Who Wrote the Bible Part One

Update thru 3/21/2018 6/23/2018 

First a short  tribute to Spinoza who was one the key philosophers to  break the bondage of my mind in two ways.  I have mentioned Spinoza on my blog before. When  much younger still in Beis Medrish and before I ever heard of the Documentary Hypothesis I came across some of  Spinoza’s works. Except for some Rabbis who taught perhaps a few of the last verses of  Deuteronomy were from Joshua, we were taught that the Torah was all  from G-d, and Moses was more or less just a transcriber.   

{ETA 3/21/2018

a) From The Soncino Chumash Edited by Re.  Dr. A. Cohen seventh impression 1968

 When discussing Deut 34:1

Page 1182 "Moses went up. This last chapter was in my [Ibn Ezra] opinion, written by Joshua."

b) Talmud Bava Basra 14b

Joshua wrote the book which bears his name and [the last] eight verses of the Pentateuch.

Talmud Bava Basra 15a

The Master has said: Joshua wrote the book which bears his name and the last eight verses of the Pentateuch. This statement is in agreement with the authority who says that eight verses in the Torah were written by Joshua, as it has been taught: [It is written], So Moses the servant of the Lord died there. Now is it possible that Moses being dead could have written the words, ‘Moses died there’? The truth is, however, that up to this point Moses wrote, from this point Joshua wrote. This is the opinion of R. Judah, or, according to others, of R. Nehemiah. 


I would like to point out that 15a also writes of  R. Simeon who appears to disagrees  with the above. These citations are consistent with what my Rabbaim taught me.}

Spinoza provided strong  evidence that was not likely the case. He hypothesized the Torah was a compilation of various scrolls that get compiled and edited {ETA and some portions authored} at a later date by someone who he theorized was Ezra. His theory is remarkably close to what virtually every, if not every  Bible Scholar today concludes.  Modern Bible Scholars also refer to multiple redactors and authors and may differ on who the final redactor may have been. 

Spinoza also encouraged me to be wary of superstitions.  I would suggest people believing the Torah is from the Mosaic period should begin by studying  Spinoza’s work, then move on to modern Bible Scholarship. These two chapters are essential reading, but I recommend starting from the beginning of the book.  http://sacred-texts.com/phi/spinoza/treat/tpt12.htm http://sacred-texts.com/phi/spinoza/treat/tpt13.htm  My post is not a copy of Spinoza’s writing and I suggest reading his work to see why he writes it is as clear as sunshine at noon that the Torah is not from Moses [or mosaic times.]

The interested reader may want to read http://kefirahoftheweek.blogspot.com/2015/12/does-torah-say-that-moshe-wrote-it.html which may have been prompted by a discussion between one individual and myself on another one of Kefirah’s blog posts. My post is written independently of Kefirah’s.

The Torah itself never gives us reason to believe Moses actually wrote the entire Torah. In fact it’s own words  provides evidence that is not likely the case.

There are many verses wherein the Torah writes that Moses was to record or recorded certain specific material. But that is not license to extrapolate to the entire Torah. Perhaps if the Torah BEGAN with the words: “And G-d told Moses to write...” or if the Torah began “And  Moses wrote.... “ Or if the Torah ended “And  Moses wrote all the words from... to....”  at least then there would be some basis to claim the Torah itself meant to indicate the entire Pentateuch was from Moses.  But on the contrary, time and time again the Torah specifically writes that Moses only wrote certain passages. The Torah is all but saying - this part is from Moses/G-d , and the implication others portions may not have been from Moses or G-d. 

{ETA 3/21/2018

From The Soncino Chumash Edited by Re.  Dr. A. Cohen seventh impression 1968. When discussing Deut 31:9

Page 1150 "This law [Torah]. "S [Sforno] defines it as  the section relating to the monarchy (xvii.14ff)"

Page 1150 Rashi and Ramban interprets as the Pentacheuch

The term Torah may not always be referring to the Pentacheuch, at least per Sforno.}

This post will discuss a minuscule amount of Hebrew, but the reader should not have any difficulty following the post. It is going to focus on Deuteronomy.

Preamble

Beginning on page 83 in Moshe Weinfeld’s commentary on Deuteronomy (Anchor Bible 1991):
Today a book refers to a composition written by a single person. Such was not the case in the Ancient Near East or ancient Israel. The author in ancient times was generally a collector and compiler of traditions, not an author in the modern sense.   Deuteronomy contains laws from the period of the Judges or even from the times of Moses. But it also contains elements from the period of Hezekiah - Josiah. In the second Temple period and onward every letter [of the Bible] was considered sacred. However prior to that it was not the case. Rather the principle content of the books were considered sacred. 

Beginning on page 357 Jewish Publication Bible - Berlin and Brettler 1999  Pseudegraphy - was a convention of authorship in the times of Josiah around 622 BCE.

[ My note - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudepigrapha “There have probably been pseudepigrapha almost from the invention of full writing. For example, ancient Greek authors often refer to texts which claimed to be by Orpheus or his pupil Musaeus but which attributions were generally disregarded. Already in Antiquity the collection known as the "Homeric hymns" was recognized as pseudepigraphical, that is, not actually written by Homer.” ]

Evidence From Deuteronomy that the Torah is not likely from Mosaic Period

Lets begin where Spinoza begins in his Theological-Political Treatise http://sacred-texts.com/phi/spinoza/treat/tpt12.htm ,  Deuteronomy 1:1

Jewish Publication Society Bible (JPS) 1917 Deuteronomy 1:1 These are the words which Moses spoke unto all Israel beyond [  עבר  ] the Jordan; in the wilderness, in the Arabah, over against Suph, between Paran and Tophel, and Laban, and Hazeroth, and Di-zahab.

The word ‘beyond’ is the translation of the Torah’s actual Hebrew word shown in brackets. 

Or Moshe Weinfeld’s version:

Deut 1:1 These are the words that Moses spoke to all Israel on the other side of the Jordan...

Or 

Commentary on the Torah - Richard Friedman 2001

Deut 1:1 These are the words that Moses spoke to all of Israel across the Jordan...

Or

JPS Tigay’s commentary on Deuteronomy 

“....on the other side of the Jordan....”

Or

 Soncino’s Chumash 1950 

“....beyond the Jordan...”

Or 

The Stone Tenach 1998 edition

“...the other side of the Jordan....”

Or

 Jewish Publication Society Torah 1962 edition:

“...on the other side of the Jordan...”

Page 1468 Eerdman’s Analytical Concordance 1988 has for the Hebrew word [  עבר  ] -  across, beyond, other side. 

In the appendix to this post we will see the Hebrew word is used to indicate direction and will demonstrate that is the most likely intention of   עבר in Deut 1:1

Page 383 JPS Berlin and Brettler translates  Deut 1:1 “These are the words that Moses addressed to all Israel on the other side of the Jordan....” and then explains to us - The geographic frame of reference places the speaker west of the Jordan and thus already in Canaan. It is an anachronism.

And Moshe Weinfeld has the same conclusion - the stand point of the Author is on the west bank [ of Jordan].

In other words, the author of Deuteronomy is providing a third party narration to the Israelites who are on the west side of Jordan. But according to tradition the Israelites are East of Jordan during the Mosaic period.  So this strongly suggests that Deuteronomy was written after the Mosaic period. ( I must clarify - not that the whole Deuteronomy  was written from scratch by a single person at a later date. See Weinfelds comments included in this post.). The introductory verse to Deuteronomy helps place the temporal period for Deuteronomy's redaction after the Mosaic period. 

