Quote:
Originally Posted by LUKE2447
Also don't ASSUME anything with me. You know nothing of my background nor of my studies!
|
I am sorry that for questioning your background but I don't understand if you have studied biblical criticism how you do not realize the different forms that are available to validate the written Word.
As I said I do not equate the oral tradition that we have today as the original. The only original we do have is that which was given to Moses as the Genesis account. In it we can see that there is many laws that were given, as they observed them.
Source criticism
Core principles
* Human sources may be relics (e.g. a fingerprint) or narratives (e.g. a statement or a letter). Relics are more credible sources than narrratives.
* A given source may be forged or corrupted why strong indications of the originality of the source increases its reliability.
* The closer a source is to the event which it purports to describe, the more one can trust it to give an accurate description of what really happened
* A primary source is more reliable than a secondary source, that is more reliable than a tertiary source and so on.
* If a number of independent sources contain the same message, the credibility of the message is strongly increased.
* The tendency of a source is its motivation for providing some kind of bias. Tendencies should be minimized or supplemented with opposite motivations.
* If it can be demonstrated that the witness (or source) has no direct interest in creating bias, the credibility of the message is increased.
Threaded Mode
