The Challenge of Noah, Part Two

Updated thru 11/4/2016 - added commentary from JPS

Please at least skim The Challenge of Noah, Part 1 first.

This post will be devoted to sinking the Apologetic that the Noah story is an allegory/metaphor/parable. Religious people who advocate this approach probably acknowledge there was no world wide deluge, yet the Tenach and Oral Tradition is most likely describing a global deluge as I explained in part one. 

We will see that the Tenach and Oral Tradition almost certainly did not consider the Noah story an allegory, but rather as actual history. 

We will see the story provides the basis for actual commandments (see below). It would be odd to base commandments on a fictional story. Also, for example the Noahide laws apply to all mankind. They are called Noahide laws because the children of Noah were given seven laws and accepted them. But if all mankind did not descend from Noah, the laws would only apply to Noah descendants and not the rest of mankind.

Finally, if the Noah story is fictional which parts are fictional ? It is a slippery slope. “Genesis 9:18 And the sons of Noah, that went forth from the ark, were Shem, and Ham, and Japheth; and Ham is the father of Canaan. 19 These three were the sons of Noah, and of these was the whole earth overspread.”
Note these verses imply all mankind descend from Noah and it refers to the flood story. But if the flood story is fictional maybe the Torah genealogies are fiction. The genealogies leading up to Avarahum Avinu (Abraham our father) could be fictional. Then maybe Avrahum is also fictional and so the  Israelites would not be descendants of Abraham. 

The Tenach

The Tenach most likely meant the Noah story as actual history. Here are some examples.

Genesis 9:11 And I will establish My covenant with you; neither shall all flesh be cut off any more by the waters of the flood; neither shall there any more be a flood to destroy the earth.

Note - Establishing a covenant based on a parable makes no sense.

Genesis 9:18 And the sons of Noah, that went forth from the ark, were Shem, and Ham, and Japheth; and Ham is the father of Canaan. 19 These three were the sons of Noah, and of these was the whole earth overspread.

Note these verses imply all mankind descend from Noah.


Genesis 9:18  "And the sons of Noah, that went forth from the ark, were Shem, and Ham, and Japheth; and Ham is the father of Canaan. 19 These three were the sons of Noah, and of these was the whole earth overspread. 20 And Noah the husbandman began, and planted a vineyard. 21 And he drank of the wine, and was drunken; and he was uncovered within his tent. 22 And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brethren without. 23 And Shem and Japheth took a garment, and laid it upon both their shoulders, and went backward, and covered the nakedness of their father; and their faces were backward, and they saw not their father's nakedness. 24 And Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his youngest son had done unto him. 25 And he said: Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren. 26 And he said: Blessed be the LORD, the God of Shem; and let Canaan be their servant. 27 God enlarge Japheth, and he shall dwell in the tents of Shem; and let Canaan be their servant. 28 And Noah lived after the flood three hundred and fifty years. 29 And all the days of Noah were nine hundred and fifty years; and he died. 10:1 Now these are the generations of the sons of Noah: Shem, Ham, and Japheth; and unto them were sons born after the flood. 2 The sons of Japheth...

Verse 18 writes Noah and sons leave the Ark-an event-period-marker, Noah plants the vine yard after which various blessings and cursings and then in verse 28 we are back to the flood - an event-period-marker and writing Noah lived after the flood. It makes no sense that Noah lived 350 years after a parable. Verse 10:1 again used the flood-event-period marker and it makes no sense to write about people being born after a parable. 

Psalms 104:5 Who didst establish the earth upon its foundations, that it should not be moved for ever and ever; 6 Thou didst cover it with the deep as with a vesture; the waters stood above the mountains..

Psalms 29:10 The LORD sat enthroned at the flood; yea, the LORD sitteth as King for ever.

Psalms 104 and 29 recalls the flood.

Isaiah 54:9 For this is as the waters of Noah unto Me; for as I have sworn that the waters of Noah should no more go over the earth, so have I sworn that I would not be wroth with thee, nor rebuke thee. 