Now one verse alone may not convince, but there are other verses and evidence that Deuteronomy  as we have it was most likely  finalized after the Mosaic period. 

JPS Berlin and Brettler discusses  Deut 2:12 And in Seir dwelt the Horites aforetime, but the children of Esau succeeded them; and they destroyed them from before them, and dwelt in their stead; as Israel did unto the land of his possession, which the LORD gave unto them.--

And explains as follows: The Israelite conquest of the land is presented as already having been completed. It is anachronism.

And on the same book discusses  Deut 3:11 For only Og king of Bashan Remained of the Remnant of the Rephaim; behold, his bedstead was a bedstead of iron; is it not in Rabbah of the children of Ammon? nine cubits was the length thereof, and four cubits the breadth of it, after the cubit of a man....

And explains as follows: The emphasis that the bed is NOW there places the historical perspective of the narrator long after the events here recounted. Cubit is given as about 17.5 inches. [ If so, that would put the bed at 13.13 feet by 5.833 feet - a bed for quite a large individual.]

{ETA 12/11/2015 Spinoza writes that knowledge of the bed in Rabbah was most likely obtained in the times of David when he captures Rabbah as described in 2 Samuel}

Besides these and other verses we may add the following content from JPS Berlin and Brettler:

JPS tells us that Deuteronomy  is not likely of Mosaic origin. The reforms of King Josiah and Deuteronomy have numerous points of contact and similarity. Josiah reforms represented an important bid for cultural, political and religious autonomy in the face of threats from Neo Assyria and a resurgent Babylon.  Also, the Deuteronomy  covenant structure resembles Neo Syrian State Treaties, Ancient Near East Legal collections and Wisdom literature. 

Lets look at some additional verses strongly implying Deuteronomy is likely not written during the Mosaic period.

Deut 34:1 And Moses went up from the plains of Moab unto mount Nebo, to the top of Pisgah, that is over against Jericho. And the LORD showed him all the land, even Gilead as far as Dan; 2 and all Naphtali, and the land of Ephraim and Manasseh, and all the land of Judah as far as the hinder sea; 3 and the South, and the Plain, even the valley of Jericho the city of palm-trees, as far as Zoar. 4 And the LORD said unto him: 'This is the land which I swore unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, saying: I will give it unto thy seed; I have caused thee to see it with thine eyes, but thou shalt not go over thither.' 5 So Moses the servant of the LORD died there in the land of Moab, according to the word of the LORD. 6 And he was buried in the valley in the land of Moab over against Beth-peor; and no man knoweth of his sepulchre unto this day. 7 And Moses was a hundred and twenty years old when he died: his eye was not dim, nor his natural force abated. 8 And the children of Israel wept for Moses in the plains of Moab thirty days; so the days of weeping in the mourning for Moses were ended. 9 And Joshua the son of Nun was full of the spirit of wisdom; for Moses had laid his hands upon him; and the children of Israel hearkened unto him, and did as the LORD commanded Moses. 10 And there hath not arisen a prophet since in Israel like unto Moses, whom the LORD knew face to face; 11 in all the signs and the wonders, which the LORD sent him to do in the land of Egypt, to Pharaoh, and to all his servants, and to all his land; 12 and in all the mighty hand, and in all the great terror, which Moses wrought in the sight of all Israel.

Verse 1-4 could not have been written by Moses. He went up the mountain but never returned.

Verse 7 - ‘unto this day’ Moshe could not have written this because he was not alive. It also implies a long period after he was dead.  

Verse 10 - ‘not arisen a prophet since’ also implies a very long period since Moses is dead.

Deut 31: 1 And Moses went and spoke these words unto all Israel....2 And he said unto them.... 9 And Moses wrote this law, and delivered it unto the priests the sons of Levi, that bore the ark of the covenant of the LORD, and unto all the elders of Israel. 10 And Moses commanded them, saying: 'At the end of every seven years, in the set time of the year of release, in the feast of tabernacles,  


Verse 9 - Tigay writes  “...Moses could not have written this verse in the past tense, in the Teachings because when he was writing the Teachings he had not yet given it to them.”


I think the following verses provide a very interesting puzzle that has some bearing on the authorship of Deuteronomy. It will involve the Book of Numbers, Deuteronomy and Judges.

Numbers 26:52 And the LORD spoke unto Moses, saying: 53 'Unto these the land shall be divided for an inheritance according to the number of names. 54 To the more thou shalt give the more inheritance, and to the fewer thou shalt give the less inheritance; to each one according to those that were numbered of it shall its inheritance be given. 55 Notwithstanding the land shall be divided by lot; according to the names of the tribes of their fathers they shall inherit.... 

Deut 34:1 And Moses went up from the plains of Moab unto mount Nebo, to the top of Pisgah, that is over against Jericho. And the LORD showed him all the land, even Gilead as far as Dan;...... 

Judges 19:40 The seventh lot came out for the tribe of the children of Dan according to their families. 41 And the border of their inheritance was Zorah, and Eshtaol, and Ir-shemesh; 42 and Shaalabbin, and Aijalon, and Ithlah; 43 and Elon, and Timnah, and Ekron; 44 and Eltekeh, and Gibbethon, and Baalath; 45 and Jehud, and Bene-berak, and Gath-rimmon; 46 and Me-jarkon, and Rakkon, with the border over against Joppa. 47 And the border of the children of Dan was too strait for them; so the children of Dan went up and fought against Leshem, and took it, and smote it with the edge of the sword, and possessed it, and dwelt therein, and called Leshem, Dan, after the name of Dan their father. 48 This is the inheritance of the tribe of the children of Dan according to their families, these cities with their villages 49 When they had made an end of distributing the land for inheritance by the borders thereof, the children of Israel gave an inheritance to Joshua the son of Nun in the midst of them; 50 according to the commandment of the LORD they gave him the city which he asked, even Timnath-serah in the hill-country of Ephraim; and he built the city, and dwelt therein. 51 These are the inheritances, which Eleazar the priest, and Joshua the son of Nun, and the heads of the fathers' houses of the tribes of the children of Israel, distributed for inheritance by lot in Shiloh before the LORD, at the door of the tent of meeting. So they made an end of dividing the land.  

Do you see the problems ?

Numbers 26 specifies there will be a lottery to determine the tribal territory allotments of  Israel to tribes.

Deuteronomy 34 - Lord shows Mosese some tribal allotments including Dan’s.

Judges 19 performs the lottery, including one for Dan.

Problem A) - Recall a lottery was performed in Judges 19:40. So did the Lord know what the results of a random lottery was going to be way in the future ?  

Problem B) Dan's tribal area changes after the allotment. Was the future battle of Layish and it's results also known at the time of the Lord showing the tribal areas ?

Problem C) If Deuteronomy  was written before the Judges Lottery, then Moses would have known the tribal areas. After all the Lord showed them to Moses. If so, why hold a lottery - the Lord showed the tribal areas to Moses and he could then relay the Israelites the specifications.

To which believers will reply - G-d was involved and his ways are a mystery and moreover G-d knows the future even the results of a future random lottery and a future war. Or perhaps since G-d can control nature he can force the lottery and wars to end in a certain desired way.  See how all problems go away if you invent miracles, prophecies, mysteries and unlimited powers to G-d ?  This what is known as a non falsifiable position. There is no amount of evidence you can present to such an individual that would convince him their position untenable. They will invent/assert  prophecies, miracles,  G-d’s powers and works in mysterious ways.  But are there not natural explanations ? I am going to speculate and is a topic I need to research further. 

