Changes

The Authors of the Gospels also believed in Mosaic authorship, as did the famous Roman historians Philo, and Josephus Flavius. <ref>{{cite book|title=The Pentateuch in Its Cultural Environment |last=Livingston |first=Herbert G.|authorlink=|year= 1974|publisher=Baker Book House|isbn=0801055407}}</ref>

The Authors of the Gospels also believed in Mosaic authorship, as did the famous Roman historians Philo, and Josephus Flavius.<ref>{{cite book|title=The Pentateuch in Its Cultural Environment |last=Livingston |first=Herbert G.|authorlink=|year= 1974|publisher=Baker Book House|isbn=0801055407}}</ref>

== The Mosaic tradition in the modern age ==

== The Mosaic tradition in the modern age ==

Dr. [[Mordechai Breuer]]'s approach is as follows. <ref>"Emunah U-Madda Be-Parashanut Ha-Mikra," Deot, Cheker Ha-Mikra Be-Machshavah Ha-Yehudit Ha-Datit He-Chadashah, 11 (1959):18-25, 12 (I960): 13-27. </ref> The Torah must speak in "the language of men." But the wisdom that God would bestow upon us cannot be disclosed in a straightforward manner. The Torah therefore resorts to a technique of multivocal communication. Each strand in the text, standing on its own, reveals one aspect of the truth, and each aspect of the truth appears to contradict the other accounts. An insensitive reader, noticing the tension between the versions, imagines himself assaulted by a cacophony of conflicting voices. The perceptive student, however, experiences the magnificent counterpoint in all its power. To use Rabbi Breuer's example: Genesis 1 (the so-called P account) describes one aspect of the biblical understanding of creation; Genesis 2 (the so-called J version) presents a complementary way of apprehending God's creation of the world and of man. Each text, isolated from the other, would offer a partial, hence misleading, doctrine of creation. In their juxtaposition, the two texts point the reader toward an understanding of the whole.

Dr. [[Mordechai Breuer]]'s approach is as follows.<ref>"Emunah U-Madda Be-Parashanut Ha-Mikra," Deot, Cheker Ha-Mikra Be-Machshavah Ha-Yehudit Ha-Datit He-Chadashah, 11 (1959):18-25, 12 (I960): 13-27.</ref> The Torah must speak in "the language of men." But the wisdom that God would bestow upon us cannot be disclosed in a straightforward manner. The Torah therefore resorts to a technique of multivocal communication. Each strand in the text, standing on its own, reveals one aspect of the truth, and each aspect of the truth appears to contradict the other accounts. An insensitive reader, noticing the tension between the versions, imagines himself assaulted by a cacophony of conflicting voices. The perceptive student, however, experiences the magnificent counterpoint in all its power. To use Rabbi Breuer's example: Genesis 1 (the so-called P account) describes one aspect of the biblical understanding of creation; Genesis 2 (the so-called J version) presents a complementary way of apprehending God's creation of the world and of man. Each text, isolated from the other, would offer a partial, hence misleading, doctrine of creation. In their juxtaposition, the two texts point the reader toward an understanding of the whole.

====Antiquity of the Hebrew found in the Torah====

====Antiquity of the Hebrew found in the Torah====

The Torah has the tendency to use some archaic Hebrew forms, which suggests that its origin antedates the Israelite monarchies.<ref>The Redaction of Genesis, Gary A. Rendsburg, Eisenbraus:1986 page 114</ref> For example, Genesis has a common 3rd person singular pronoun form -hw; Joshua and later works breaks this into masculine and feminine forms.<ref>Exodus: The Egyptian Evidence, E.S. Frerichs and L.H. Lesko (eds), Eisenbrauns:1997. page 44</ref> Also of note, is that the word "Goshen", which is mentioned extensively throughout the Torah, is only used in the pre-monarchy texts (the latest reference is found in Joshua 15); all subsequent biblical references to the area do not refer to this.<ref>Israel in Egypt: The Evidence for the Authenticity of the Exodus Tradition, James K. Hoffmeier, Oxford: 1997. page 21</ref> Some of the poetic material preserved in the Torah is incredibly ancient, and reflects syntax and semantic usages that disappeared later in the Old Testament historical period. The poetry of the Bible, like that of other Northwest Semitic literaruters, employs a language which differs in various ways from the language of prose, reflecting, in general, an earlier stage of Hebrew and with a closer affinity in language, style, and content with neighboring dialects, especially those to the north." Notable among the biblical passages that best reflect Archaic Hebrew are the Blessings of Jacob (Gn 49), the Song of Moses (Ex 15), Balaam (Nm 23-24), the Oracles of  and the Poem of Moses (Dt 32), the  and of Moses (Dt 33). One also finds widespread use of the third person pronominal suffix -mo (e.g. Ex 15.5,7), the second person feminine suffix -ky, the third person singular masculine suffix -h instead of -w (e.g. Gen 49.11), infinitive absolute with temporal value (e.g. Ex 15.6), zo and zu used as relative particles (Ex 15.13), use of the negative bal instead of lo, the verbal suffix -t in the third person feminine (e.g. Dt 32.36) traces of the old case endings in nouns suffixed by -i or -o in the construct state (e.g. Gen 49.11; Nm 23.18). "Expressions used almost exclusively in poetry include hapax legomena and other rare words, which tend to be concentrated in the oldest biblical texts. Generally it may be said that these items existed during the archaic period of the language, later disappearing from normal use...The occurrence of so many lexical items of this kind in a single passage is evidence of its antiquity." <ref>A History of the Hebrew Language, Angel Saenz-Badillos (trans. by John Elwolde), Cambridge:1993. pages 56-61</ref>

