Talk:Richard Elliott Friedman

A professor of literature not an archaeologist

Professor Richard Elliott Friedman is a professor of literature at the University of California, San Diego https://act.ucsd.edu/directory/faculty_staff?list_code=8577&blinkref=&entryparam=richard%20%20friedman He is not an archaeologist. It is doubtful he is qualified to of speak of the Biblical Exodus and archaeology. He seems to be totally unaware of the book, Exodus: The Egyptian Evidence edited by Ernest S. Freichs and Leonard H. Lesko, Eisenbrauns, 1997. I find this odd. Miistermagico (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 02:37, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

The embedded link directs to Jennifer Friedman. Editor2020 (talk) 18:26, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

"He attended the University of Miami (BA, 1968), the Jewish Theological Seminary (MHL, 1971), and Harvard University (ThM in Hebrew Bible, 1974; ThD in Hebrew Bible and Near Eastern Languages and Civilizations, 1978). He was the Katzin Professor of Jewish Civilization: Hebrew Bible; Near Eastern Languages and Literature at the University of California, San Diego, from 1994 until 2006[3][4], whereupon he joined the faculty of the University of Georgia's Religion Department, where he is currently the Ann and Jay Davis Professor of Jewish Studies.[5] Friedman teaches courses in Hebrew, Bible, and Jewish Studies.[5]

He is a winner of numerous awards and honors, including American Council of Learned Societies Fellow.[6] He was a Visiting Fellow at the University of Cambridge and the University of Oxford; and a Senior Fellow of the American Schools of Oriental Research in Jerusalem. He participated in the City of David Project archaeological excavations of biblical Jerusalem. He is probably most famous for his work Who Wrote the Bible?, a description of the documentary hypothesis."

I think he is qualified.Editor2020 (talk) 18:45, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

Dear User:Editor2020, I disagree with you archaeology is not Friedman's field. Participating in a dig does not make one an archaeologist. You are only a laborer, a helper, for a trained archaeologist. Friedman is a professor or literature. This is the reason behind Friedman's book on the documentary (fact) hypothesis. Look carefully at the Noah story in Genesis it is obvious there are TWO versions. There are TWO versions of the number of creatures taken into the ark, an obvious doublet. I highly recommend "On Genesis: A New Reading" by Bruce Vawter, Doubleday & Co, (1977), also follow the latest discoveries in ancient archaeology from critical archaeologists. I suggest William G. Dever. Miistermagico (talk) 08:17, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

Dear User: Editor2020, I was WRONG. Friedman is Ann and Jay Davis Professor of Jewish Studies at the University of Georgia where he teaches Hebrew, Bible and Jewish studies. He does NOT teach archaeology. How can he possibly present evidence from BOTH text and archaeology that Exodus is a HISTORICAL FACT as he claims? Archaeology is NOT his field. Miistermagico (talk) 14:25, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Friedman doesn't claim that the Exodus story in the book of Exodus is historically accurate, he claims that has a distant historical basis, in that a core group of what were to become Levite priests left Egypt and imposed themselves on the Israelites, who were Canaanites. It would explain the apparently Egyptian names in Exodus, which are concentrated exclusively in the Levites/Aaronids. It's not a fringe position, and not held only by him. PiCo (talk) 06:22, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

@Mistermagico You are arguing against listening to Friedman purely on the basis of him lacking a title given to him by someplace or not having heavy experience in the field of archaeology, and instead are saying “read William G. Dever, etc. who are archaeologists,” but yet Dever argues in favor of the exact same thing that Friedman is arguing in favor of in The Exodus, except with the Josephite tribes rather than the Levites (in Who Were the Early Israelites and Where Did They Come From? — note that Friedman’s view has far more evidence backing it up than Dever’s alternative identification of the Josephite tribes). Same with Abraham Faust and many other archaeologists. And as PiCo noted in his comment above you seem to have missed the point of what Friedman argues in his book (and seem to be unaware of the fact that this argument is not a fringe position either and is not unique to him). One need not have formal background in something to be knowledgeable enough to comment upon matters in a particular field. On this same note, Friedman has actively worked with many knowledgeable and respected archaeologists in his career and is quite knowledgeable about matters in it.

I realize this comment thread/discussion is old but I still wanted to point this out here because nobody seems to have mentioned that plenty of archaeologists argue in favor of what is essentially the same thing that Friedman argues in his 2017 book. Mdx107 (talk) 04:03, 14 February 2023 (UTC)