1) Numbers and Joshua are from a similar narrative as to how the lands are assigned, which is via lots.  The Deuteronomy portion may have come from an unrelated  different narrative that G-d told Moses the territory allotments. However, the full details were  not provided in Deuteronomy.  As the Torah is being compiled multiple traditions are being respected.   

2) Numbers and Joshua are an Etiological myth, a true one or a false one. In other words, portions of the tribes had already been extant in Israel. Any tribal bickering over territory  could be quelled by claiming there was a lottery held in ancient times.  It is  possible a lottery was held.  Alternately  bickering could be quelled by claiming G-d had already shown Moses the allotments. 

3) Deuteronomy portion never happened. It was about boasting and glorifying an ancient hero Moses. Also, that  G-d sanctioned the land of Canaan for the Israelites. ‘Proof’  that G-d can control / predict the future. The Deuteronomy section  provides a lead into the next book which is Joshua. 

This post although titled 'Who Wrote the Bible' , is really about why it is very likely Deuteronomy is not from the Mosaic period. My post  Some Reasons to Reject Orthodox Judaism discusses reasons why the Torah is most likely not a divine text.  Now some people may not find my reasons convincing.  But that does not mean the Torah is divine. People who make such an assertion need to provide valid extraordinary evidence.  I am still waiting. 

Continued at Who Wrote the Bible Part Two

Appendix

Numbers 36:13 These are the commandments and the ordinances, which the LORD commanded by the hand of Moses unto the children of Israel in the plains of Moab by [  על   ] the Jordan at Jericho. 

The Hebrew word in the brackets is translated as ‘by’ or ‘on’. By referencing Moab which happens to be East of Jordan,  this verse is consistent with being written on the East side of the Jordan, in contrast to Deut 1:1

Deut 4: 22 but I [Moses] must die in this land, I must not go over  [  עבר  ] the Jordan; but ye are to go over, and possess that good land.

Here  [  עבר  ] Is being used to denote a direction. Since Moses did not enter Canaan and is depicted as speaking on the East of Jordan,  the direction is referring to the West of Jordan.

Examples can be multiplied.  {ETA 6/23/2018  In many verses} a person standing west of the Jordan who says  ‘[  עבר  ] Jordan’ will be referring to East of the Jordan.  A person standing East of the Jordan who says  ‘[  עבר  ] Jordan’ will be referring to West of the Jordan.   This is especially so when the speaker mentions other location that happen to be on the side of Jordan they are referring to. 

{ETA 6/23/2018 However, there may be exceptions:

The Rashbam on Deut 1:1 explains ‘beyond the Jordan’ was current among the inhabitants of the holy land. For them it meant the East side of the Jordan river. But, ‘beyond the Jordan’ may also refer to a region near Jerusalem by people in the desert thru which the Israelites had been traveling, i.e West of the Jordan river. 

[Using this Rashbam it suggests Deut 1:1 was written by an author on the west side of the Jordan, i.e. in the holy land.]

[Consider Number 32: 32 We will pass over armed before the LORD into the land of Canaan, and the possession of our inheritance shall remain with us beyond the Jordan.

Here the speaker is East of the Jordan and yet refers to the East of Jordan as ‘beyond the Jordan’ ! . But notice, the speaker is contrasting his position relative to the Canaan on the west of Jordan. Relative to Canaan (on the west of the Jordan}, the speaker is ‘beyond the Jordan’ which puts him on the east of Jordan. However, it could be the writer of this verse is already in the holy land, and thus refers to the east of Jordan as ‘beyond the Jordan’, consistent with Rashbam. 

I have not examined every instance of ‘beyond the Jordan’ in the Tenach and the term ‘beyond the Jordan’ could depend on context, period written, who is speaking, first or third part narration, Hebrew grammar etc: and would require a dissertation.]

Proof / Disproof of God based on Fallow Part One

The proof/disproof for god (Yahweh) involves:

Leviticus: 25:3 Six years thou shalt sow thy field, and six years thou shalt prune
thy vineyard, and gather in the produce thereof. 4 But in the seventh year shall be
a sabbath of solemn rest for the land, a sabbath unto the LORD; thou shalt neither
sow thy field, nor prune thy vineyard. 5 That which groweth of itself of thy harvest
thou shalt not reap, and the grapes of thy undressed vine thou shalt not gather; it
shall be a year of solemn rest for the land. 6 And the sabbath-produce of the land
shall be for food for you: for thee, and for thy servant and for thy maid, and for
thy hired servant and for the settler by thy side that sojourn with thee; 7 and for
thy cattle, and for the beasts that are in thy land, shall all the increase thereof be
for food....18 Wherefore ye shall do My statutes, and keep Mine ordinances and
do them; and ye shall dwell in the land in safety. 19 And the land shall yield her
fruit, and ye shall eat until ye have enough, and dwell therein in safety. 20 And if ye
shall say: 'What shall we eat the seventh year? behold, we may not sow, nor gather
in our increase'; 21 then I will command My blessing upon you in the sixth year,
and it shall bring forth produce for the three years. 22 And ye shall sow the eighth
year, and eat of the produce, the old store; until the ninth year, until her produce
come in, ye shall eat the old store.

Most, if not all academic scholars interpret Levit 25 (Shemita) regulations as
prescribing that every seventh year the entire country fallows simultaneously.

Shemita is a very complicated topic and I have limited my discussion almost solely
to the proposed 'proof/disproof'.

Before discussing the 'proof/disproof' please read the following important
background material carefully. It also provides academic support for Part 2 and
Part 3 and should be kept in mind while reading them. {ETA 12/15/2014 - A reader who desires to see the proof/disproof go to part 2 and part 3. Think of this Part 1 as supporting documentation to those other two posts.}

-----------------------------
Native American Religions - by Paula Hartz 1997

P 53 Regarding Native Americans - "A sacred song can carry prayers to the spirit world, cure illness, and influence weather and events."

P 59  Native Americans believe that prayer and attention to the spirits can
influence the spirit world and therefore nature. Most agricultural tribes
performed a ritualistic dance to bring life giving rain."

--------------------------------
African Religion by Aloysius Lugira 1999

P 73 " Rain is so important that there are special rites, and indeed, ritual specialists whose main function is to bring about rain at crucial times."

---------------------------------
Religions of the American Indians - by Ake  Hultkrantz 1967, 1979 translation.

Page 274 In March masses of children are sacrificed to the Aztec god Tlaloc. The more they cry the more rain Tlaloc sends.

-------------------------------------

We have precedent for Jewish legal loopholes to abolish Shemita:

In Talmud Sanhedrin 26A R. Jannai abolishes it for economic reasons.

In Israel today there are available Rabbi sanctioned legal loopholes to plant
during the Shemita year.

What I am suggesting is the Priests or Rabbi's would have found ways to mitigate
Shemita in states of emergency, especially if life was in danger.

-------------------------------

Handbook of Life in Bible Times by J.A. Thompson 1986

Page 132 Large government store houses have been excavated in Megiddo, Hazor,
Beer-Sheba and Beth Shemesh, where grain, wine, and olive oil were kept."

--------------------------------

Life In Biblical Israel by King and Stager 2001

Page 91 There were granaries, silos, for grain storage both private and publicly
owned. There were storage pits, collard pithoi and large vessels.