Isaiah is treating the flood as an actual event.

Oral Tradition 

I am aware of no traditional sources advocating that the flood is an allegory.  My Orthodox Yeshivas taught the flood as a real event. In addition, if the story is an allegory why does the Talmud, Midrash, traditional commentators all provide additional real world information, details, miracles and facts about the flood ?

Here is sampling where it is self evident Oral tradition treats the flood as a real world event and sometimes it has legal implications.

1) Rambam - Guide to the Perplexed Part 3 Chapter 50

“It is one of the fundamental principles of the Law that the Universe has been created ex nihilo, and that of the human race, one individual being, Adam, was created. As the time which elapsed from Adam to Moses was not more than about two thousand five hundred years, people would have
doubted the truth of that statement if no other information had been added, seeing that the human race was spread over all parts of the earth in different families and with different languages, very unlike the one to the other. In order to remove this doubt the Law gives the genealogy of the nations (Gen. v. and x.), and the manner how they branched off from a common root. It names those of them who were well known, and tells who their fathers were, how long and where they lived. It describes also the cause that led to the dispersion of men over all parts of the earth, and to the formation of
their different languages, after they had lived for a long time in one place, and spoken one language (ibid, xi.), as would be natural for descendants of one person. The accounts of the flood (ibid, vi.-viii.) and of the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah (ibid, xix.), serve as an illustration of the doctrine that “Verily there is a reward for the righteous ; verily He is a God that judgeth in the earth” (Ps. IVIII. 12).

I have highlighted some very informative Rambam commentary. Let me explain. Rambam cites  Genesis X which begins with 10:1 Now these are the generations of the sons of Noah: Shem, Ham, and Japheth; and unto them were sons born after the “flood”

Rambam is advocating the genealogy as history. Notice people are being born after the “flood”. Would it not be odd that a history lesson’s first sentence involves an allegory ? It makes more sense the sons are born after the flood is being understood as history. 


The accounts of the flood (ibid, vi.-viii.) and of the destruction
of Sodom and Gomorrah (ibid, xix.), serve as an illustration of the doctrine that “Verily there is a reward for the righteous ; verily He is a God that judgeth in the earth” (Ps. Iviii. 12).

Rambam is writing the flood and Sodom and Gomorrah are  illustrating a doctrine. How would fictional stories illustrate a reward for righteous or judgment ?  

2) Ramban commentary on

Genesis VI - Ramban asks how did the Ark space accommodate the many large animals ? And answers is was a miracle.

[It make no sense for G-d to provide a miracle in a fictional event.] [A reading of Ramban’s Noah story commentary makes clear he understood the flood as a real event.]

3) Rashi commentary on

Genesis VII:11 Rashi cites a dispute among the ancient Rabbis regarding which month the flood starts.

4) Genesis Rabbah 

28.8 - The earth acted lewdly; wheat was sown and it
produced pseudo-wheat, for the pseudo-wheat we now
find came from the age of the deluge. [Thus the flood is considered a real event]

28.8 Judgement of the flood generation lasts twelve months. [Talmud explains they also had no portion in the world to come.]

34.11 Discusses if the planets functioned during the flood. [Why the discussion if the flood was an allegory ?]

5) Talmud

The Talmud almost certainly is treating the Flood as a real world event and using the Noah story  to deduce actual law. Here are some examples. 

In Sanhedrin 56b, the Talmud tries to deduce halacha (oral law) from Genesis 9:6. 

Sanhendrin 59a “Our Rabbis taught: But flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat, [Genesis9:4] this prohibits flesh cut from the living animal. R. Hanina b. Gamaliel said: It also prohibits blood drawn from a living animal....” [A halacha embedded in a fictional event ?]

Zevachim 113a - It seems halacha depends on  whether the holy land was flooded or not. How could a halacha depend on a fictional event ?

