(03-13-2022 03:10 AM)JRsec Wrote:  Julius Wellhausen developed the Source Theory of Hebrew studies in the OT. Elohim & Jehovah, Yahweh usages come from different eras of the use of Hebrew which also adopted some Canaanite words which influence it in addition to other ancient semitic languages. There are clear text breaks in Genisis between oral ancient Hebrew story telling and insertions from much later used to explain origins (etiologies) of customs, items in worship, etc. My favorite is the break to explain where Eden is located. The oldest text in the Bible begins in Genisis Chapter 2, the latter part of verse 3 which is from the stories passed down before scribes and told to each generation. It's smooth to read and clear in the telling. It makes the breaks stand out.

Gensis Chapter 1 has language used at the time of the Babylonian exile. It is a lesson to Hebrew Children as to why their Babylonian captors are idiots. Babylonians originally believed there were 10 days in a week and 3 weeks in a month. This evolved to an 8 day week. Because of this Babylonians suffered many cycles of famine. The Hebrews followed a lunar calendar which every 4th year added a leap month. Their calendar more in keeping with the seasons told them when to plant and harvest, which was a blessing from God. So you learn about the creation set to seven days with the greater and lesser lights in the heavens and of fruit and plants yielding seed of their kind so you know what to plant, when to plant it, and when to harvest it.

The Psalms are set in three year worship cycles. Read Siegmund Mowinckel about this and it will make Temple worship in Israel make sense.

If you understand Israelite customs and idioms you understand why Jesus stopped to curse the fig tree while on his way to Jerusalem and his Passion.

Turn the other cheek doesn't mean passivity either.

Knowing textual, cultural, and linguistic distinctions alter what people think they are reading and can make some of the modern political redactions stand out for the hooey they are and that was the only point I intended to make.

I personally dislike deep study of source theories on the torah. I don't mean that as a knock on you or anyone who is interested in them, I just think they are potentially a very unhealthy avenue for most Christians to go down. Its just so highly speculative and shaky.

I'm sure you are well aware these theories have become a favored manner of some theologians to reject the OT and torah altogether as God's Word and argue its just a man made religion.

We have the written Torah God intended us to have from the beginning. IMO to suggest otherwise is to suggest He is not really in control. I do not accept that its by chance or accident or some other means than the will of God. Obviously I'm not accusing you of that, I have just seen that speculated and implied so many times when going down this road. Most importantly what we have predates Christ and the cross by multiple centuries and that clearly was the intended dividing line for evidence and proof in its design, and to validate the Gospel and NT. IMO that is clearly implied in the overall design of the text as a whole. What is vital is to be able to date it from around or right after the Persian era to the time of Jesus. Once that is established there is such a mountain of supernatural impossible evidence displayed there that its a pretty save assumption the hand of God is at work here. If we don't have enough evidence at that point, there simply is none that can be given that will satisfy.

I just don't think that its a healthy pursuit for most Christians. Obviously that is not the case for all, and not to suggest there is nothing positive to glean from it. But I suspect its a rather large net negative for most Christians.

I have just seen too many people use that to attack, doubt or reject the Bible altogether. And they get so wrapped up in that aspect of it that they miss the evidence proof the torah and the Bible actually gives us that its God's eternal Word.