--------------------------------

The Economic Life of the Ancient World by Jules Toutain 1951

Page 9 Regarding Homeric and Hesiodic Society - To reduce soil exhaustion -  each
year one half of the land would fallow and the other half was sown.

Page 38 Greece by the  6th to 4th century B.C. fallowing was no longer the only
method to rest the soil. They had developed ways to obtain better yields than just
fallowing as in page 9.

--------------------------------

The Scale and Nature of the Late Bronze Age Economies of Egypt and Cyprus by
Keith Padgham 2014

P 17 Cypriot Agriculture - It was customary to fallow up to 50% of cultivated
land. Also they practiced Bare Fallowing - Land was cultivated only once every
two to three years. Garnsey suggests that for dry or semi arid conditions: Year
one wheat or Barley. Year Two Legumes. Year Three Fallow.

--------------------------------

From Debt - Slavery in Israel and the Ancient Near East by Gregory Chirichigno  1993

P 304 There were examples of 7-year cycles in the ancient near east which already
had religious and cultic associations before similar Israelite Sabbatical was
instituted, although it is not entirely clear the Israelites borrowed this ancient
practice from any other culture.

Page 310 From Hopkins - a practical way an ancient Israelite Farmer could satisfy
Shemita with biennial rotation.  He divides the land into two plots. {Notation - C -
crop, F - Fallow, S - Shemita Fallow the whole country.} He plants as follows. In
the first year Plot 1 is cropped, while Plot 2 is fallowed. The sequence starting
from year one is:

Plot 1 C F C F C C S  F C F C F C S
Plot 2 F C F C F C S  C F C F C C S

[This is similar to the ancient Homeric and Hesiodic Society
crop-fallow-crop-fallow etc:  system mentioned above.]

Hopkins suggests that Shemita would promote social cohesion and enforce
elasticity of agricultural production.

--------------------------------

Anchor Bible Dictionary Volume 5 1992

Regarding Sabbatical Year page 857

The existence of a seven year cycle of nature is found in Ugaritic Texts (Gordon
1953). "Its purpose was connected with the victory of Baal over Mot, and was to
ensure agricultural prosperity."  There are some parallels (particularly the seventh
year) which indicate the close association of religious belief and agricultural
practices.

--------------------------------

The EERDMANS Bible Dictionary 1987

P 898 "It is not certain whether the Sabbatical Year was ever consistently
practiced" After citing several Tenach verses goes on to say "This suggests that
the actual observance of the Sabbatical year had been dropped before the exile..."

--------------------------------

The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia 1988

P 252 "Observance of the Sabbatical year possessed agricultural and economic
value, for it prevented continuos tilling of the land (Levit 25:4)"

"...for almost 500 years before the exile of Judah in 587 B.C. the Sabbatical
regulation seems to have been widely disregarded..."

--------------------------------

The Anchor Bible Leviticus 23-27 by Jacob Milgrom 2001

P 2156 "As argued by Cohen (1979:45-49), The Sabbatical year was rarely observed..."

P  2182 Reaping is forbidden in the Sabbatical year, but every Israelite is permitted
to benefit from whatever happens to be growing in the field.

P 2158 Regarding the after growth of verse 5 "There is ample evidence that the
after growth during the first fallow year is so abundant that at times two or three
harvests are obtained from one sowing in the Galilee highlands in Wadi Artas,
near Bethleham (Kalisch 1867-72)."

P 2246 "From earliest times Farmers would have realized that fertility was a
coefficient of periodic fallowness...Also  there was an  economic advantage to
accumulate surplus during the first six years to be consumed in the seventh and
thereby obviate the need to engage in a money economy.  And as demonstrated by
M. Hildenbrand and Hopkins (1985, see comment C), leaving the entire land fallow
for the seventh year, provided there had been judicious rotation during the
previous six, need not have resulted in economic stress."

--------------------------------

Ancient Israel by Roland Der Vaux 1965 edition

Page 173 Regarding Sabbatical Year - Seven year periods also occurs in Oriental
literature.

-------------------------------

My Sabbath post discusses the mythological  importance of seven.

Sabbatical Cycle or Seasonal Pattern ? Reflections on a New Book  (Kapelrud's
Baal in the Ras Shamra 1952) by , C. Gordon in Orientalia Volume 22, 1953

From Ugaritic Literature:

Mot's death at the hands of Baal (or Anath) lasted 7 years.

"...Seven years may Baal fail, yea 8 the Rider of Clouds; let there be no dew, no
rain..."

Text 52 deals with the ushering in of a 7 year cycle of plenty.

"Moreover, other texts  such as  'seven years the god is ful' (75:II:45) tie in with
this 'cyclicity', regardless who the god may be."

"Seven-year famines result from the  slaying of a hero such as Gilgamesh, Aqhat
and probably Saul and Jonathan.
People feared unseasonable drought, locust plagues, blight, ....
When a succession of sterile years occurred life became unbearable. "Such
catastrophes were coupled in the minds of the people of Mesopotamia, Ugarit,
Israel, Egypt etc. with the seven-motif and therefore it occurs to us that while
seasonal pattern is ruled out, Sabbatical Cycle fits the facts. The land is to lie
fallow in the seventh year so that the next Sabbatical Cycle will be a fertile one.

This suggests original fertility rites in conjunction with the  Sabbatical Cycle. That
the institution goes back to pre-Israelite origins is evident from the extrabibilical
texts we have cited, especially those from Ugarit."

-----------------------------------------------

The Sabbatical Year
A Eugene D. Owen in e: Agricultural History, Vol. 12, No. 1 (Jan., 1938), pp. 32-45

The following is directly quoted from Owen.

It is reasonably certain that the practice of fallowing land in some systematic way is much older
than the Mosaic legislation and that it was not confined to theHebrews but belonged rather to a stage of agricultural development.

It may be questioned whether the spontaneous crop of a coun
try would be sufficient to sustain its population for a year. How-
ever, there was no command against storing for the sabbatical
year and thus diligence and thrift were rewarded.

There was also a promise of a much greater crop in the sixth year, which
could not be a result of natural causes since then the ground would
be more nearly exhausted than at any other time in the seven-year
period. Furthermore, there is at least one account in ancient
literature of some such system. It is said that in early times
there were many places in Albania where the land when sown
once produced two or even three crops, the first a crop of even
fiftyfold and the others coming up without additional plowing.
Though Palestine was not usually reputed to be an exceedingly
fertile land, making allowances for the probable exaggeration
of hearsay with regard to Albania, some return should be ex
pected from natural seeding of grain left in the field.
The references in ancient literature to returns from seeding fall
naturally into two groups: one, in which yields are about what
would be expected from the same sort of soil today; and the other,
in which they are so large as to be considered impossible by Ellen
Churchill Semple.

In the former group is the statement of Marcus Tullius Cicero
(106-43 B.C.) referring to Leontine in Sicily, which reads: "On
an acre of Leontini ground about a medimnus of wheat is usually
sown, according to the regular and constant allowance of seed.
The land returns about eightfold on a fair average, but in an
extraordinarily favourable season, about tenfold," and that of
Marcus Terentius Varro (116-27 ? B.C.) who said, "the influence
of the kind of soil in a district is so great that the same seed yields
in some places ten-fold, in others fifteen-fold, as in several parts
of Etruria."

