Comments on: Source Criticism and Theology http://bluecord.org/biblioblog/2007/08/source-criticism-and-theology/ A biblioblog Fri, 21 Nov 2008 19:26:25 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5 By: Blue Cord » “Sources of the Pentateuch” http://bluecord.org/biblioblog/2007/08/source-criticism-and-theology/#comment-30247 Blue Cord » “Sources of the Pentateuch” Tue, 16 Oct 2007 15:58:43 +0000 http://bluecord.org/biblioblog/2007/08/source-criticism-and-theology/#comment-30247 [...] of outlining some of them. I explored the issue of whether source criticism is useful in my post “Source Criticism and Theology”. [back] Permalink [...] […] of outlining some of them. I explored the issue of whether source criticism is useful in my post “Source Criticism and Theology”. [back] Permalink […]

]]> By: Blue Cord » Source Criticism and Theology (Noch einmal) http://bluecord.org/biblioblog/2007/08/source-criticism-and-theology/#comment-26496 Blue Cord » Source Criticism and Theology (Noch einmal) Mon, 27 Aug 2007 13:38:12 +0000 http://bluecord.org/biblioblog/2007/08/source-criticism-and-theology/#comment-26496 [...] Pate left a comment on my prior post about source criticism and theology. He asked how source criticism determines which layers of the text are authoritative. In other [...] […] Pate left a comment on my prior post about source criticism and theology. He asked how source criticism determines which layers of the text are authoritative. In other […]

]]> By: James Pate http://bluecord.org/biblioblog/2007/08/source-criticism-and-theology/#comment-26399 James Pate Sat, 25 Aug 2007 16:01:50 +0000 http://bluecord.org/biblioblog/2007/08/source-criticism-and-theology/#comment-26399 Thanks for the post. How should we use source criticism to determine which parts of the text are authoritative? Should our goal be to peel back subsequent layers and recover an earlier, pristine theology, as Wellhausen does when he presents P as a degeneration of Israelite religion from a better, freer form? Should we accept the final redactors or later authors as authoritative, as some do when they prefer Deuteronomyy's reworkings of Exodus laws (since Deuteronomy is more egalitarian)? Or should we try to balance the difference perspectives against each other, recognizing them all as simultaneously true in some sense? Thanks for the post.

How should we use source criticism to determine which parts of the text are authoritative? Should our goal be to peel back subsequent layers and recover an earlier, pristine theology, as Wellhausen does when he presents P as a degeneration of Israelite religion from a better, freer form? Should we accept the final redactors or later authors as authoritative, as some do when they prefer Deuteronomyy’s reworkings of Exodus laws (since Deuteronomy is more egalitarian)? Or should we try to balance the difference perspectives against each other, recognizing them all as simultaneously true in some sense?

]]> By: Jim Getz http://bluecord.org/biblioblog/2007/08/source-criticism-and-theology/#comment-26368 Jim Getz Sat, 25 Aug 2007 02:46:17 +0000 http://bluecord.org/biblioblog/2007/08/source-criticism-and-theology/#comment-26368 I think you are right. In fact, I think starting with the acknowledgment of sources even changes where you start to do theology. You're already entered into an extended dialog with numerous partners from the past who often critique and even rewrite eachother's words. It's a wild concept for those of us who grew up in fundamentalist traditions! I think you are right. In fact, I think starting with the acknowledgment of sources even changes where you start to do theology. You’re already entered into an extended dialog with numerous partners from the past who often critique and even rewrite eachother’s words.

It’s a wild concept for those of us who grew up in fundamentalist traditions!

]]>