Replies

Flash forward to the 1980's, when the traditional view was challenged by an emerging new paradigm advanced by a group of scholars penned in the popular press and discussion circles as "minimalists". They asserted that the Hebrew Bible as we know it today was the product of writing and editing by a group of elite 6th-5th century B.C. scribes who, in essence, "wrote" the Bible under Babylonian captivity and during post-exilic times in Jerusalem. The minimalists argued that events and personalities documented in the Biblical record that occurred prior to the 5th century were fabrications, or at best highly exaggerated accounts in order to create a more glorified history and heritage. It meant that, among other things, kings David and Solomon and their kingdoms either did not exist at all or that they were not as large on the historical stage as traditionally portrayed.

This thinking isn't modern. During the catastrophic period in Germany that produced so much bad philosophy, including Marxism, mid-19 century AD (Year of our Lord intended), a group of German Jewish scholars began to attack their 'own' Book.

In November 1819 a group of Jewish Scholars met in Berlin to found the Society for the Culture and Scientific Study of the Jews. Out of this came the reaction to the philosophical and religious debates on the Torah stretching back to Maimonidean Controversy and beyond as seen in the New Testament. They introduced humanism and Kant to the debate, but it was already an old debate. As we look to this era and the new information archaeology is 'discovering' we can see the origins of communism, fascism, and antisemitism and the reactions to them. A large part of which was an attempt to fit in and 'reconcile' Judaism with the modern world.

This lead to severe criticism of the Torah as to authenticity and purpose in the late 19th & early 20th century. A controversy which continues today. It's origins are ancient, though. So to pretend that the attempt to refute the Bible is a 'modern' one is absurd.

Given how much we don't know about the ancient world and how much of what we do 'know' is simply speculation I'm excited to see how the work progresses. In Central and South America we've barely scratched the tip of the tip of archaeological knowledge to be gained. Africa, Asia, and other areas remain largely unknown. We should recognize, though, that the theme of refuting God is an ancient one. We'll be through this cycle again, unless we undo government schooling in America.