|
The thought occurred to me that scholarship is probably advancing (I'm not saying qualitatively, but quantitatively) so fast that this book will be obsolete in a few years, if it isn't already (it's over 7 years old). I don't know if Dr. Friedman is still living, but it might be time for a revision by someone.
I haven't done any research or study on the O.T. Documentary Hypothesis since the mid 80's. Then, it was nice and short--JEDP. There might have been a person or two out there arguing that there were other sources, but they hadn't reached the mainstream at that time.
I was "floored" to see that there are now, apparently, eleven sources advocated.
I should have known, though. I do halfway keep up with the state of the documentary hypothesis thinking in studies of the N.T. Gospels. At first, it was nice and neat--Matthew and Luke used Mark and the hypothetical document Q. But, then, scholars realized that there was some material in Matthew that wasn't in Mark or Q, so they postulated a source "M" for that. And there was some material in Luke that wasn't in Mark or Q, so they postulated a source "L" for that. But, that didn't fully account for everything, so there was a Proto-this and Proto-that. Etc., etc. Ad infinitum.
Maybe I need to wait and see if a revision to this Bible Sources book will be coming out soon.
|