Sanhedrin 108a “Our Rabbis taught: The generation of the flood have no portion in the world to come, as it is written, And every living substance was destroyed which was upon the face of the ground and every living substance was destroyed refers to this world; which was upon the face of the ground...”

Berachoth 59a 
“For at the time when the Holy One, blessed be He, wanted to bring a flood upon the world, He took two stars from Kimah and brought a flood upon the world.”

Roah Hashona 11b “ ‘In the sixth hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, on the seventeenth day of the month.’ [Genesis 7:11]  R. Joshua said: That day was the seventeenth day of Iyar, when the constellation of Pleiades sets at daybreak and the fountains begin to dry up, and because they [mankind] perverted their ways, the Holy One, blessed be He, changed for them the work of creation and made the constellation of Pleiades rise at daybreak and took two stars from the Pleiades and brought a flood on the world.”

Rosh Hashona 12a “Our Rabbis taught: ‘The wise men of Israel follow R. Eliezer in dating the Flood and R. Joshua in dating the annual cycles, while the scholars of other peoples follow R. Joshua in dating the Flood.”

6) Stone edition commentary

Page 14 - The flood begins in the year 1656 from creation.

Page 19 Be fruitful and multiply found in Genesis 9:7 is a command (Rashi).  Genesis  9:3 G-d now givess man permission to eat meat.  Genesis 9:5 G-d places another limitation on man’s right to take life. An accounting from one who spills his own blood.

Regarding Genesis 9:18-27  - Noah was humiliated resulting in blessing and curses. And regarding 9:25-27 Rav Hirsch calls them the most far reaching prophecy ever uttered.

[Can all the above based on an allegorical story ? ]


{ETA 11/4/2016 (7)  JPS - Jewish Publication Society The Jewish Study Bible - Berlin and Brettler Editors 2004

Page 25 In the Talmud,  Genesis 9:5  is interpreted as a prohibition against suicide (Talmud Bava Kama 91b).  And verse 6 is cited as support against abortion (Talmud Sanh. 57b). Regarding verses verses 8-17: "In the talmud, it is taught the 'descendents of Noah'   - that is universal humanity - are obligated by seven commandments:..."

[Notice all humanity descends from Noah. This must mean all other people had been wiped out in an actual flood. Also odd indeed for the Torah to embed laws within a fictional narrative. ] }

{eta 12/22/2019  (8) Sefer Kuzari I, 67  - written by Judah Halevi. He mentions Prophetic traditions of Adam and Noah. [In other words they were real people who provided traditions.] }

The Challenge of Noah, Part One

11/4/2016 Updated for a correction regarding Talmud Sanhedrin 108

Updated 11/19/2021 to cite Isaiah 54:9

The story of Noah and the Deluge encapsulates many of the major problems with the Orthodox Jewish narrative. The story conflicts with Biology, Genetics,  Geology,  Archaeology,  History, and Modern Bible scholarship. It has logistical impossibilities, and has pagan parallels. 

The focus of my Noah posts will be to show Orthodox Judaism has no intellectually honest responses to the challenges posed by the Noah story.

No modern scientific text advocates a worldwide deluge of the Biblical scale within the past 6000 years, and for very valid reasons. We may accept that it is almost certain it did not occur.

Apologetic responses have advocated a local flood or the Noah story is an allegory/metaphor/parable. Another approach is to accept a Biblical world wide flood and to make the flood fit with modern academic knowledge, typically by distorting modern academic knowledge or ignoring certain incongruities. When all else fails, cite miracles galore.

This post will torpedo the local flood approach and sink it.

Religious people who advocate this approach probably acknowledge there was no world wide deluge. It is a post hoc rationalization to force fit the Torah to modern science.  

The Tenach and Oral tradition are almost certainly describing a global flood.

The Tenach

I will quote some but not all chapters and verses supporting a worldwide flood.

Genesis 6:17 And I, behold, I do bring the flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh, wherein is the breath of life, from under heaven; every thing that is in the earth shall perish.