Of the second group of references, in addition to Strabo, may
be mentioned the Biblical comment, "Then Isaac sowed in that
land, and received in the same year an hundredfold." Herodotus
(484?-423 B.C), referring to Mesopotamia, wrote: "This
territory is of all that we know the best by far for producing
corn . . . it is so good that it returns as much as two-hundred-fold
for the average, and when it bears at its best it produces three hundred-
fold." He said, moreover, of Libya: "when it bears
best it produces a hundred-fold, but the land in the region of
Kinyps produces sometimes as much as three-hundred-fold."
Varro claimed that, "In Italy too, in the country about Sybaris,
they say that the usual yield is a hundred fold, and in Syria near
Gadara, and in Africa in Byzacium from one peek the return is
likewise a hundred pecks." In the parable of the sower, Jesus
spoke of certain good ground which brought forth thirtyfold,
sixtyfold, and even a hundredfold. Caius Plinius Secundus
(23-79 A.D.), better known as Pliny the Younger, stated that in
ordinary years land in Byzacium yielded one hundred and fiftyfold.
In another place he said that the Byzacium crop that
yields so remarkably is common wheat.

No references have been found to ancient yields so low as fourfold
and fivefold. Cicero mentioned a yield of eightfold to ten
fold in Sicily, and Varro tenfold to fifteenfold in Etruria. Against
these Strabo spoke of a yield of fiftyfold in Albania, and there
are two Scriptural references, separated by hundreds of years, to
yields of one hundredfold in Syria with additional mention of
sixtyfold and thirtyfold in the later instance. Varro mentioned a
yield of one hundredfold in Syria near Gadara and in Sybaris,
Italy and Byzacium, Africa. Herodotus said that Libya at its
best produced one hundredfold and mentioned a yield of two
hundredfold to three hundredfold in Mesopotamia and three
hundredfold in Kinyps in Africa, and Pliny cited a yield of one
hundred and fiftyfold for Byzacium.

There are only two references to small yields, and they refer
to land in Italy and Sicily; to yields of fiftyfold or more there are
ten extending over three continents, being mentioned by six
authors one Hebrew, two Greeks, two Romans, and one Hebrew
writing in Greek. It is plausible, therefore, to presume that
there is some truth back of the latter statements.

Data compiled by the Bureau of Agricultural Economics of the
United States Department of Agriculture show that the average
return from wheat in the United States for the period 1928-1933
was 862,645 bushels harvested from 85,126 bushels of seed, a
little less than tenfold, and from corn, 2,522,065 bushels from
17,408 bushels of seed, or more than one hundred and fortyfourfold.
These figures are well within the range of the more
extravagant ancient claims.

Apart from the spiritual implications of the sabbatical year,
the curtailing of grain production necessitated a septennial
reduction in the number of livestock which, by culling out the
unfit, resulted in improvement in the quality of the remaining
animals. Furthermore, the decrease in the quantity of grain
reduced the tendency of the people to trade with neighboring
countries and served to prevent the accumulation of unwieldy
wealth. The people thus became more nearly economically
self-sufficient and capable of meeting their own needs at all
times. The year of fallow was also of unquestioned value to the
land. Fallow is a preventive of exhaustion, weediness, and larvae, and in dry
regions a conserver of moisture.

---------------------------------------------

Studies in the Economics of the Bible by  Eli Ginzberg ,The Jewish
Quarterly Review, New Series, Vol. 22, No. 4 (Apr., 1932), pp. 343-408

The following is directly quoted from Ginzberg.

Leviticus 25.2

"In a later discussion of theories of land ownership we shall have
occasion to deal with the concept that the god or king is sole owner
of the land. This was a very widespread theory especially in Africa.
Cf. Breasted, Records of Ancient Egypt, Volume II- Lowie, Primitive
Society."

"In [Josephus's] Antiquities xiv 16-2 during one of Herod's wars it
is stated that the army was badly in need of provisions
for there was a famine in the land because it was a Sabbatical
Year."

Regarding Maccabees I-VI: 49:54 "Here is clearly
undeniable evidence that Jerusalem did make provision
for a seventh year. Likewise it assumes that the districts
around the city which supplied it with food must also have
observed the law to that degree at least that they did not
have any excess produce to sell."

"If the attempt be made to arrive at an estimate as to
what extent the agricultural part of the Sabbatical Laws
was observed, for there can be no doubt that it was not
entirely disregarded, one must not lose sight of the following
considerations:

1. There is good reason to assume that at the time of
the Second Temple, Palestine was no longer the ideal land
flowing with milk and honey. The ravages of war must
have left their marks.
2. The population during the last hundred years before
the destruction of the Temple has been estimated at an
almost unbelievably high figure.
3. It is without an historical analogy anywhere that a
country not specially productive, possessed of a large
population, with comparatively primitive methods of agriculture
could have been able to remain idle for almost two years. "In the seventh you eat
the harvest of that which
was sown in the sixth, and as you are not permitted to sow
that year, it must also suffice for the eighth."
4. There are no historical records to show tremendous
importations of grain, nor is there any way of conceiving
how these could have been paid for.

In view of the foregoing arguments one is forced to
admit that it is totally impossible even to dream that all
Palestinian Jewry could have observed the Sabbatical Year.
It does not seem unlikely in view of the frequent reference
to Jerusalem in connection with the observance of the law,
and its relationship to a discussion of war in both Maccabees
and Josephus that a small observant minority around the
capital city permitted part or perhaps all of their fields
to lie fallow during this year.
The discussion of the second part of the law pertaining
to the Sabbatical Year can be much shorter than the
question which was just considered. Historical evidence
of the remission of debts during the seventh year is entirely
lacking. The very conservative nature of Jewish Law
and the reluctance of any individual, even a Hillel, to
inaugurate changes, leaves one but a single alternative in
attempting to explain the Prosbul.

Disregard of the regulation must have been almost universal and to ease
the conscience of a few law-believing if not law-abiding
individuals, Hillel finally officially permitted the law to be
disregarded by a technicality. It would not be surprising
that once again a small minority actually observed the
law. But it is out of the question that the rank and file of
a commercial nation could have lived a normal economic
life with such an institution actively in force. And there is
no reason to assume that they led an abnormal existence."
------------------------------------------------

Continued Part 2

Proof / Disproof of God based on Fallow Part Two

UPDATED THRU 11/26/2014

The 'proof' consists of three questions and one premise.  I will state  the questions and premise and then provide brief responses to each. Additional refutations and details are fleshed out in Part 3.  I suggest reading Part 1 now since it provides academic and other support. .

 Later on, I will use Shemita to provide a  'proof' that the Torah is not divine. 


Question 1) How could the Torah make the Shemita law risking the starvation of an entire nation, unless it could back it up with the guarantee of extra yields as in verse 21  ? 

Answer 1a) Risk could be minimized greatly or eliminated.

Answer 1b) Potential benefits of Shemita out weigh the risks. 

Answer 1c) Even if Shemita was risky, leaders/religions make outrageous or dangerous claims regardless if they can back it up or not. For example the Indian Ghost Dance. 

Answer 1d) If extra yields did not occur in the sixth year or the risk of starvation was real, Priests/Rabbi's could issue a suspension of the law or provide legal loop holes.

Answer 1e) Logical fallacy of argument from incredulity or ignorance. 

Question 2) Why would the Torah write such a risky law into  the Torah ? 

Answer 2a) Risk could be minimized greatly or eliminated. 

Answer 2b) Other religions/cultures had/have dangerous rituals/laws.

