Lundahl (2022x) is Absolutely Wrong. Traditions Shouldn’t Be Blindly Trusted and His “First Known Audience” Approach is a Scam
Kevin R. Henke
November 22, 2022
In Henke (2022bn), I said the following:
“Lundahl (2022k) makes the following comments about point #5 in Henke (2022b) about who wrote Genesis 3 and when:
“First known audience considered it to have been written by Moses, and considered Genesis 1 to be based on a vision granted him on Sinai. They are not known to have made a parallel claim of prophecy for the parts that could be historically transmitted. This means, Genesis was finished as book after the Exodus event, and by Moses, who had access to revelation for a limited part of it and historic traditions and documents for the rest.”
“Here, Mr. Lundahl is again making groundless proclamations that have no evidential support whatsoever. So, where’s the archeological evidence that Moses ever lived? If he did happen to exist, how do we know that he wrote anything? How do we know when Moses lived, if he lived at all? Why should we trust the traditions of ancient Israelites? How can we trust the beliefs of individuals that lived about a thousand years after Moses supposedly lived and many more thousands of years after Adam supposedly lived? To be exact, the archaeological results in Finkelstein and Silberman (2001) and other 21st century sources provide good evidence on the origin of ancient Israel and the Moses story is baseless. Lundahl (2022k) needs to look at the evidence and not just blindly trust groundless Hebrew speculation and myths. Finkelstein and Silberman (2001, pp. 10-24) and many other experts also present good evidence that the Pentateuch was written by multiple authors and not all at once. Various individuals, including conservative Christians and secular archeologists (e.g., Finkelstein and Silberman 2001), have thrown out dates on when the Pentateuch or various parts of it were written. None of these dates are well verified.” [my emphasis]
In Lundahl (2022x), Mr. Lundahl continues to respond to Henke (2022bn) by addressing the above bolded statement:
“You can be an expert in what you can watch yourself repeatedly. You cannot be an expert in assigning authorships other than those assigned by first known audience.
The authority of expertise is not the kind of evidence I should look at, the authority of tradition is.”
Mr. Lundahl fails to realize that long-held traditions often turn out to be unreliable and should never be blindly trusted (Henke 2022Lc). Furthermore, his “first known audience” approach is a scam, as I have repeatedly demonstrated (e.g., Henke 2022bh, Henke 2022cc, Henke 2022dn, Henke 2022ee, Henke 2022ek, Henke 2022fL, Henke 2022gc, Henke 2022gg, Henke 2022jt, Henke 2022ju). Critical examination of the vocabulary, grammar, contradictions, and other aspects of various texts, both biblical and non-biblical, can often identify forgeries or the presence of multiple authors (Price 2017; Ehrman 2013). Mr. Lundahl actually needs to read Finkelstein and Silberman (2001, pp. 10-24). For more information and evidence on the multiple authorship of the Pentateuch, Finkelstein and Silberman’s references are on pp. 358-359. Rather than just blindly trusting faulty traditions and his unreliable “first known audience” approach, Mr. Lundahl would also benefit from more recent peer-reviewed references on this topic. The old tradition that Moses wrote the Pentateuch is long dead.
References:
Ehrman, B.D. 2013. Forgery and Counterforgery: The Use of Literary Deceit in Early Christian Polemics: Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 628pp.
Finkelstein, I. and N.A. Silberman. 2001. The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology's New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of its Sacred Texts: The Free Press: New York, USA, 385pp.
Price, R.M. 2017. Holy Fable: Volume I: The Old Testament Undistorted by Faith: Mindvendor Press, Coppell, TX, USA, 334pp