From: Terry M. Gray (grayt@lamar.colostate.edu)
Date: Sat Nov 30 2002 - 12:38:22 EST
Bob Schneider wrote:
>To follow up on David's comments about source criticism, I am finishing a
>semester course devoted to the Book of Genesis, that mine of jewels. It
>seemed to me, as I introduced my students to source and redaction criticism,
>that there is evidence enough that Genesis is a redacted work that draws
>from more than one source. After reading Gordon Wenham's critique of the
>hypothesis that the Flood story contains two major sources, despite his
>argument to the contrary, I still remain convinced that there are indeed two
>accounts woven together. Where I found Wenham convincing is in his analysis
>of the structure of the Flood story, an excellent example of chiastic or
>palistrophic arrangement of episodes and details into a coherent and
>striking narrative. It seems to me that what we have here is an outstanding
>job of redaction. This creative editor-writer, whoever he was, was able to
>bring these sources together in such a way that the account reads smoothly
>and effectively. I think the differences in the sources are still evident,
>but they do not detract from the movement of the narrative, and in fact may
>be missed by a reader not alerted to them. I do not hesitate to believe
>that this redactor was inspired.
Just to note that there is nothing in Bob's comments here that is
*necessarily* inconsistent with the Old Princeton/Hodge-Warfield view
of inspiration, infallibility, and inerrancy. Perhaps the redactor
was Moses himself and the sources existed prior to Moses ;-). Since
Moses lived hundreds of years after the events of Genesis (and since
the view of inspiration that I am talking about is not a mechanical
dictation model), it is necessary that Moses obtained his information
from other sources either some oral traditions or perhaps some prior
written accounts.
The claim of inspiration applies to the final assembled text. Even
E.J. Young acknowledges certain additions to the Pentateuchal text
that are not likely to have been written by Moses, whom he believes
to be its chief author. Young notes that the editor making the
additions was inspired similarly to Moses so that the resultant text
was inspired in exactly the same way.
TG
-- _________________ Terry M. Gray, Ph.D., Computer Support Scientist Chemistry Department, Colorado State University Fort Collins, Colorado 80523 grayt@lamar.colostate.edu http://www.chm.colostate.edu/~grayt/ phone: 970-491-7003 fax: 970-491-1801
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Nov 30 2002 - 12:41:26 EST