Answer 2c) Logical fallacy of argument from incredulity or ignorance.

Answer 2d) Mythology of Seven is common in Ancient Near East and could provide basis of the law.

Answer 2e) There are certain benefits (agricultural, social, economic..) that accrue if the whole country fallows at the same time. I.E. Better pest and diseases control, encourages national self sufficiency, encourages international trade,...)

Question 3) Why would the people accept such a risky law ?

Answer 3a) Risk could be minimized greatly or eliminated 

Answer 3b) Many religions had dangerous or risky rituals.

Answer 3c) Logical fallacy of argument from incredulity or ignorance.

Answer 3d) The Israelites as a whole may not have accepted Shemita.

Answer 3e) Mythology of Seven is common in Ancient Near East and could provide basis of law.

Answer 3f) If extra yields did not occur in the sixth year or the risk of starvation was real, Priests/Rabbi's could issue a suspension of the law. 

Answer 3g) Shemita probably had economic and agricultural benefits.

Premise  4)  If triple yields did not occur it would 'prove' the Torah was false, hence the fact that the Torah makes a testable claim proves the Torah is true. 

Answer 4a) People  may have initially had no way to verify the Torah claim of triple yields, and the Torah authors knew this. 

Answer 4b) Torah authors may have had no concern about testablity , at least when the law was first written.

Answer 4c) Indian Ghost Dance - claim was made for immunity from white man's bullets. This claim could be tested. Same for numerous other religions. 

Answer 4d) If triple yields do not occur Priests/Rabbis can say the Israel sinned or the law was not fully observed or Yahweh did not provide for one reason or another. Excuses and Apologetics.

Shemita Disproves Divinity of Torah 

A) Although fallowing is a good agricultural practice, the Torah's approach six years of production followed by a fallow year would eventually result in soil exhaustion. 

B) The Torah fails to teach superior methods of agriculture. For example, grain followed by legume followed by fallow. 

C) No evidence exists that triple yields (in sixth year) occurred in ancient Israel or are occurring in Modern Israel as promised. In fact just the opposite.

{ETA 11/25/2014 Even if the entire Israel did not observe Shemita those that did should get the triple yields. An omnipotent god could achieve this through natural means. For example, god could infuse extra nutrients from underground, or provide extra water via rain patterns.}

We would expect ancient people to develop a sub optimal fallow system and that is what we find in the Torah.  G-d would be a less likely to give a faulty system. So we go with the human authorship of the Torah fallow system. 

Continued Part 3

Proof / Disproof of God based on Fallow Part Three

UPDATED THRU 12/01/2014

Prior to reading this post it is essential to read  Part One and Part Two. This Part will provide more details, more support and some additional arguments that refutes the Shemita’proof’.

Agricultural Practice

1) From experience some ancient cultures could and did determine fallowing was good agricultural practice and gave better long term yields than without fallowing. Fallowing was practiced in ancient times by many cultures. 

The ancient Israeli leaders may have been aware or through experience learned first hand of the benefits of fallowing . However, some of the peasants may  have been well less informed or did not want to risk the shortfall of the fallow year and were reluctant to fallow. Some of the Israelite slaves who entered Canaan would probably not be aware or have faith in the fallow practice.

Knowing of the better yields occurring with fallowing, the leaders could assert to the reluctant peasants - you will not starve and attribute the higher long term yields to a supernatural being and the Sabbath mythology.

It should be noted some ancient agricultural methods utilizing fallowing are much more effective than the Torah's. For example some planted grain then legume and then fallowed.  This cycle is very similar to that now advocated by many in modern agriculture. The Torah had the opportunity to educate about improved agricultural practice and failed. Worse, it locked the ancient Israelites into a worse scheme. Shemita could result in food shortages as populations increased and farming land could not be expanded. 

2) Given 7 plots, each year let a single plot fallow a year. The total yield over 7 years is 7*6 = 42. Alternately let  all 7 plots be fallow in one year every seven years. Total yield over 7 years is 7*6 = 42. (I am assuming all other things  being equal). So either approach provides the same yields. From an agricultural standpoint letting all plots fallow in one year may be a superior method as it provides less of a reservoir for diseases and pests, yet it does increase risks of food shortages in the Shemita year. 

According to Torah the world was created in 6 days and god rests on day 7. And verse 4 relates Shemita to Sabbath the day of rest for the fashioner of the world. This could motivate a theological reason to rest all fields simultaneously.

Why seven ? - There is widespread use of 'seven' and in ancient near east mythology. 

3) During the fallow you could still eat from the plants that self seeded in the fields,  vineyards, olive groves, cattle, kosher insects, hunt wild game, fish, resort to international trade, gather wild edibles roots and nuts in fields and forests, on mountains and live off of previously stored foods. Some farmers by legal loopholes or otherwise may have farmed, as we find in Israel today. In anticipation of the Shemita year, farmers could have increased the number of farmed plots greatly reducing the risk of starvation. (Technical note a) : for example Rashi explains in more detail - the produce of the Shemita year is allowed to be eaten as long as it is made available to anyone. Eating produce from the fallowed fields is an accepted interpretation by virtually all if not all academic scholars  as well as Jewish traditional interpretation. Technical note b) Although ancient Israel had enemies they did engage in international trade. Even in times of 'embargos' or trade sanctions, countries find ways to import goods. Arguably, Shemita would encourage self sufficiency and that could have been one of the motivations.) 

{ ETA 11/26/2014  Some Rabbi's argue but Israel was surrounded by enemies - there could not be trade. Yet the fact is Israel did trade with neighbors and is confirmed in the Tenach.  Also, the law could have started when the Israelites had some friendly neighbors. Or if the law originates prior to entry into Canaan Israel, there was no reason to anticipate every neighbor would be hostile.} 

4) Shemita could have originated very early when there was only a small  population and so the risk of starvation was minimal. (At such an time farming was supplemented by scavenging, fishing, hunting, herding. etc: etc: Increasing the number of farmed plots was feasible, There was no large leisure or merchant classes, temples, ...to support). The practice was retained even as the population grew and eventually became codified in the Torah. There was no sudden thrust of a risky law onto a large population. 

5) The argument assumes that information about yields were widely available and easily checked. But according to Orthodox Judaism the law is given at  Mount  Sinai, before the Jews enter Canaan and practice land farming. Moreover, there was no centralized Temple or Monarchy (to tally yields) until many years after entry into Canaan. Thus the Torah authors could boast  the triple yield claim knowing it would be difficult to check yields even if the Jews conquer Israel and even after they are farming in Israel. To encourage the acceptance of Yahwism, boasting his powers is expected and is found throughout the Tenach. 

6) In Canaan, the danger of drought was real. The Torah authors may have realized it was risky to rely on annual farming yields for survival. Shemita would encourage food storage, alternate ways of obtaining food besides farming (for example international trade, fishing...), and motivate people to bring more land into production. 

7) Farmers could have brought more land into production prior to Shemita make up any short fall during the Shemita year. The risk of starvation from a simultaneous Shemita would be greatly reduced. Eventfully as populations rose and farming land could no longer be increased the risk of food shortages could develop. But this would only occur long after the Torah was written. 

OTHER CULTURES

1) Indian Ghost dance - Native Americans thought they would be  invisible to  bullets. How could their leaders make this claim ? Wer'nt they afraid their people  would die from  the bullets ? Weren’t the leaders  afraid of being proved wrong ? There are leaders who will make claims without the concern of being 'proved' wrong in the future.

