The problem I have with contradiction writers is they are clueless as to why the contradictions exist. This is especially true in the OT where contradictions typically appear in sequence. Where the writers really that stupid? There are cosmic myth reasons why those contradictions exist. These have never been explored by any scholar. Unless you know the " cosmic code" and historyof the text, these contradictions make the authors look stupid.
The stucture of the OT was set by Wellhausen and scholars have not altered much from it, except for unified text theory. But how about another theory which combines the two and eliminates the texual problems associated with each theory? The OT was written as a living document. It was not sewn together or written at one time in one era. There is ample evidence for this within the Bible itself.
Tigay's work on Gilgamesh shows that it was a living document. The contradictions within the text were added later. (We know this because we have both older and newer texts for comparison.) Tigay outlines writing techniques such as resumptive repetition used soley to add new material to Gilgamesh. Those same identical techniques desribed by Tigay for Gilgamesh are present in the OT Bible.
How could it be two texts written in the same era by similar or the same culture could use the same writing techniques, but one be a living document and the other a unified text, or a piece job? Here Gilgamesh supplies us with a template on Biblical construction. It is also possible to de-contruct the text by reversing the process (with a little logic and admitted prejudice) to obtain the original OT text. If i can do it, Bible scholars can do it too. The problem is they have certain ivory tower beliefs that prevent them from thinking outside the box, even when it is obvious.
The stucture of the OT was set by Wellhausen and scholars have not altered much from it, except for unified text theory. But how about another theory which combines the two and eliminates the texual problems associated with each theory? The OT was written as a living document. It was not sewn together or written at one time in one era. There is ample evidence for this within the Bible itself.
Tigay's work on Gilgamesh shows that it was a living document. The contradictions within the text were added later. (We know this because we have both older and newer texts for comparison.) Tigay outlines writing techniques such as resumptive repetition used soley to add new material to Gilgamesh. Those same identical techniques desribed by Tigay for Gilgamesh are present in the OT Bible.
How could it be two texts written in the same era by similar or the same culture could use the same writing techniques, but one be a living document and the other a unified text, or a piece job? Here Gilgamesh supplies us with a template on Biblical construction. It is also possible to de-contruct the text by reversing the process (with a little logic and admitted prejudice) to obtain the original OT text. If i can do it, Bible scholars can do it too. The problem is they have certain ivory tower beliefs that prevent them from thinking outside the box, even when it is obvious.
"On Earth as it is in Heaven, the Cosmic Roots of the Bible" available on the Amazon.
