The PuritanBoard  

Go Back   The PuritanBoard > The Scriptures > OT Historical Books

OT Historical Books Discussion of texts from Genesis - Esther
Hear O Israel, the Lord our God is One! (Deut. 6:4)

» Online Users: 79
16 members and 63 guests
Amazing Grace, Christoffer, Grafted In, Heidelberg1, JennyG, LeeJUk, Michael Doyle, Michael Turner, Puritan Scot, Tim, Timothy William, William Price
Most users ever online was 856, 07-06-2007 at 12:19 AM.
Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 05-11-2009, 03:25 PM
ColdSilverMoon's Avatar
Puritanboard Senior
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 2,024
Thanks: 671
Thanked 843 Times in 395 Posts
Authorship of the Pentateuch

I recently purchased a copy of the Reformation Study Bible, and love it. However, I was reading the intro section to the Pentateuch, and was surprised that they claim that while Moses provided the bulk of the original content, it was "updated" and "supplemented" by various editors at a later time, who also organized the content topically. They claim that all of these supplements were inspired.

This is the first time I have read Reformed scholars who claim that anyone other than Moses contributed to the Pentateuch (other than his obituary, of course, which I have always been taught was written by Joshua). Does anyone know of any good resources on the authorship/editing of the Pentateuch? Does the RSB represent the prevailing view in the Reformed community?
__________________
Mason
Member, Redeemer Presbyterian Church (PCA)
New York, NY

"Come now, and let us reason together," says the Lord, "Though your sins are like scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they are red like crimson, they shall be as wool." - Isaiah 1:18
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 05-11-2009, 03:27 PM
FenderPriest's Avatar
Puritanboard Sophomore
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: West Chester, PA
Posts: 602
Thanks: 120
Thanked 206 Times in 129 Posts
From Paradise to the Promised Land by Desmond T. Alexander devotes the first half of his this book to discussing the textual criticism issues of the Pentateuch.
__________________
Jacob
Sovereign Grace Ministries
Covenant Fellowship Church
WTS M.A.R. in Theology student
West Chester, PA

"Grace renews nature; glory perfects grace." ~ John Owen
"Grace tried is better than grace, and more than grace. It is glory in its infancy." ~ John Flavel
Blog - The Strasbourg Inn
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to FenderPriest For This Useful Post:
ColdSilverMoon (05-11-2009), Montanablue (05-11-2009)
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 05-11-2009, 03:28 PM
Montanablue's Avatar
Puritanboard Graduate
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Montana
Posts: 3,792
Thanks: 2,626
Thanked 985 Times in 537 Posts
I don't have any answers for you - but I heard the same thing in my New Testament class (at a secular university). I'd also be interested to hear what the Reformed view is.

Edit: We were only discussing the Pentateuch because a student had asked about its authorship. Since it was a NT class, the professor didn't really elaborate much, so I wasn't able to ask why scholars believed it wasn't written entirely by Moses.
__________________
Kathleen M
nondenominational
Montana
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 05-11-2009, 04:33 PM
chbrooking's Avatar
Puritanboard Sophomore
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Ellicott City, MD
Posts: 783
Thanks: 248
Thanked 393 Times in 179 Posts
There are a few minor places where mosaic authorship seems problematic. For instance, Dt. 1:1 says, "these are the words that Moses spoke to all Israel on the other side of the Jordan. You will recall, of course that Moses never crossed. By saying "on the other side", the text is indicating a perspective from "this side"--the side Moses never saw, except from a distance.

That said, it is impossible to prove that Moses didn't write this, the account of his humility or even his death. All inspiration is supernatural. But it is reasonable to come to the conclusion offered in your study Bible.

I think, though, that any who would deny Mosaic authorship and still maintain inerrancy must reckon with Josh 8:32; 12:19; Luke 20:28; John 1:45; 5:46, etc. Saying the content is "essentially mosaic" probably isn't saying enough. And yet, if you are willing to grant an exception to his "obituary", then you probably won't have a problem with the handful of other minor amosaica either.
__________________
Clark Brooking
Pastor
Living Hope Presbyterian Church (OPC)
Clarksville, MD
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
The Following User Says Thank You to chbrooking For This Useful Post:
ColdSilverMoon (05-11-2009)
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 05-11-2009, 04:37 PM
Archlute's Avatar
Puritanboard Senior
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Sandy, Oregon
Posts: 2,063
Thanks: 453
Thanked 871 Times in 398 Posts
I have had, and have passed on from, a copy of the NKJV Reformation Study Bible for the very reason that although it has some helpful notes and essays it is also (at least in my opinion) marred by the influence/pressure of redaction criticism, and even a bit of classic higher criticism, in some of its notes.