2) Just because a certain text/religion/person makes a claim that could potentially disproved in the future does not mean they would not make the claim. They may have certain reasons to make the claim then deal with potential refutations in the future even if that is a consideration. Maybe they really believed it was true when writing it. When it turned out to be incorrect nobody ever went back to correct the texts. Maybe the authors of the text or the religion are deluded.

3) There is no end to the practices advocated by religions/cultures that are purported to provide benefits. Sometimes the original motivation maybe unknown.  How could the Aztecs sacrifice masses of children to their god(s) in the hopes of certain benefits like rain ?  This was a testable claim.

Logic

1) To modern skeptical people it does not make sense to pass a law that risks starvation, but to ancient people that believed that spirits would save them it could make sense. (Yet, as  previously mentioned the risk of starvation from Shemita was may not have been significant.) 

2) Perhaps the Torah authors were not concerned their claim would not be  fulfilled.  If yields were low they could claim that the people had sinned in some way and therefore are being punished. 

3) Just because the Torah has risky / strange / ridiculous notions and customs  (according to modern standards) it does not remotely suggest the Torah is god given. Just because the Torah may make a claim that could be disproved in the future does not remotely suggest the Torah is god given or the claim did in fact occur.

4) Why did/does any culture create difficult laws: Human Sacrifice, Mutilation,  Animal Sacrifice... some with testable promises of great benefit  ? Interestingly, often the promised benefits do not materialize yet the practice continues. Consider the rain dance that purports to end drought. How can religious leaders make this claim ? Aren’t they afraid the rain would not materialize ? Aren’t the leaders afraid of being proved wrong ? 

5) The argument assumes the sudden introduction of Shemita laws. However, it is  plausible the custom was in effect in earlier less populated times and was retained as the population grew. Then it was finally codified in the Torah. We have Torah precedent for this where various practices pre-exist Mt Sinai and prior to a large Jewish population. The practices are later codified in the Torah. Examples include circumcision, sacrifice, sinew prohibition...

Historical evidence

1) On the one hand I have never seen data demonstrating that Shemita was associated with  triple yields. {ETA 12/1/2014 - If there such triple yields would not the Talmud or Tenach wax poetic about them ? Yet they do not. This suggests the triple yields were not common at all. }On the other hand we know  that there are instances in Jewish history where yields were not tripled prior to  Shemita. From I Maccabees  6:48 Then the king's [Antiochus's] army went up to Jerusalem to meet them, and the king [Antiochus]  pitched his tents against Judea, and against mount Sion. 6:49 But with them that were in Bethsura he made peace: for they came out of the city, because they had no victuals there to endure the siege, it being a year of rest to the land.

So Bethsura was observing shemita, yet had no extra yields as promised in the Torah.

See Part 1 where Josephus documents that at times Shemita resulted in hardships.

In Israel today farmers following Shemita laws, on average do not reap extra yields. (Israel has difficulty maintaining food levels during Shemita years because many Israeli farmers practice actual fallowing of the land and do not utilize legal loopholes.)

Some Rabbinic authorities assert Shemita laws no longer apply others disagree.  This provides an explanation why Israeli farmers today do not have the extra promised yields according to some Rabbis. But what about the other Rabbi's ? They may respond, the Shemita requires the entire land be fallow or perhaps Israel is a sinful nation. This is apologetics and excuses since observant jews will be disenchanted  to observe causing the Shemita law to  lax even further. Are we to assume Yahweh is up in the heavens tabulating the percent of farmers fallowing ! ? In addition,  is this how a divine promise works ? Heads Yahweh win, Tails the Jews  lose.

{ETA 11/25/2014 Even if the entire Israel did not observe Shemita those that did should get the triple yields. An omnipotent god could achieve this through natural means. For example, god could infuse extra nutrients from underground, or provide extra water via rain patterns.}

2) Historically Shemita does not seem to have been widely practiced.

Ancient Near East Religions and Mythology

1) There is evidence Shemita's 7 year cycle is shared in the ANE

2) Theologically it emphasizes Yahweh's role in fertility ( as opposed to say Baal's). 

Torah Laws 

One premise of the argument is that the Jews encounter Shemita for the first time as a Torah commandment. But there is the possibility Shemita type laws were  already part of the Canaanite practice. Put another way, Shemita was already a pre-ancient Israelite practice that the Torah is continuing (perhaps modifying) and codifying.  This may be compared to other commandments like circumcision or the sinew prohibition which predate the alleged Mt Sinai revelation and began when the were many fewer 'Jews'.

Explanations of Pagan Customs in Judaism with some notes on Maimonides Part 4

Updated thru 7/27/2018

This post is being devoted to my replies to various objections to my pagan posts, begun here Explanations of Pagan Customs in Judaism

By 'pagan' I intend the religions of non Israelite ancient near east people and the religions of other ancient peoples. 

Objection  #1 Ok,  there are  pagan rituals in the Torah. That does not disprove the divine authorship of the Torah. Yahweh could have placed them in there.

Is the Torah divine or a result of ancient near east thinking ? Since the Torah has many indications of being the result of ancient near east culture (including ane expressions, conceptions, rituals, laws)  it is seems more likely it was a man made text. Reflecting their psychology, hopes , desires, aspirations etc: 

Not just are the Torah rituals similar to some pagan rituals, sometimes the reasons given for them are also similar and the likely reasons are similar. Pagan rituals are based on superstitions, incorrect reasoning and are not effective. Codification of even ONE falsehood  in a book supports the notion of the book’s non divine origin or corruption.  Sure G-d could put false information in a book,  but it seems more likely fallible humans did.

Some of the pagan like Torah rituals are potentially dangerous (for example circumcision) , unfair, scientifically unfounded, bizarre, and wasteful (for example certain Torah prescribed  sacrifices). It seems fallible humans are the more likely reason they are in the Torah. What can possibly motivate Yahweh to codify similar to pagan rituals and sometimes for similar reasons ? G-d is surely inscrutable. 

It seems more likely they are in the Torah not because Yahweh  gave them, but because the Torah authors essentially shared similar ANE beliefs, but with devotion to Yahweh and not other gods.

Objection  #2  God  gave Adam and or Noach and or Abraham the ways to worship God. From these origins all ancient peoples tended to worship God the same way, more or less.

Claiming there was an Adam or Noach or Abraham is a form of circular reasoning. You cannot rely on a suspect text to assert something, but we shall ignore this problem.

Nevertheless, I would agree many of the rituals, laws and concepts could be from very ancient times  But lets not limit the origination of all rituals, laws and concepts to only that period. Cross pollination and change occur frequently.

Please read my response to Objection #1 - it is related to my response to Objection #2.There are many Torah rituals and laws that can not be accounted for by the theory of Objection #2.

For Example:

It can not account for  the prevalence of circumcision - since that was supposed to be a special operation as part of a covenant with Abraham. If so the pagan origin of that custom must be a different 

It can  not account for similarities in Tabernacle/Temple worship, which came much later than Abraham. For example Yom Kippur and Goat rituals. God gave Yom Kippur and Goat rituals to Abraham/Adam/Noach ? Moreover after Yahweh  gave it to one or more of them somehow the pagans learned about it ?

It cannot  account for similar magic rituals (bitter waters, red heifer to name two).

It can not account for why the Zukru festival compares with the spring festivals of Passover and Unleavened Bread, as well as other ritual festivals in west Semitic religion of  the second millennium BC. Was Passover given to Abraham or Adam or Noach. ? Moreover after Yahweh  gave it to one or more of them somehow the pagans learned about it ?

