Ramana, following is an amazon review of gmirkin. Gmirkin does not understand the concept of a false flag operation. Even Protocols of Zion painted Jews positively as supreme controllers.
forum link
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->This stunning book presents a theory, argued in meticulous detail, that proposes the who, when, and why the Pentateuch was written. Gmirkin argues on a number of grounds for an early 3rd century BC _terminus a quo_ (no earlier than) date of production of the Pentateuch. These arguments would stand whether or not there was a viable scenario at that time, but it happens there is an excellent one: the traditions surrounding production of the Greek Septuagint. Like Sherlock Holmes solving a vexing mystery, Gmirkin snaps the conclusion into place: the Hebrew Pentateuch was produced as a sort of cultural studies project/grant from the Egyptian ruler Ptolemy II, who gave Jewish scholars access to the famous Library of Alexandria, from which these Jewish scholars wrote their history of the Jewish people. The traditional source analysis of J, P, E, and D, Gmirkin argues, reflects collation of input into the final documents, like the production of work done by a committee. (That is, Gmirkin accepts multiple sources going into the Pentateuch, but dates each of them to early 3rd century BC, on the basis of argument.) In this revolutionary thesis of how the Pentateuch was written, Gmirkin argues, for example, that the biblical exodus story was a Jewish response to Manetho's anti-semitic story of the expulsion of lepers from Egypt, and not the other way around as has traditionally been supposed.
Gmirkin then argues that the Hebrew version of the Pentateuch was translated into Greek contemporary with its Hebrew production. (Compare Josephus's later publication of his 1st century AD _Wars_ first in Aramaic and then in Greek, nearly simultaneously, as a later parallel.) The legendary tradition of the Septuagint's production in the _Letter of Aristeas_, Gmirkin argues, is actually a garbled tradition of the production and publication of the Pentateuch itself. That is, a known tradition of the Pentateuch's time, place, and circumstances of production has been in plain view all this time, but has heretofore not been recognized as such.
Note that Gmirkin's thesis on the date of composition of the Pentateuch does not address issues of historicity of the contents of the Pentateuch, which could contain accurate information concerning the past or be highly legendary or some mixture thereof, depending on the quality of the 3rd century BC Jewish scholars' sources in the Library of Alexandria. That is a distinct set of issues, separate from the issue of date and place of production and publication.
Gmirkin addresses matters such as linguistic dating, illusory reasons why the Pentateuch has been thought to have been in existence prior to 3rd century BC, and so on. Gmirkin's thesis is stunning in its simplicity and coherence, such that informed readers are sure to ask after reading it, "Why didn't I think of that?" There is sure to be a wild ride of scholarly discussion and controversy over Gmirkin's thesis and argument. This is one of the most important studies of this decade for those interested in historical-critical questions concerning the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
forum link
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->This stunning book presents a theory, argued in meticulous detail, that proposes the who, when, and why the Pentateuch was written. Gmirkin argues on a number of grounds for an early 3rd century BC _terminus a quo_ (no earlier than) date of production of the Pentateuch. These arguments would stand whether or not there was a viable scenario at that time, but it happens there is an excellent one: the traditions surrounding production of the Greek Septuagint. Like Sherlock Holmes solving a vexing mystery, Gmirkin snaps the conclusion into place: the Hebrew Pentateuch was produced as a sort of cultural studies project/grant from the Egyptian ruler Ptolemy II, who gave Jewish scholars access to the famous Library of Alexandria, from which these Jewish scholars wrote their history of the Jewish people. The traditional source analysis of J, P, E, and D, Gmirkin argues, reflects collation of input into the final documents, like the production of work done by a committee. (That is, Gmirkin accepts multiple sources going into the Pentateuch, but dates each of them to early 3rd century BC, on the basis of argument.) In this revolutionary thesis of how the Pentateuch was written, Gmirkin argues, for example, that the biblical exodus story was a Jewish response to Manetho's anti-semitic story of the expulsion of lepers from Egypt, and not the other way around as has traditionally been supposed.
Gmirkin then argues that the Hebrew version of the Pentateuch was translated into Greek contemporary with its Hebrew production. (Compare Josephus's later publication of his 1st century AD _Wars_ first in Aramaic and then in Greek, nearly simultaneously, as a later parallel.) The legendary tradition of the Septuagint's production in the _Letter of Aristeas_, Gmirkin argues, is actually a garbled tradition of the production and publication of the Pentateuch itself. That is, a known tradition of the Pentateuch's time, place, and circumstances of production has been in plain view all this time, but has heretofore not been recognized as such.
Note that Gmirkin's thesis on the date of composition of the Pentateuch does not address issues of historicity of the contents of the Pentateuch, which could contain accurate information concerning the past or be highly legendary or some mixture thereof, depending on the quality of the 3rd century BC Jewish scholars' sources in the Library of Alexandria. That is a distinct set of issues, separate from the issue of date and place of production and publication.
Gmirkin addresses matters such as linguistic dating, illusory reasons why the Pentateuch has been thought to have been in existence prior to 3rd century BC, and so on. Gmirkin's thesis is stunning in its simplicity and coherence, such that informed readers are sure to ask after reading it, "Why didn't I think of that?" There is sure to be a wild ride of scholarly discussion and controversy over Gmirkin's thesis and argument. This is one of the most important studies of this decade for those interested in historical-critical questions concerning the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->