I find the ESV study bible much better overall regarding notes and even the essays.

-----Added 5/11/2009 at 04:37:03 EST-----

Quote:
Originally Posted by chbrooking View Post
There are a few minor places where mosaic authorship seems problematic. For instance, Dt. 1:1 says, "these are the words that Moses spoke to all Israel on the other side of the Jordan. You will recall, of course that Moses never crossed. By saying "on the other side", the text is indicating a perspective from "this side"--the side Moses never saw, except from a distance.

That said, it is impossible to prove that Moses didn't write this, the account of his humility or even his death. All inspiration is supernatural. But it is reasonable to come to the conclusion offered in your study Bible.

I think, though, that any who would deny Mosaic authorship and still maintain inerrancy must reckon with Josh 8:32; 12:19; Luke 20:28; John 1:45; 5:46, etc. Saying the content is "essentially mosaic" probably isn't saying enough. And yet, if you are willing to grant an exception to his "obituary", then you probably won't have a problem with the handful of other minor amosaica either.
Clark, I would agree with the few passages often cited regarding editorial addition to the Pentateuch, such as what you cited, or the closing of the book as well, but from what I remember of my copy of the Reformation Study Bible it included a much broader view of redaction criticism than that with which we should be comfortable. And that not just with the Pentateuch, but other OT books as well.
__________________
Adam J. Myer
Slated for the Jan. 10th Chaplains Basic Officer Leadership Course
Estacada Christian Church
Sandy, Oregon

Soli Deo Gloria
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
The Following User Says Thank You to Archlute For This Useful Post:
ColdSilverMoon (05-11-2009)
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 05-11-2009, 04:46 PM
Contra_Mundum's Avatar
Pilgrim, Alien, Stranger
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: CentralLakeMI
Posts: 5,190
Thanks: 74
Thanked 3,365 Times in 1,190 Posts
You have to answer such questions as:

Who wrote the account of Moses death and burial?

Who included "glosses" referring to later place-names and such, which weren't named until Israel entered the Promised land, etc.? (e.g. Gen.27:2; 35:19; Num.32:38; cf. Dt.4:8 with 3:8-9)

Why might the Israelites in the wilderness need this explanation?
Exo 16:36 (An omer is the tenth part of an ephah.)

These are the sort of issue that is being addressed. Moses might be responsible for all the words in the Pent., but is it absolutely necessary that he was to maintain faith in its accuracy and inspiration? I don't think so.
__________________
Rev. Bruce G. Buchanan
ChainOLakes Presbyterian Church, CentralLake, MI

Made both Lord and Christ--Jesus, the Destroyer
Acts 2:36 - 1 Cor. 10:9-10 & 15:22-26 - Hebrews 2:9-15 - 1 John 3:8 - James 4:12

When posting friends, kindly bear those words of earthly wisdom in mind:

Oh, that God the gift would give us
To see ourselves as others see us.
--Robert Burns, 1786 (modernized) ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions? --
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Contra_Mundum For This Useful Post:
ChristianTrader (05-12-2009), ColdSilverMoon (05-11-2009), puritanpilgrim (05-12-2009)
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 05-11-2009, 04:55 PM
Puritanboard Freshman
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 106
Thanks: 78
Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
They make it clear in that intro that that is not their position. They indicate that it is the position of recent scholars who do not accept the Bibles witness as to authorship. They state right before the paragraph you are referring to that Moses is the author.

Terry
__________________
Terry Morris
San Jose, Ca
Searching for a Reformed Church in San Jose.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 05-11-2009, 06:04 PM
DMcFadden's Avatar
Meum cerebrum nocet
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: San Gabriel, CA
Posts: 7,512
Thanks: 1,769
Thanked 3,538 Times in 1,717 Posts
The Reformation Study Bible seems to have a fairly decent defense of Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch.

Quote:
These various headings underscore the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch and its binding authority. That is, Israel’s divine King caused His commands to be written down through Moses (c. 1400 b.c.).

