This is more so a question for myself, and possibly a discussion because I would love this communities insight. I have a similar back story to Bart’s, my first job was running an elementary school ministry while I began attending seminary to study apologetics. 2 years later I became a skeptic, but still retained a lot of biblical insight. Today I’m beginning a study that I plan to turn into a lecture series, because today’s youth is more keen to audio and visual learning as opposed to written.
My study is on the origination of the Hebrew Bible, the NT, and the organization of Canon and ommisioms. I’ve noticed that there is a lot of information out their for those seeking to learn how Moses wrote what would become the Torah. As well as, how the patriarchs sacked cuties as they conqured the promise Land.
Unfortunately, it seems information is limited when using actual historical comparisons methods to deduce the Bible. I want to make sure I’m using good, up to date, information for this study. I want to provide a comprehensive study of this material that isn’t biased by religious belief.
Some sources I’ve been looking at include:
Ehrman, of course
The Book: A history of the Bible by Christopher de Hamal
Lectures by Carol Meyers
It’s a short list and I’m still adding to it, while avoiding people I find to be religiously biased. I don’t have the Hamal book yet but the reviews are good, but no mention of whether he accepts the religos biases.
Hopefully someone has good insights or finds this endeavor interesting enough to wish to lend me a hand!
These do not appear to be two complementary accounts of how the creation took place; they appear to be two accounts that are at odds with each other in fundamental and striking ways. Read them carefully yourself. Make a list of what happens in chapter 1, then a list of what happens in chapter 2, and compare your lists. Among other things you will notice the following:
- According to Genesis 1, plants were created on the third day; only later, on the sixth day, were humans created. But not according to Genesis 2. There we are told that “the LORD God formed man from the dust of the ground” before there were any plants or herbs on the earth (2:4, 7).
- According to Genesis 1, all the animals, of all kinds, were created before humans, on the fifth and sixth days. But according to Genesis 2, “man” was created first (2:7), and then the animals—who were made in order to provide companionship for the man (2:19). Note: it was only after man was made that “the LORD God formed every animal of the field and every bird of the air.” None of the animals existed, according to this account in chapter 2, before the man was made.
- According to Genesis 1, humans, both male and female, were created at the same time, as the pinnacle of all creation (1:26–27). But in Genesis 2 the LORD God first creates “man” (adam); he then creates all the animals in order to provide a companion for “man.” And when none of them is deemed suitable, then and only then does the LORD God make a woman out of a rib that he has taken from the man.
Moreover, and just as important, the literary inconsistencies of Genesis are not unique to these two chapters. On the contrary, there are such problems scattered throughout the book. You can see this for yourself simply by reading the text very carefully. Read, for example, the story of the Flood in Genesis 6–9, and you will find comparable differences. One of the most glaring is this: according to Genesis 6:19, God told Noah to take two animals “of every kind” with him into the ark; but according to Genesis 7:2, God told him to take sevenpairs of all “clean animals” and two of every other kind of animal. Well, which is it? And how can it be both?
You can find similar differences in other parts of the Pentateuch, for example, in the book of Exodus and the ten plagues that Moses miraculously performed against the Egyptians in order to convince the reluctant Pharaoh to let the children of Israel go free from slavery. These are terrific stories, as good as the accounts of the Patriarchs in Genesis. But scholars have long detected similar discrepancies. It has been noted, for example, that in the fifth plague, the LORD killed “all of the livestock” of the Egyptians (9:6). So, based on this account one would think that “all” of the livestock were, indeed, dead. But then, just a few verses later, Moses performs the seventh plague, in which a terrible hailstorm killed not just humans but also all the “livestock” of the Egyptians that had been left in the fields (see 9:19-20; 25). It has been widely concluded that this story was patched up from at least two earlier accounts, which, when spliced together, created an inconsistency. *[how much time elapsed between the first incident and the second? We don’t know. As with the other apparent contradictions, many have simple answers.]
Such differences occur not only within this or that book of the Pentateuch; similar problems are found to occur between one book and the next, making it appear that the same author is not responsible for the entire work. And so, for example, in Exodus, in one of Moses’ early encounters with the deity, God tells him “I am the LORD (Yahweh). I appeared to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob as God Almighty (Hebrew: El Shaddai), but by my name ‘The LORD’ (Yahweh) I did not make myself known to them” (Exodus 6:3). Here God is saying that the patriarchs of Genesis did not know the personal name of God, Yahweh; they only knew him as God Almighty, El Shaddai. But that will come as a very big surprise to a careful reader of Genesis. For it is quite clear in Genesis not only that God appeared to the patriarchs as The LORD (Yahweh), but that they called him by that name. Consider Genesis 4:26: “At that time people began to invoke the name of the LORD (Yahweh).” Or even more telling, Genesis 15:6–8:
And he [Abraham] believed the LORD (Yahweh), and the LORD reckoned it to him as righteousness. Then he said to him, “I am the LORD (Yahweh) who brought you from Ur of the Chaldeans, to give you this land to possess.” But he said, O Lord GOD (Adonai Yahweh), how am I to know that I shall possess it?”
** According to Exodus, God never appeared to or revealed himself to Abraham as Yahweh; according to Genesis, he did. There are clearly different sources that have been incorporated into these stories.
* my question
** This would be like a biographer of the famous boxer referring to the childhood of Muhammad Ali, even though his name was really Cassius Clay at the time.
All or most of these alleged contradictions likely have simple explanations
The reality is that you are starting with some bad assumptions.
