I'm forbidden from commenting at Triablogue, but that hasn't stopped their continuing inanity.
Commenter Mr Fosi complains:
'Google search results showing that "documentary hypothesis" appears within the syllabi of some classes at "evangelical" schools is not proof of your claim (that I have paraphrased) that it is a "widely accepted hypothesis taught as sound methodology at the majority of evangelical schools".'Here is what I actually wrote:
If you cannot accept that even Evangelical Seminaries teach the documentary hypothesis, then seriously I have to wonder...Did I say that Evangelical seminaries taught the DH as "sound methodology"? No I did not. I said they taught it, which they clearly do - as it is the standard understanding in Biblical scholarship. Certainly many reject it - where they reject anything which contradicts the "truth" of the Bible.
Here is Conservapedia of all sources on the subject: "The great majority of Bible experts accept one or another version of the Documentary Hypothesis. However it is rejected by some Fundamentalists... The Documentary Hypothesis is taught in at most universities and seminaries."
As Fundamentalist scholar Bryant Wood withered
"...in academia it's an established fact that this whole time period is legendary... there’s a strong anti-Bible bias in the academic journals that publish archaeological findings..."Here's more of Mr Fosi, lecturing the ether:
"I bring it up not to ridicule you, but to provide one bit of evidence that, contrary to your fallacious claim, that I have noticed your links. The point here is not that you haven't furnished links or information, but that what you have provided does not appear support the claims you are making."According to his profile, Mr Fosi is "struggling to finish his phd". I hate to think in what.