Would God actually have given Adam or Noach or Abraham all kinds of pagan laws and rituals such as animal sacrifice and others ?  God is surely a mystery.

Recall explanation E2) The  Israelites had been steeped in Idolatry. The Torah allowed some pagan practices to continue  as an 'accommodation' to human weakness, but they are rededicated to the worship of Yahweh. It is this sort of notion that Rambam advocates. It follows Rambam was all but saying  the pagan rituals found in the Torah were not truly the way G-d was intended to be worshipped, but are from the pagans. Hence he would reject the explanation found in Objection # 2

Objection # 3 Have you ever read books by Yehezkel Kaufmann ? (Implying  he would disagree with my posts.)

I have not read his books and therefore not sure he would object to anything I have written. From what I have seen he would not agree with the Orthodox Jewish narrative. 

From http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/judaica/ejud_0002_0012_0_10902.html"Although he [Kaufmann] accepted the Documentary Hypothesis of the sources of the Penateuch and the multiple authorship of Isaiah and Hosea, he resisted the tendency to analyze books into increasingly smaller units".  

Kaufmann's work is dated and given more recent discoveries I am not sure how he would react.

I have come across his name in some academic literature and his work has been disparaged. Kaufmann's opinions were apparently a minority view during his lifetime and would be more so today.

From the book Yahweh and the Gods of Canaan by Albright 1968

Page 173 "The unrealistic approach of the late Yehezkel Kaufmann  who held that there was no backsliding in Israel except possibly during the period of Ahab and Jezebel in the 9th century, is, in my opinion, quite untenable"

Page 179 "The latter [regarding  the influence of Canaanite culture on the Israelites] is an exceptionally complex problem, since the early Hebrews were influenced by their Canaanite neighbors,  there were beliefs and practices common to both, and there were later borrowings and adaptations from Canaanite culture during the period of the Judges as well as the subsequent Monarchy....we can state definitely that it does not support the extreme position of the late Yehezkel Kaufmann, who maintained in his great 'History of the Faith of Israel' that mosaic monotheism was a phenomenon entirely peculiar to Israel"

From Frank Moore Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic: Essays in the History of the Religion of Israel 1973 in the preface:

From - Yehezkel Kaufmann's View of the Religion of Israel The Religion of Israel, From Its Beginnings to the Babylonian Exile by Yehezkel Kaufmann;Moshe Greenberg Review by: J. Philip HyattJournal of Bible and Religion, Vol. 29, No. 1 (Jan., 1961), pp. 52-57 Published by: Oxford University Press

"It is difficult to determine whether Kaufmann attributes monotheism basically to the intuition of Moses and the people, or to special revelation; or whether he considers these as two sides of the same process. He seems to put the emphasis on human intuition and in-sight, rather than on supernatural revelation."

Per Kaufmann -  "The patriarchs before the time of Moses were not monotheists. They were no more than links in the chain leading to monotheism." 

"He [Kaufmann] often declares statements in the Bible to be unhistorical or legendary; at several points he rejects the "historiosophy"-philosophy of history--of the biblical writers. He can say of the Torah that it embodies "divergent and at times mutually contradictory matter" 

"Kaufmann considers three conclusions of classical criticism as assured (pp. 156-157): (1) He accepts the analysis of the three primary sources, JE, P, and D, together with their laws and narrative framework; the author is especially insistent that there are three separate and mutually independent legal corpora. (2) The present Torah book was not in pre-exilic times canonical and binding on the nation. Before this book came into existence, there was a long period of literary creation by priests and religious writers. (3) Deuteronomy was promulgated in the reign of Josiah, and the Torah as a whole was promulgated in the times of Ezra and Nehemiah "

"Yet, I find myself asking many questions about Kaufmann's theories. In particular, his basic position respecting Israelite monotheism is not convincing. His view of what he calls paganism seems to me distorted, and hence his attempt to interpret the religion of Israel as utterly different and radically new fails. It appears to me to be erroneous history and inadequate theology to say that Hebrew religion was utterly new or unique. "

"Kaufmann does not deny that the pre-exilic literature contains traces of idolatry, magic, divination, mythology, etc., but these are to him merely vestigial remains of an earlier Hebrew paganism, linguistic fossils, poetic imagery, and the like."

The Evolution of God by Robert Wright 2009 beginning page 106 Kaufmann's view which substantially rejects the evolutionary growth of Israelite religion from the local milieu  now lacks foundation. Moreover the consensus is the Israelites who settled the highlands of Canaan came from somewhere within Canaanite society. "...[there] is no reason to doubt that the Israelite religion is  exactly the kind of organic outgrowth of the local culture that Kaufmann...said it wasn't."

He goes on to explain 

a) The discovery of the inscriptions:  Yahweh  and his Asherah

b) That some scholars argue Yahweh merged with Canaanite god El and inherited some of El's genes.

c) That Yahweh may have acquired genes from Baal. For example 

Baal smites the Lotan (Leviathan) dragon and so does Yahweh in Psalms 74. 

Page 504 "All told Psalm 74:12-17, in which  Yahweh overcomes Yam, Tannin, and Leviathan, seems to have a clear kinship to the Ugaritic tradition.."

Psalm 48 Baal and Yahweh have characteristics of storm gods- For example Psalm 29

Yahweh's holy mountain/home  as Mount Zion -Summit of Zaphon and Baals Mount Sapan which various scholars say is the same mountain. 

Yahweh rides upon the clouds in Psalms 68:5 and Baal's nickname was rider upon the clouds. 

Beginning on page 120 he lists many other similarities which may interest the reader. 

Page 129 "Full fledged monotheism did'nt, as Kaufmann has argued, emerge early in Israelite history 'as an insight, and original intuition'. Early Israelite religion grew out of earlier religions, 'pagan' religions, just as they had done. And out of it, eventually, grew the more modern god of late Israelite religion: a single transcendent all- powerful, all knowing god - the god of the Jews..."

Objection  #4  God is the creator. There are deep meanings to the Torah. Orthodox (Rabbinic) Jews don't believe God needs worship in the same way as the ancient near east people did. 

This objection also relates to Objection #3 so read my response there.

Many ancient cultures also believed in creator god or gods, so the fact the Torah claims there was a creator or fashioner is a non starter. 

I am not sure where these deeper meanings come from, since the reasons for some of the rituals are written in the Torah text and sometimes those reasons parallel other ANE cultures. Scholars also try to deduce the most likely reasons for some of the other rituals by studying ancient comparative religion and myths. Some of my posts provide such documentation. 

The Torah does not provide a consistent monotheistic concept   nor a consistent lofty view of God.  Pagan magic, conceptions and rituals persist in the Torah. They still persist to this day within Orthodox Judaism. My posts have documented some of them. 

Just because a particular ritual or prayer is devoted to Yahweh does not make it any less magic or any less pagan in action or conception. 

Recall explanation E2) The  Israelites had been steeped in Idolatry. The Torah allowed some pagan practices to continue  as an 'accommodation' to human weakness, but they are rededicated to the worship of Yahweh. It is this sort of notion that Rambam advocates. It follows Rambam was all but saying  the pagan rituals found in the Torah were not truly the way G-d was intended to be worshipped, but are from the pagans. Hence he would reject the explanation found in Objection #4.


Please see Cut Off in the Bible, Statute Forever in the Bible