The Patriarchs and Moses most likely didn’t even exist. You won’t find professional scholarship attesting to their existence, and how they did things, because the vast majority of all scholars think they were the result of folklore, myth, and propaganda. For example, the ethnocentrism portrayed throughout Genesis (the curse of Canaan, placing the Garden of Eden between the Tigris and Euphrates, the incestuous origins of Moab and Ammon, the rejection of Esau and therefore Edom, etc). This clear propaganda occurs throughout these books well into Judges. The Book of Joshua most scholars consider to be wholly the result of Israelite Nationalism, and the history contained within is marginal at best.
The Hebrew Bible was written from around 750-100 BCE, long after Moses supposedly existed. It was the result of many editors, authors, and redactors all contradicting and correcting each other over hundreds of years, and the vast majority of the books are composite works.
For example, the Book of Job most likely began as a series of dialogues following a common Ancient Near Eastern archetype of a suffering innocent man, at the hands of a divine being (see Epic of Aqhat, Legend of Keret, and more). These were the dialogues between Job, his three friends (Bildad, Zophar, and Eliphaz), and Yahweh. After these were written, the Prologue and Epilogue were most likely added as framework. Then at a later date the Prologue was severely edited, so as to blame the cause of Job’s misfortunes on Satan (whereas the rest of the book firmly places the blame solely on God). From there, Elihu’s passages and the Wisdom Poem were added at an even later date.
This is similar to how all the books were assembled. There were no singular authors, and these aren’t singular works either. They are composite works, being compiled, edited, and redacted.
For some really good information on all this read:
1. Mark S. Smith – “God in Translation: Deities in Cross-cultural Discourse in the Biblical World”
2. Bart Ehrman – “Forged” and “Lost Scriptures”
3. Marvin H. Pope – Anchor Bible Series V. 15 “Job: Introduction, Translation, Notes”
4. William G. Dever – “What Did the Biblical Writers Know and When Did They Know It?” and “Beyond the Texts: An Archaeological Portrait of Ancient Israel and Judah”
5. Nahum Sarna – “Exploring Exodus” and “Understanding Genesis”
6. NIV Cultural Backgrounds Study Bible
As for some online lectures check out these channels:
1. Oriental Institute – ** you do not have permission to see this link **
2. Bart D. Ehrman – ** you do not have permission to see this link **
3. Dr. Anthony J. Tomasino (a personal friend of mine) – ** you do not have permission to see this link **
4. Mark S. Smith –
5. William G. Dever – ** you do not have permission to see this link **
I suggest getting the books most of all though. You can get far more information, read the citations for more books to obtain, and see the actual evidence being displayed.
I am fascinated by the authorship of the Pentatuech myself as well as its canonization.
I wrote to one Shaye JD Cohen concerning his Jewish Homer and told him of my fascination. He recommended Lester Grabbe, who is very up to date and mentions rival opinions based on the evidence we have so far. Not a lot of theoretical could be’s from this guy, just the facts!
I will say, for my money, the Septuagint may be the first time these stories were meshed and it was probably 2nd century BC.
I have seen some sources from Jewish archeologists and textual critics who show that Ezra (the book) was Helleneistic and the book even claims that a rite described in Deutoronomy was first done under Ezra, meaning that even in Hellenistic times rites were being invented and added to the Torah.
Then there is the paper trail. Most finds in the legal genre simply do not support the idea that the Torah was in effect the actual legal system being followed in ancient Persian or Hellenic Yehud.
cturner94 said
This is more so a question for myself, and possibly a discussion because I would love this communities insight. I have a similar back story to Bart’s, my first job was running an elementary school ministry while I began attending seminary to study apologetics. 2 years later I became a skeptic, but still retained a lot of biblical insight. Today I’m beginning a study that I plan to turn into a lecture series, because today’s youth is more keen to audio and visual learning as opposed to written.My study is on the origination of the Hebrew Bible, the NT, and the organization of Canon and ommisioms. I’ve noticed that there is a lot of information out their for those seeking to learn how Moses wrote what would become the Torah. As well as, how the patriarchs sacked cuties as they conqured the promise Land.
Unfortunately, it seems information is limited when using actual historical comparisons methods to deduce the Bible. I want to make sure I’m using good, up to date, information for this study. I want to provide a comprehensive study of this material that isn’t biased by religious belief.
Some sources I’ve been looking at include:
Ehrman, of course
The Book: A history of the Bible by Christopher de Hamal
Lectures by Carol Meyers
It’s a short list and I’m still adding to it, while avoiding people I find to be religiously biased. I don’t have the Hamal book yet but the reviews are good, but no mention of whether he accepts the religos biases.
Hopefully someone has good insights or finds this endeavor interesting enough to wish to lend me a hand!
I have expertise in the historical accuracy of the Bible.
How Moses wrote what would become the Bible?
Moses received the education a pharaoh could give his son. The Hammurabi Code had been around for some time by the time Moses received an international education. He could use the Hammurabi Code as a guide to write what he did.
I would not go against scholarship that deconstructs The Torah (Five Books of Moses) into different traditions (JEPD Theory):
1) Yahwist
2) Elohist
3) Priestly
4) Deuteronomist
QUESTION: Which one/s could link back to Moses? NOT ALL FOUR.
Chris Hansen
The reality is that you are starting with some bad assumptions.
The Patriarchs and Moses most likely didn’t even exist. You won’t find professional scholarship attesting to their existence, and how they did things, because the vast majority of all scholars think they were the result of folklore, myth, and propaganda.
Steefen
So WRONG.
cturner94, please see two works of James Hoffmeier: Ancient Israel in Sinai: The Evidence for the Wilderness Tradition and another book of his, The Archaeology of the Bible.
Was there a Moses figure born before the eruption of Thera which seems to factor into naturalistic explanations of the plagues and the crossing of the Reed Sea? Yes.
It is imperative (no way around this) that you take a good look at the excellent book Exodus: Myth or History by David Rohl.
BDEhrman
FreedomBen
evgendob
Robert
1 Guest(s)