Higher Criticism - We Should Use It

Total Posts:  7
Joined  02-07-2008
31 August 2011 09:16

I believe that science, though adequate in itself to refute religion, is not enough for many people.  We need to include The Bible itself in our writing and speaking.

In all the Atheist literature I have read I have never encountered a good treatment of Higher Criticism.  It is the study of scripture as an academic subject, and it is over 200 years old.  Higher Criticism recruits from many disciplines including linguistics, history, archaeology, comparative mythology, literature, and I have probably missed something.  Mainstream seminaries teach HC to their seminarians.  HC has revealed what there is to know about scripture; that it was written by men from a wide range of sources, that it has a highly political agenda, that The Bible has incorporates passages (some of them verbatim), from the traditions of other cultures.

There is no clearer evidence that The Bible is of human origin, along with Jahweh,  Jesus, and the lot.  Why do no major Atheist authors use the discoveries of HC in their writings?

Here are a couple of examples:
The Annals of Atra-Hasis provides the model for the life story of Moses. 
The Epic of Gilgamesh was quoted in Ecclesiastes, as well as various other places.
Major events in the mythic story of the life of Jesus reflect events in Moses’ life.
Examples go on and on.

The Bible is shrouded in the meme of unassailable mystery and holiness.  There may be no penetrating the fundamentalist mind, but when The Bible is demythologized, it becomes easier to become Atheist. 

We should use HC.