Moses Supposes—Fascinating New Documentary Defends Moses’ Authorship of the Book of Exodus（https://answersingenesis.org/bible-history/moses-supposes-fascinating-new-documentary-defends-moses-authorship-of-the-book-of-exodus/）
===========================
同一个帖，他说：「目前所有大学的宗教系（包括耶鲁哈佛）的基督教导论课都会讲底本说。当代犹太人的顶尖旧约学者在The jewish study Bible （耶鲁采用的教科书）的绪论里非常直接地承认的底本说的正确性。也含蓄地说出旧约部分乃传承自更高文明的米索布达米亚地区。」
这里有一篇牛津大学的文章“The Documentary Theory Revisited”（底本说再思）说：
has raised again the question of the credibility of the Documentary Theory as an explanation of how such a corpus of literature as the Pentateuch 再次提出了以“底本说”解釋像五經這樣的文學作品集的可信性问题（https://www.oxfordscholarship.com/view/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199257836.001.0001/acprof-9780199257836-chapter-8）
我发现它在创世记的序言中说：「During the last three centuries many interpreters have claimed to find in the Pentateuch four underlying sources. The presumed documents, allegedly dating from the tenth to the fifth centuries b.c., are called J (for Jahweh/Yahweh, the personal OT name for God), E (for Elohim, a generic name for God), D (for Deuteronomic) and P (for Priestly). Each of these documents is claimed to have its own characteristics and its own theology, which often contradicts that of the other documents. The Pentateuch is thus depicted as a patchwork of stories, poems and laws. However, this view is not supported by conclusive evidence, and intensive archaeological and literary research has tended to undercut many of the arguments used to challenge Mosaic authorship.」（在過去的三個世紀中，許多口譯員聲稱在五经中找到了四個潛在的來源。 假定的文件據稱可追溯到公元前十世紀至五世紀，分別被稱為J（對於Jahweh / Yahweh，這是上帝的舊約個人名字），E（對於Elohim，是上帝的通稱），D（對於申命記）和 P（祭司）。 這些文檔中的每一個都具有自己的特徵和神學，這常常與其他文檔相矛盾。 因此，五經被描述為故事，詩歌和法律的拼湊而成。 但是，這種觀點沒有確鑿的證據支持，而深入的考古學和文學研究往往削弱了許多挑戰摩西著作的論據。）
你在欧洲哪个大学的神学院学到“底本说”是事实？你的教授太落伍了！他们也教你撒谎？
===========================
同一个帖，哈默先森说：「The jewish study Bible ……也含蓄地说出旧约部分乃传承自更高文明的米索布达米亚地区。」
我在“Complete Jewish Bible”的创世记序言，搜寻“Mesopotamian”， 找到一点也不含蓄，总共四段的话：「Chs. 1-38 reflect a great deal of what we know from other sources about ancient Mesopotamian life and culture. ……Clay tablets found in 1974 at the ancient (c. 2500-2300 b.c.) site of Ebla (modern Tell Mardikh) in northern Syria may also contain some intriguing parallels.……」（ 1-38章反映了我们从其他来源对美索不达米亚古代生活和文化的大量了解。 ……1974年在叙利亚北部Ebla（现代Tell Mardikh）的古代遗址（约公元前2500年至2300年）发现的黏土片也可能包含一些有趣的相似之处。……）
页5-6。“Scholars now agree that the reasons usually given for assigning these dates to the individual sources are problematic, and a lively debate has developed ……”“学者现在同意将这些给各种来源定日期所以常有的理由，是有问题的，并且已经展开了激烈的辩论……”
页 1909。 “Particularly odious to the faithful was the Documentary Hypothesis” “底本说特别令那些虔诚的人讨厌”
页 1913。 Cassuto’s background in literature impelled him to view the Documentary Hypothesis as unsound. 卡苏苏（Cassuto）的文学背景促使他认为底本说是不合理的。
Segal’s opposition to the Documentary Hypothesis西格尔（Segal）反对底本说
页1967。 Mendelssohn oppose it门德尔松（Mendelssohn）反对它
页 2085。 “Wellhausen’s historical reconstruction……caused Jewish scholars to ignore it or to polemicize against it. …… subsequent scholar up to the present have built upon, accepted, modified, or rejected.” 威尔豪森（Wellhausen）的历史重建……导致犹太学者无视它，或与之抗辩。 ……直到现在的后来学者都从它建〔新理论〕，接受，修改或拒绝了。”
哈默先森因为未上过大学，所以不知道，没有理论是人人接受的。他撒谎的例子之一是，说：《The Jewish Study Bible》承认接受它。！
NIV
靈修
新聞
貼圖
為教會
檢舉不當內容/回應