The Torah has the tendency to use some archaic Hebrew forms, which suggests that its origin antedates the Israelite monarchies.<ref>The Redaction of Genesis, Gary A. Rendsburg, Eisenbraus:1986 page 114</ref> For example, Genesis has a common 3rd person singular pronoun form -hw; Joshua and later works breaks this into masculine and feminine forms.<ref name="Exodus 1997. page 44">Exodus: The Egyptian Evidence, E.S. Frerichs and L.H. Lesko (eds), Eisenbrauns:1997. page 44</ref> Also of note, is that the word "Goshen", which is mentioned extensively throughout the Torah, is only used in the pre-monarchy texts (the latest reference is found in Joshua 15); all subsequent biblical references to the area do not refer to this.<ref name="Egypt 1997. page 21">Israel in Egypt: The Evidence for the Authenticity of the Exodus Tradition, James K. Hoffmeier, Oxford: 1997. page 21</ref> Some of the poetic material preserved in the Torah is incredibly ancient, and reflects syntax and semantic usages that disappeared later in the Old Testament historical period. The poetry of the Bible, like that of other Northwest Semitic literaruters, employs a language which differs in various ways from the language of prose, reflecting, in general, an earlier stage of Hebrew and with a closer affinity in language, style, and content with neighboring dialects, especially those to the north." Notable among the biblical passages that best reflect Archaic Hebrew are the Blessings of Jacob (Gn 49), the Song of Moses (Ex 15), Balaam (Nm 23-24), the Oracles of  and the Poem of Moses (Dt 32), the  and of Moses (Dt 33). One also finds widespread use of the third person pronominal suffix -mo (e.g. Ex 15.5,7), the second person feminine suffix -ky, the third person singular masculine suffix -h instead of -w (e.g. Gen 49.11), infinitive absolute with temporal value (e.g. Ex 15.6), zo and zu used as relative particles (Ex 15.13), use of the negative bal instead of lo, the verbal suffix -t in the third person feminine (e.g. Dt 32.36) traces of the old case endings in nouns suffixed by -i or -o in the construct state (e.g. Gen 49.11; Nm 23.18). "Expressions used almost exclusively in poetry include hapax legomena and other rare words, which tend to be concentrated in the oldest biblical texts. Generally it may be said that these items existed during the archaic period of the language, later disappearing from normal use...The occurrence of so many lexical items of this kind in a single passage is evidence of its antiquity." <ref>A History of the Hebrew Language, Angel Saenz-Badillos (trans. by John Elwolde), Cambridge:1993. pages 56-61</ref>

===Biblical manuscripts===

===Biblical manuscripts===

In 1979, two silver scrolls that were used as amulets, inscribed with portions of the well-known Priestly Blessing of the Book of Numbers were discovered in a burial cave near Jerusalem. These scrolls have been dated to close to 600 BC based on late Iron Age artifacts found in the undisturbed area of the tomb where they were located. <ref name="tna">{{cite episode

In 1979, two silver scrolls that were used as amulets, inscribed with portions of the well-known Priestly Blessing of the Book of Numbers were discovered in a burial cave near Jerusalem. These scrolls have been dated to close to 600 BC based on late Iron Age artifacts found in the undisturbed area of the tomb where they were located.<ref name="tna">{{cite episode

| title        =  Who Wrote the Bible?

| title        =  Who Wrote the Bible?