Note the text “all flesh...under heaven”

Genesis 7:4 For yet seven days, and I will cause it to rain upon the earth forty days and forty nights; and every living substance that I have made will I blot out from off the face of the earth.'

Note the text “every living thing that I have made”

Genesis 7:19-20 And the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and all the high mountains that were under the whole heaven were covered. 

Note the text “all the high mountains that were under the whole heaven were covered. “

Genesis 7:23 And He blotted out every living substance which was upon the face of the ground, both man, and cattle, and creeping thing, and fowl of the heaven; and they were blotted out from the earth; and Noah only was left, and they that were with him in the ark. 

Note the text - “Only Noah was left”

Genesis 9:11 And I will establish My covenant with you; neither shall all flesh be cut off any more by the waters of the flood; neither shall there any more be a flood to destroy the earth.

Note - If the Torah deluge was a local  G-d’s promise makes no sense. There have been many local floods. What the text means is there will be no more world wide floods.

Isaiah 54:9 

“To me this is like the days of Noah,when I swore that the waters of Noah would never again cover the earth.”

This implies Noach was a global flood, because there have been many local floods.

Genesis 9:13 I have set My bow in the cloud, and it shall be for a token of a covenant between Me and the earth. 14 And it shall come to pass, when I bring clouds over the earth, and the bow is seen in the cloud, 15 that I will remember My covenant, which is between Me and you and every living creature of all flesh; and the waters shall no more become a flood to destroy all flesh.

Note verse 15 “all flesh”. 

{ETA 11/3/2016 Genesis 9:18 And the sons of Noah, that went forth from the ark, were Shem, and Ham, and Japheth; and Ham is the father of Canaan. 19 These three were the sons of Noah, and of these was the whole earth overspread.

Note these verses imply all mankind descend from Noah and so ther must have been a global flood destroying all mankind.}


Psalms 104:5 Who didst establish the earth upon its foundations, that it should not be moved for ever and ever;
6 Thou didst cover it with the deep as with a vesture; the waters stood above the mountains.

Note verse 6 “cover it [the earth] and verse 5 it is referring to the entire earth not a local portion. 

I came across this in Commentary on the Torah by Richard Friedman 2001 - 

Page 35 [Regarding Genesis 6:11 And the earth was corrupt before God, and the earth was filled with violence.] The book explains here the Hebrew word Eretz (translated as earth) refers to all the earth. 

Page 37 Regarding Genesis 7:11 “It is far more than an ordinary rain. It is a cosmic crisis, in which the very structure of the Universe is endangered.”

Oral Tradition understood the Flood to be Worldwide

I am aware of no traditional sources advocating a local flood.  My Orthodox Yeshivas taught a global flood.

Here is sampling of traditional understanding.

A) Radak Commentary 

On Genesis 7:11 - he explains the surface of the globe was flooded.

On Genesis 7:21 he explains 15 cubits of water covered even the tallest mountains making it impossible for ANY person to survive. [My caps].

On Genesis 8:17 - only very few of each species left the ark. They were told once more they would be numerous. [It seems to me this implies a global flood. If the flood was only local, they were already numerous]

B) Ramban  Commentary 

Ramban explains - The Ararat mountains are among the highest under the heavens per all commentators. [Also see Genesis 7:19-20 And the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and all the high mountains that were under the whole heaven were covered.] 

On Genesis 8:2 - Water spread over the WHOLE EARTH. [My caps].

C) The Stone Edition Tenach - Rabbi:Blinder, Gold, Zlotowitz, Scherman 1996 Edition.

Page 14 Regarding Genesis 7:10-24 “The flood inundates the world”

D) Leviticus Midrash Rabbah 5.1 explains that after the flood the world was reconstructed from one man [Noah].

E) The Hirsch Chumash - Rav Samson Raphael Hirsch 2002 Translated by Daniel Habarman.

He writes beginning on page 172 - that the flood decayed bones and flesh and this would explain why no Antediluvian remains of man have been found. [This implies a world wide flood, because otherwise his explanation makes no sense.]

