishonest if the quoted authors are given recognition. The Internet is a good source if you do not have the material in your library and can lead one into many great works that one can purchase. You have not one bit of evidence that Torah was evolutionary except through other authors who you have relied on and they certainly have no more evidence than what is being touted today as "I believe."

Are you saying I need to prove the Bible wasn't written by Moses? Guess I need proof Santa doesn't exist too. Seriously man. Why does the Torah write about Moses in third person? Why is it written in several different dialects belonging to two different stages of Hebrew over a span of half a millennium? Moses may indeed have inspired the Torah, and the Law may indeed have been dictated by God himself, I don't argue that, but to say Moses wrote it is like saying King David wrote Paul's letter to the Romans or that NT was written by one person. It's just no way it can be true.

Text Jethro was a son of Cain. A Kenite.

Are you serious? Kenites were a sect of Midianites and are regarded as the same peoples. Abraham propagated the Midianites through his son Midian. He was not the son of Cain as you stated. That is why I said that Jethro was the son of Abraham simply because that is his ancestral seed. I should have said that he was from the house of Abraham but nevertheless He most certainly was not of the seed of Cain.

Gen 25:1 Then again Abraham took a wife, and her name was Keturah.
Gen 25:2 And she bare him Zimran, and Jokshan, and Medan, and Midian, and Ishbak, and Shuah.
Gen 25:3 And Jokshan begat Sheba, and Dedan. And the sons of Dedan were Asshurim, and Letushim, and Leummim.
Gen 25:4 And the sons of Midian; Ephah, and Epher, and Hanoch, and Abida, and Eldaah. All these were the children of Keturah.

==> www.jewishencyclopedia.com...

a reply to: Utnapisjtim

TextAre you saying I need to prove the Bible wasn't written by Moses? Guess I need proof Santa doesn't exist too. Seriously man. Why does the Torah write about Moses in third person? Why is it written in several different dialects belonging to two different stages of Hebrew over a span of half a millennium? Moses may indeed have inspired the Torah, and the Law may indeed have been dictated by God himself, I don't argue that, but to say Moses wrote it is like saying King David wrote Paul's letter to the Romans or that NT was written by one person. It's just no way it can be true.

Once again Utnapisitim you do not comprehend what you read. I have never said that Moses penned (wrote) the entire Torah. Show me where I have made that statement. Let me bring this down to your level of English.

A person writes a book. That book is copied by many other people in various languages. The original book is worn out and destroyed. All you now have are copies and perhaps more copies of the original copies. You do not have the original literature to compare the copies which you are left with. What are you left with to understand? You cannot say with certainty that what you have left is a letter by letter and even the original language that was used in the original book. You are left with tradition at best. Now it may be true (but not provable) that some portions of the book were copied by different people at different times and compiled into another book. But now is the question. Is the book you now have the same as the original? You do not know and no one can possibly know till the true literature is produced.

That original book may have been compiled from a hundred different sources along with the author's writings but not quoted as such. As the author may die and his work may have additions, it is still his work and not the work of those that added to his work. But you are still left with the fact that the original work is not available regardless of those additions. I said from the start of my rant that I believe the Torah did have various input and that all of the tribes and even Jethro had some influence in Torah but that I could not prove my theory any more than you or Wellhausen can prove your theories.

Now we come to the word Kenites and Midianites. I insist that both are the same. One was embraced by the other and when you say that Jethro was a priest of Midian but was still a Kenite can be misleading. The tribal Midianites were absorbed into the tribe of Judah in the days of Solomon so does that mean that the Judahites are actually Midianites or even Kenites? Then there are some who insist that the Judahites are not true Jews at all but are scoundrels called Edomites. Take you pick. I believe that Jethro was of the son of Abram (Midian) and that through him his tribal identification became Kenites. How Cain survived the flood is beyond me.

a reply to: Seede

Thanks for clearing up. In understandable English. For you did say Torah was not authored totally by Moses but was compiled by Moses in conjunction with his own writings. Some might interpret that as a claim that the Torah was part written, compiled and edited together into one corpus, by Moses? In other words, the work of one man, Moses?

As for Being both a Kenite and a Midjanite, it's like being a Klarkson and a Newyorker, and an American, and an Earthling. His clan was the Kenites, his dwelling was in Midjan.

Interesting topic. I think this one can never be answered, unless we discover another ancient document that exactly answers this question. But beyond that, it's likely to stay unanswered. It might just be safe to say different groups wrote these different first books of the Christian Bible.

a reply to: Murgatroid

Sorry, I can't put much stock in fifth or sixth-hand stories, despite your arrogant and pompous attitude toward my moniker.

"Not even the Bible claims that Mark was an eye witness to Jesus’ ministry".
"That’s it. The source for the gospel of Mark is other peoples’ stories and writings. In other words, all of Mark’s sources were at best, second hand, more likely fifth or sixth hand. What happens to stories that circulate orally for years? Obviously, they come to be changed in the retelling. Thus, the source for much of the synoptic gospels is no more than hearsay.
Apologists dismiss the charge of “hearsay” by pointing to the strength of the “oral tradition”. The simple childhood game of “Telephone” is sufficient to illustrate the point that stories told mouth to mouth for 35 years or more can’t possibly retain their original content".

thechurchoftruth.wordpress.com...