someone made a persuasive argument to me today. he asked me if i analyzed someone's writings over the course of 60 years, then would i expect to see some differences in the writing style, vocabulary, and content? wouldn't the writer's experiences, location, and relationships impact these attributes?
i have been exposed to an onslaught of views on the authorship of the old testament (or hebrew bible if i follow the 'correct' reference). one of the areas questioned by critics is changes in writing of authors over the years. a specific example is the writer of the book of Isaiah.
i have been challenged again (the same ideas were given during an old testament survey class at UVa) by the notion that there were multiple authors of Isaiah. the first author wrote chapters 1-39 and another author wrote 40-66 or 40-55 and then another wrote 56-66. the main evidence cited for this theory is that the perspective shifts from the time before the Jews were exiled to Babylon and the time after they were exiled.
i am still working through the evidence but i definitely see this debate as an example of how we as humans want to define and control everything mysterious and have a neat explanation.
if we were to analyze the writing of the very same people who critique Isaiah and other Old Testament writings, then wouldn't we also find the very same inconsistencies or changes that the critics raise for Isaiah. the critics would claim that they wrote all of their works and cite that their vocabulary, ideas, and style changed due to different seasons in their lives. they would be offended if we said that they obviously didn't write all of their precious works...
maybe the theories that i am reading about are not as neat as the critics make them out to be...
No comments:
Post a Comment