What is Reddit's opinion of
The Bible with Sources Revealed?
From 3.5 billion Reddit comments
By popularity on Reddit, this product is:
11 reviews of this product found across Reddit:
It is dishonest to the sources to assert or even think it should not have plot holes.
The two primary fallacies of studying the bible for me are
asserting it was meant to be history as opposed to allegorical theology and founding mythology.
assuming that the various component parts are supposed to be consistent.
Never allow any biblical discussion to assume either of these points.
Regarding the second point, a component part might be Mark, or Matthew or sections of a Book like contiguous pieces of the P source in Genesis. This subdivision into sources is not hard and fast but we have some pretty good ideas about the various different contributors and the redactions.
The writers of each component part wrote at different times, with different theologies behind them and with different messages and intents. Presumably the members of the communities involved had devout beliefs based on these texts.
For example: it is utterly dishonest to try to force Mark and Matthew into concordance. In this example we are quite confident that Matthew was written expressly to contradict a bunch of theology in Mark. It is also the case that Mark was bashing the sect behind Matthew.
Another example: it is ridiculously dishonest to have a nativity with both shepherds and magi. Luke's nativity was written specifically to occlude Matthew's. Luke saw the power of Matthew's nativity and how it improved on Mark and made Matthew's theological points. So he had to have one, but he could not use Matthew's, so had to write one from whole cloth with his own agenda.
Yet another, the J source gives Noah 7 pairs of clean animals but the P source reduces this to one pair. P is making the point that Noah is not of the priestly class and hence did not take all those extras for sacrifices This fits the P source agenda, which is retrojecting the priestly class and it's power into the then pre-existing mythology. Every time Moses farts, Aaron is written into comment on it. Neither of Noah's animal loadings happened of course, the original idea was lifted from the Babylonian mythology, possibly via Berossus. They only appear together in the same document because the P and J sources were redacted together in an act of political syncretism at some point. Reading the text with awareness of the sources (in this case using Friedman works well) leaves no contradiction. Just greater understanding of the formative process.
So no, there are not nearly as many plot holes and contradictions as you might think, because you are reading it wrong.
And yes, I accord the bible quite special treatment, namely that treatment I describe above. I read it as critically as I can in order to understand the formative process of it and the huge piles of religious cruft we are left with that are based (loosely) on it.
Not a website or an app, but a scholarly book about what the first five books of the bible mean in context: https://www.amazon.com/Sources-Revealed-Richard-Elliott-Friedman/dp/006073065X
I recommend it, very fun read. A starting point at least.
For the Pentateuch, I would definitely recommend the Bible with Sources Revealed by Richard Elliott Friedman. (https://www.amazon.com/Sources-Revealed-Richard-Elliott-Friedman/dp/006073065X)
I refer to it all the time. I'm not sure all of his assignments are undisputed, but it is a great place to start.
I know this comment is a bit old, but I just came across it.
First, to answer your followup question, here is an excellent resource that breaks up the Torah sources by color coding them: The Bible With Sources Revealed
Next, to answer your question about the Elohim/YHWH thing, this is easily distinguishable in English. Genesis 1 just uses God, where Genesis 2 uses either "YHWH" or "YHWH God". Whenever you see God, about 90% of the time it says "Elohim" in the Hebrew text. Whenever you see LORD in all caps, but where the "ORD" is in a bit smaller print is where "YHWH" appears. In other places, especially the prophets, you might see where it says "Lord GOD". In this instance, the word "GOD" has the all caps, but "OD" is in a bit smaller print. When this appears, it shows in the Hebrew text as "Lord YHWH". I'll agree, it is confusing at first in English, but as you look around for it, you will start to notice it more and more.
Concerning a translation that makes the distinction, the only one I can think of is "The Scriptures" by ISR. In their translation, they put the Hebrew letters יהוה instead of just "LORD". Then whenever the word God appears, they put "Elohim". I will warn you though, this translation is really awkward. ISR replaces a lot of words that they claim is "pagan" with more general terms. I'll give you a few examples:
- "altar" is replaced with "slaughter place"
- "king" is replaced with "sovereign"
- "lord" is replaced with "master"
Also, they use Hebrew names for people and places instead of English ones.