Besides these titles indicating Moses’ authorship, Jesus said, “Moses … wrote about Me” (John 5:46), and He explained to His disciples on the road to Emmaus what the Scriptures said about Him “beginning at Moses” (Luke 24:27). The Pentateuch itself tells of Moses’ decisive contribution to it: he wrote the great legal code, the Book of the Covenant (Ex. 24:3–7), and the exposition of the law recorded in Deuteronomy (Deut. 31:24–26).

Luder G. Whitlock, R. C. Sproul, Bruce K. Waltke and Moisš Silva, Reformation Study Bible, the : Bringing the Light of the Reformation to Scripture : New King James Version, Includes Index. (Nashville: T. Nelson, 1995).
Quote:
It would be arbitrary to exclude Genesis from the New Testament testimony that Moses (fifteenth century b.c.) authored the Pentateuch. More specifically, our Lord said that “Moses therefore gave you circumcision” (John 7:22; Acts 15:1), which is uniquely given in Gen. 17. It is not surprising that the founder of Israel’s theocracy gave this masterful foundation to the Law. Its historical narrative furnished the theological and ethical underpinnings of the Torah: Israel’s unique covenantal relationship with God (Deut. 9:5) and its singular laws (e.g., the Sabbath, 7:2 note). Moreover, since creation myths are basic to pagan religions, it is natural that Moses would have included a creation account opposing the pagan myths. This account is, in addition, foundational to the Law Moses mediated (1:1–2:3 notes).

This Bible’s own witness to Moses’ authorship is supported by extrabiblical data.

Luder G. Whitlock, R. C. Sproul, Bruce K. Waltke and Moisš Silva, Reformation Study Bible, the : Bringing the Light of the Reformation to Scripture : New King James Version, Includes Index. (Nashville: T. Nelson, 1995).
Since we do have evidence of non-Mosaic sections (e.g., his death, the perspective "across the river"), I thought that this was a pretty strong defense of the traditional view. Back as far as the mid 70s, my seminary profs at an "evangelical" seminary argued that the Pentateuch was "Mosaic" only in that it was a "mosaic" of bits and pieces cobbled together in the 7th century. I like the Reformaton Study Bible going against the grain of so much modern scholarship.
__________________
Dennis E. McFadden, Ex Mainline Baptist (in Remission)
Atherton Baptist Homes, CEO
First Baptist Church of Alhambra, Member, Transformation Ministries (CA)

Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 05-11-2009, 06:18 PM
ColdSilverMoon's Avatar
Puritanboard Senior
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 2,024
Thanks: 671
Thanked 843 Times in 395 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by mossy View Post
They make it clear in that intro that that is not their position. They indicate that it is the position of recent scholars who do not accept the Bibles witness as to authorship. They state right before the paragraph you are referring to that Moses is the author.

Terry
No, that's not what they're saying, Terry. They refute the idea that the Pentateuch was written in equal parts by multiple authors, but they say explicitly that Moses' original writings were arranged and edited years later.

On the intro to Genesis they say this:

Quote:
Like the remainder of the Pentateuch, Moses gave the book its essential substance and later editors supplemented it, all by the Holy Spirit's inspiration. It would be arbitrary to exclude Genesis from the New Testament testimony that Moses (fifth century B.C.) authored the Pentateuch.
I'm not arguing one way or another, since I haven't really investigated this at all. I have always been taught that Moses was the sole author of the Pentateuch, and was somewhat surprised by this intro in the RSB (ESV version, by the way). As Pastor Buchanan said, these sort of minor updates wouldn't seem to harm the inspiration or accuracy of the original documents.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
  #10 (permalink)  
Old 05-12-2009, 06:18 PM
puritanpilgrim's Avatar
Puritanboard Sophomore
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 627
Thanks: 80
Thanked 230 Times in 112 Posts
Quote:
These are the sort of issue that is being addressed. Moses might be responsible for all the words in the Pent., but is it absolutely necessary that he was to maintain faith in its accuracy and inspiration? I don't think so.


I don't understand why we have to pin ourselves in the corner on issues like this. Is it really that big of a deal if there was an editior. Paul used an amanuensis to write Romans. If God used someone to finish up and add editorial note, then that is what he did. Moses was still the author.
__________________
Aaron Josh Wright
Deerbrook Baptist Church, Humble Tx
New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Closed Thread

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.0

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:12 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.3.2 ©2009, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright © 2002-2008 PuritanBoard.com
Hosted by WebsiteMaven - helping ministries with web hosting advice, reviews, and design.
67 Westminster Abbey © Confessional Presbyterian Presses - used with permission.
Add Our Custom Button to your Google Toolbar

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69