| series      = The Naked Archaeologist

| series      = The Naked Archaeologist

===Archaeology===

===Archaeology===

The work of the American school of [[Biblical archaeology|biblical archaeologists]] such as [[William F. Albright]] and [[Cyrus Gordon]] have confirmed that [[Genesis]] and [[Exodus]] are firmly grounded in the material reality of the second millennium.<ref>[http://www.biblicalstudies.org.uk/article_archaeology.html#1 "Archaeology and the Patriarchs"]</ref>  The Torah accurately portrays second-millennium legal and social customs.<ref>Israel in Egypt: The Evidence for the Authenticity of the Exodus Tradition, James K. Hoffmeier, Oxford: 1997. page 21</ref> An example of this how the price of 20 shekels price for Joseph was the going price for a slave during the first half of the 2nd millennium, whereas in the 2nd half of that millennium the price had gone up to 30 shekels. <ref>Israel in Egypt: The Evidence for the Authenticity of the Exodus Tradition, James K. Hoffmeier, Oxford: 1997. page 84</ref> The legal and cultural patterns present in the Patriarchal narratives simply no longer existed in exilic or post-exilic times.Furthermore, the customs manifested by Abraham & the patriarchs that descend from him are most closely matched by the society illustrated in the Nuzi tablets (of a Hurrian background peoples), dated in the first half of the 2nd millennium BC  <ref>The Bible and the Ancient Near East, Cyrus Gordon and Gary Rendsburg, Norton:1997 (4th ed). pages 109-130</ref>

The work of the American school of [[Biblical archaeology|biblical archaeologists]] such as [[William F. Albright]] and [[Cyrus Gordon]] have confirmed that [[Genesis]] and [[Exodus]] are firmly grounded in the material reality of the second millennium.<ref>[http://www.biblicalstudies.org.uk/article_archaeology.html#1 "Archaeology and the Patriarchs"]</ref>  The Torah accurately portrays second-millennium legal and social customs.<ref name="Egypt 1997. page 21"/> An example of this how the price of 20 shekels price for Joseph was the going price for a slave during the first half of the 2nd millennium, whereas in the 2nd half of that millennium the price had gone up to 30 shekels.<ref>Israel in Egypt: The Evidence for the Authenticity of the Exodus Tradition, James K. Hoffmeier, Oxford: 1997. page 84</ref> The legal and cultural patterns present in the Patriarchal narratives simply no longer existed in exilic or post-exilic times.Furthermore, the customs manifested by Abraham & the patriarchs that descend from him are most closely matched by the society illustrated in the Nuzi tablets (of a Hurrian background peoples), dated in the first half of the 2nd millennium BC  <ref>The Bible and the Ancient Near East, Cyrus Gordon and Gary Rendsburg, Norton:1997 (4th ed). pages 109-130</ref>

Furthermore, for those who doubt the historicity of the Exouds completely, by suggesting that it was created only in the sixth to fifth century B.C. post-exilic era, a question must be asked regarding Ramesses and [[Pithom]], the cities on which the Hebrews labored, according to Exodus. Why did the biblical editors or redactors refer specifically to Ramesses, when in their own era and for some three centuries earlier the capital of [[Egypt]] had been Tanis, a city well known and often referred to in the [[Old Testament]]? From the [[Book of Judges]] onwards, Tanis is consistently referred to as Egypt's capital. Why would a biblical editor insert Ramesses into a newly composed story when that city no longer existed in Egypt and had not been [[Pharaoh]]'s residence or the capital for the previous four or five centuries? ...Tanis had been the Egyptian capital throughout nearly the entire span of Israel's monarchic period. What sense would it make for Jews familiar with Saite Egypt to invent a story about an oppressive pharaoh who had compelled their ancestors to labor on his cities, and why fix on Ramesses for this role? In Dynasty XXVI Pharaoh's capital was Sais, and even more pointedly, Jewish exiles in Egypt were valued for their mercenary skills and not consigned to compulsory brick making. <ref>Exodus: The Egyptian Evidence, E.S. Frerichs and L.H. Lesko (eds), Eisenbrauns:1997. page 44</ref>

Furthermore, for those who doubt the historicity of the Exouds completely, by suggesting that it was created only in the sixth to fifth century B.C. post-exilic era, a question must be asked regarding Ramesses and [[Pithom]], the cities on which the Hebrews labored, according to Exodus. Why did the biblical editors or redactors refer specifically to Ramesses, when in their own era and for some three centuries earlier the capital of [[Egypt]] had been Tanis, a city well known and often referred to in the [[Old Testament]]? From the [[Book of Judges]] onwards, Tanis is consistently referred to as Egypt's capital. Why would a biblical editor insert Ramesses into a newly composed story when that city no longer existed in Egypt and had not been [[Pharaoh]]'s residence or the capital for the previous four or five centuries? ...Tanis had been the Egyptian capital throughout nearly the entire span of Israel's monarchic period. What sense would it make for Jews familiar with Saite Egypt to invent a story about an oppressive pharaoh who had compelled their ancestors to labor on his cities, and why fix on Ramesses for this role? In Dynasty XXVI Pharaoh's capital was Sais, and even more pointedly, Jewish exiles in Egypt were valued for their mercenary skills and not consigned to compulsory brick making.<ref name="Exodus 1997. page 44"/>