My personal preferences for literal or accurate Bible translations would be the NRSV or the JPS Tanakh (JPS only includes the Hebrew Bible though, not the New Testament). No they do not have the YHWH and Elohim distinction, but what I summarized in paragraph 2 is in both of these translations.
Hope this helps!
One of my FAVORITE bible books is Richard Elliot Friedman's The Bible With Sources revealed. (<em>https://www.amazon.com/Sources-Revealed-Richard-Elliott-Friedman/dp/006073065X</em> ) .
This is the 5 books of Moses but color-coded according to their own sources (per Richard Elliot Friedman's conclusions). With this resource, you can certainly read through the 5 books in the redacted form that we have it today, or you can jump around easily sticking to one source by following one color (which is how I understood what you were referring to with reading a "pure" version).
It also includes a running commentary, in which Friedman explains how he (or other scholars) reached their conclusions about how to divide the text.
Well, first off, I'm not out to debunk Christianity. As maybe apparent, I have a deep fascination with ancient cultures and how their thinking developed. I think the best explanation for the development of Abrahamic religions is that they are entirely man made developments, but that doesn't mean they lack value or have no relevance to our lives today.
> God (Yahweh) was the God of the Israelites and obviously was the real God. There's many religions of the world and many of the oldest religions are polytheist, obviously this is humanity trying to find the truth and the Isrealites that were once polytheist found the real God and thus gave them truth and blessed them.
You say, "obviously" a couple times here, but it is not obvious at all, hence the many different religions, and the many different theologies even inside one religion.
> As for the golden calf no longer being allowed to worshiped, is this possibly due to the fact that God no longer wants him to be worshiped in the old Pagan/Polytheist way?
The final editing of the Bible was done while in Babylonian captivity by the sect of Israelites that was fervently Yahweh-Only worship, and very anti-idolic, and believed that Yahweh was using the Babylonians to punish them for worshiping other gods or even having idols of him. It makes the most sense for me to have that group edit their story to place an emphasis on YHWH's dislike of idols, as it would back their own belief system.
I don't think there was a mass exodus either (where the story takes place), there likely was one or more bands of nomads that had escaped Egyptian rule and joined with the ex-Canaanite group that eventually became the Isrealites, and their powerful story of escape and wandering became engraned into the cultural identity of a group that wanted to shun their Canaanite origin.
> Obviously this is a new area of debate for me that I do need to research into but I doubt you'll debunk Christianity simply because "da jews use to be pagans".
Like I said, I'm not out to debunk anything. I honestly am not sure why people have such a problem with the understanding that the early Israelites had a pantheon of gods because part of the whole identity of Israel (which translates as 'struggles with god') is that they were in almost constant rebellion against god, worshiping idols and other deities.
Also, I wouldn't call them pagans since that term really came to use well after the period we are talking about.
Per Paul, he never met Jesus, and in his own words says he didn't get any of his information from Jesus's disciples. I don't take that as a worthy source about how Jesus lived and taught.
> Luke claims that the traditions included in his gospel have been “delivered” to him by those “who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word.”
So again, the author of Luke/Acts was not an eyewitness. By claiming to have learned it from eyewitnesses he acknowledges he wasn't one of the witnesses. Most biblical scholars also agree that most of Luke was copied from Mark, so we also catch that author in a falsehood, he didn't hear it from an eyewitness, he was copying someone else's writing.
Mark is the oldest of the gospels, but Mark's writing style also indicates he wasn't an eyewitness either. It was also written ~40 years after Jesus's death, which is a heck of a long time given that Jesus himself didn't live to 35.
> Lastly how do I know Jesus to be lord? Easy, evidence. Now since it was 2000 years ago (give or take) that Jesus was around, it's hard to find evidence for such a person and since he did raise from the dead that does make it more difficult as well. But if you take the biblical and non biblical sources of the sightings of Jesus: life, death, and Resurrection it becomes evident that it happened.