The Rav writes “Thus a whole generation went to its ruin because of its sin”; The whole generation was condemned to extermination, except Noach. “After 1,600 years of Human history, one man and his family stand alone and God continues to build his world upon this one man.”

Page 176 A new humanity descends from 3 ancestors.

Page 193 In the days of the Catastrophe a new world was formed.

Page 195 “Everything came to pass exactly as had been previously announced.”

F) Talmud 

Sanhedrin 108

“R. Johanan said: The corruption of the generation of the Flood is characterised as great, and their punishment is characterised as great. Their corruption is characterised as great, as it is written, And
God saw that the wickedness of man, was great in the earth; and their punishment is characterised as great, as it is written, All the fountains of the great deep. R. Johanan said: Three of those [hot
fountains] were left, the gulf of Gaddor, the hot-springs of Tiberias, and the great well of Biram.”

{It seems to me that “All the fountains of the great deep” are opened except three implies more, a lot more than a local flood. ETA 11/4/2016 - I think the talmud means to say all the fountains were closed after the flood except three.}

“Our Rabbis taught: The generation of the flood have no portion in the world to come, as it is written, And every living substance was destroyed which was upon the face of the ground and every living substance was destroyed refers to this world; which was upon the face of the ground to the next....”

{It seems to me the term ‘generation of the flood’  is used without ‘local’ qualifiers thru out the Talmud and Rabbinic literature, meaning the entire generation of the flood, not just a local portion of the generation of the flood.}

Berachoth 59a 

“For at the time when the Holy One, blessed be He, wanted to bring a flood upon the world, He took two stars from Kimah and brought a flood upon the world.”

[It seems to me the terms “upon the world” implies non locality.]

Some Apologetics mislead by claiming there is a Talmud section that writes the flood was local. There is discussion in Talmud Zevachim 113a about whether the holy land was flooded or not. One master says yes, another no. Neither cite any other region that may not have been flooded. 

Continued Part 2

Jewish Oral Tradition Part 2, Treatment of Women

Updated thru 9/11/2016

Continued From Jewish Oral Tradition - Part 1 - Introduction

Some of my previous posts explained that the written Torah unfairly discriminates based on gender. 

We see this even in the 10 commandments.

Exodus 20:13 Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house; thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife, nor his man-servant, nor his maid-servant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour's. 

Notice how a man's wife is lumped in with man's possessions such as a house, servants, oxen and asses. ( The Torah is not referring to the gluteus maximus here.)

Under Oral Tradition, women’s inferior status is ubiquitous. This post is only a tiny tip of the ice berg.

Women Can Not Be Witnesses, Women Can Not Contribute to Prayer Quorum, Women Ineligible To Judge; {ETA 9/11/2016 Women Ineligible To Be King Or In Authority.}

Rambam's Hilcot Edot Section 9 - Women may not serve as witnesses. Nor can servants; minors;  mentally or emotionally unstable individuals; deaf-mutes; the blind; the wicked debased individuals; relatives; and  androgynus are also unacceptable - for there is an unresolved doubt whether they are considered as women.

Shulchan Aruch Orach Chaim 55 - A minyan ( the number of congregants required for certain prayers) requires at least 10 males. Women don't count.

Shulchan Aruch Choshen Mishpat 7 A women is not eligible to Judge.

{ETA 9/11/2016 Rambam's Melachim uMilchamot  Chapter 1 Paragraph 5 - A women may not be appointed King. This also applies to all positions of authority in Israel.}

Only Male Polygamy is Allowed

Rambam's Hilcot Ishut - 14 -  A man can have numerous wives, and his wife may not object to this. [However  the Ashkanaz Jews later instituted a ban for Ashkanaz Jews, no doubt because of the surrounding Christian culture which prohibited polygamy.  I believe that ban was to last until a certain date, a date which I think has passed.] 

