Tamarisk/ACNR/Bethany/Praludium/Annie & "ED ADAMS" -- Christian Theology Discussion Group

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, [3], 4, 5, 6 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 20:19:09 11/27/02 Wed
Author: Sola Scriptura
Subject: Tamarisk/ACNR/Bethany/Praludium/Annie & "ED ADAMS"
In reply to: tamarisk 's message, "Sola" on 08:10:03 11/27/02 Wed

Basil Uses a Form of Redaction Criticism To Explain His Atheism
Redaction Criticism of the Bible is the theory that different copyists and commentators of the early biblical writings embellished and altered the biblical texts throughout early Jewish and Christian history to make them appear more miraculous, inspirational, and legitimate.
An example of redaction theory would be the claim that Old Testament prophecies were modified by redactors after the fact to make them appear as miraculous prophecies. Redaction criticism reduces the quality of the biblical record, casts strong doubt on its inspiration, and implies that the Bible is not trustworthy as a historical document.
Redaction Criticism which began in Germany as have so many of the various Christian antagonists� theorem. Redaction Criticism began in the early 1700's with Hermann Reimarus. He was a deist who wrote extensively opposing Christianity.
It is note worthy to me; how many of these philosophers are rabid atheists. And unlike the confusion about the �Which came first� dilemma regarding the chicken or the egg; it is my opinion that these philosopher�s hatred for Christ with the abetting of Satan is what germinates these evil theorem. Thus their hatred for Jesus is the source that spawns these vile notions that become embedded in a humanist society. Charles Darwin and Karl Marx are two such examples of this phenomenon.
Reimarus from this hatred, proposed that Jesus was a failure and that the disciples altered their stories in an attempt to make Jesus appear messianic and miraculous.
Just as a side note, writing that Reimarus claimed �Jesus was a failure� I can�t help but recall some of the blasphemous utterances about Jesus made by the mouth of Ken Copeland (among many of the Third Wave heretics) who are endorsed and advanced by several of the PFAKES on their web sites. Example from Copeland; � "Satan conquered Jesus on the Cross� or this from Heretic-Copeland: � Jesus' "emaciated, poured out, little, wormy spirit�..� OUTRAGEOUS!!!!!

Redaction criticism was later taken up by David Friedrich Strauss (1808-74) who attempted to show that the gospels were altered, were the expression of myth, and cannot be construed as historical. Same pattern as Ten Tons of Manure in his devise to attack God�s Word.

Others followed including Wilhelm Wrede (1859-1906) who was the next major proponent of redaction criticism. He attempted to show that the historical narratives of Mark were not reliable. Again, the same way Ten Megatons of Manure does with Noah�s sons. With this, deception is implied since the biblical documents claim authenticity and accuracy.
Some evidence offered to support biblical redaction is that the ending of Deuteronomy (Chapter 34) records Moses' death though it was not Moses who wrote it; the arrangement of the Psalms into five sections is the work of a compiler; and that the Book of Chronicles state they are based on prior writings (1 Chron. 9:1; 27:24; 29:29; 2 Chron. 9:29; 13:22; 6:11; 20:34; 25:26; 27:7; 28:26; 32:32; 33:19; 35:27; 36:8).3 There are other alleged evidences but these will suffice.

Though there are accounts of biblical writers arranging or commenting on events, this does not discount the authenticity or reliability of the biblical documents.
It is commonly accepted in conservative scholarly circles that Joshua probably wrote the ending of Deuteronomy. This does not invalidate the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch. Likewise, simply arranging material, such as the Psalms, into categories does not affect its inspiration, authenticity, or reliability at all. And, citing other sources for factual reference likewise, in no way reduces the inspiration of the book of Chronicles, or the Bible as a whole. The inspired writer simply used other books, which were not inspired though accurate, in his compilation of the biblical record.

Redaction criticism is refuted by the evidence of the reliability of the historic documents the fact that the prophecies were indeed made and fulfilled, and that the Bible is archeologically accurate. Due to the science of Textual Criticism, the original texts of the Bible can be reconstructed with a great deal of accuracy, their prophetic nature verified, and their inspiration maintained.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]