The Bible is not evidence, the Bible is the claim. The Bible claims that when Jesus rose from the dead, that a bunch of other people also rose from the dead. Why is this unnoticed by historians of the day?
But even if you want to say the Bible is evidence, there are problems. Like I mentioned earlier Mark is the oldest gospel and others were based off it. Mark did not originally end with jesus's resurrection, but with the ladies going to the grave, being told that Jesus wasn't there by the boy in white, then running off. Later, Mark was given an extended ending that added supporting statements about the resurrection, but the fact that other gospels that embellished on Mark talked about resurrection, and then someone decided Mark itself needed embellishment is a red flag for me.
Anyway, you seem young and new to your faith, but interested in learning. I'll drop some links that you may be interested in for further reading.
https://bible.org/article/synoptic-problem
http://www.theology.edu/ugarbib.htm
And some good books on modern Bible Scholarship
Removed comment posted by /u/bdw9000 at 01/04/15 22:27:15:
> The Bible With Sources Revealed > > In addition to a good explanation for why scholars have come to the conclusions they have, it includes the OT "books of moses" in their entirety, color coded to correspond to the JEDP authors. This helps you read the bible with a new perspective and gain a greater appreciation for what each author was trying to do.
... in response to submission Question: Looking for books on JEPD. Any good resources? posted by /u/RevMelissa at 01/04/15 19:32:08:
> I want to write a bible study this Summer on the four early voices in the Hebrew Bible: Jahwe, Elohim, Priestly and Deuteronomical. Any great resources?
Removed comment posted by /u/Checake1 at 01/04/15 22:28:11:
> Does conversion from one religion to another prove anything? I am sure if you google religion x to conversion to religion y where x and y are all religions in the world, you'll find numerous examples. Does Bart Ehrman's leaving the Christianity, even though he is more knowledgeable in Bible and Christian history than 99.9% of Christian population prove christianity is not true? No, apostasy in my opinion aren't really evidence for anything. Numerous factors go into. I am sure in America you'll hear of numerous jews converting to christianity. Where as in Israel you'll hear of numerous Jews staying fast to their faith.
... in response to comment posted by /u/evo64 at 01/04/15 22:03:05:
> I haven't watched them and am not sure I will for a while.
>
> I presume an interesting counterpoint might be the testimony of Father James Bernstein, an Orthodox Christian priest who first became an evangelical Christian, but then converted to Orthodoxy. His father was an Orthodox Jewish Rabbi in the Old City of Jerusalem.
>
> Hw authored a book that is popular with Orthodox Christians entitled Surprised by Christ: My Journey from Judaism to Orthodox Christianity
Removed comment posted by /u/bdw9000 at 01/04/15 22:27:15:
> The Bible With Sources Revealed > > In addition to a good explanation for why scholars have come to the conclusions they have, it includes the OT "books of moses" in their entirety, color coded to correspond to the JEDP authors. This helps you read the bible with a new perspective and gain a greater appreciation for what each author was trying to do.
... in response to submission Question: Looking for books on JEPD. Any good resources? posted by /u/RevMelissa at 01/04/15 19:32:08:
> I want to write a bible study this Summer on the four early voices in the Hebrew Bible: Jahwe, Elohim, Priestly and Deuteronomical. Any great resources?
I suggest you read it again using this book: The Bible With Sources Revealed
You will clearly be able to see which passages come from which source. The Documentary Hypothesis (look this up) suggests that the first five books of the bible were written by four different people and then combined into one work, which led to contradictions in the passages as OP has pointed out
The Bible with Sources Revealed (List Price: $22.99)
Ratings: 4.2/5 rating (37 reviews)
Stock: 29 new ($13.87) 32 used ($8.98)
Similar Products:
The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology's New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Its Sacred Texts
Who Wrote the New Testament?: The Making of the Christian Myth
Alternate Sources: [Google Shopping] [Ebay] [AbeBooks] [ISBN search]
Popular alternatives to The Bible with Sources Reve...
The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology's New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Its Sacred Texts
The Lost World of Genesis One: Ancient Cosmology and the Origins Debate (The Lost World Series, Volume 2)