Marriage and Divorce Ala Oral Tradition

Talmud Gittin 90a Mishnah. Beth Shammai say: a man should not divorce his wife unless he has found her guilty of some unseemly conduct, as it says, because he hath found some unseemly thing in her. Beth Hillel, however, say (that he may divorce her) even if she has merely spoilt his food, since it says,  because he hath found some unseemly thing in her. Rav Akiba says, (he may divorce her) even if he finds another woman more beautiful than she is, as it says, it cometh to pass, if she find no favour in his eyes.

So per Oral Tradition what are the grounds for divorce ? They really did not know and made things up based on 'deductions' of Torah verse. 

Until about 1000 years ago - under oral law the male was able to divorce his wife without her consent.  European Jews thereafter required her consent. They just invented laws. 

Unlike the male, the wife can not issue a divorce. Rambam's Hilcot Gerushin 1 explains The man must voluntarily initiate the divorce. However, Gerushin 2 explains there are some limited circumstances where the man can be compelled to issue a divorce. 

Sometimes the man withholds giving divorce papers creating problems for the spouse; because she can not marry without them. 
{ETA 9/9/2016 Sometimes the man has vanished for one reason or another and this leaves the women unable to remarry.  These are called the Agunot Problems for more see http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Judaism/agunot1.html }

The point is Divorce Oral Tradition style was and still is biased in favor of males. It unfairly discriminates based on gender. 

Only Males can initiate marriage. Talmud Kiddushin 2a -  A women is 'acquired'  in one of three ways: money or contract or sex. Kiddushin 5b But if she gives him (money or its equivalent)

and says ‘Behold, I am consecrated unto thee,’ ‘I am betrothed unto thee,’ ‘I am a wife unto thee,’ she is not betrothed.

Women's Mind

Talmud Yoma 66 - A wise woman asked R. Eliezer: Since with regard to the offence with the golden calf all were evenly associated, why was not the penalty of death the same? He answered her: There is no wisdom in woman except with the distaff. Thus also does Scripture say: And all the women that were wise-hearted did spin with their hands.

Talmud Avot - Chapter 1 Mishna 5 Engage not in too much conversation with women. They said this with regard
to one's own wife, how much more (does the rule apply) with regard to another man's wife.

Talmud Kiddushin 49b Ten Kabs [measures] of gossip descended to the world: nine were taken by women.

Conclusion

A compelling case can be made Oral Law and Tradition unfairly discriminates against women and holds man superior despite some modern day Rabbinic apologetics. 

P.S. Many Orthodox Jews today may not be sexist, but that is besides the point. The historical Oral Law and Tradition was sexist. Even if Oral Tradition may sometimes write complimentary things about women, it does not change the actual halacha - the oral law.

Continued Jewish Oral Tradition Part 3, Treatment of Heretics

Proof of God from Life; Genesis 2:7

Before getting to the proof lets discuss Genesis 2:7

Genesis2:7 Then the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

Rashi explains the dust came from the four corners of the Earth so that wherever he may die the Earth would accept him. Alternately from the Earth  from where the future Temple would be built.  That man was made of both earthly and heavenly matter. Animals have an inferior soul. Mans has understanding and speech.

Rambam - Guide for the Perplexed Chapter L : “It is one of the fundamental principles of the Law that the Universe has been created ex nihilo, and that of the human race, one individual being,

Adam, was created. As the time which elapsed from Adam to Moses was not more than about two thousand five hundred years,....”   {ETA In Rambm's Beit Habechirah - Chapter 2 Paragraph 2 - Adam, the first man, offered a sacrifice there [the location of King David's alter] and was created at that very spot, as our Sages said: "Man was created from the place where he [would find] atonement." }

Per modern science there was no original Adam, mankind arose much more than 2,500 years prior to Moses, and Man was not created from earth/clay. There was no breath or soul from a supernatural being required for human life to come about - more on this later.

Not only is Genesis most likely a false myth it has numerous pagan parallels.

Here are just a sampling from the book Myth Legend and Custom In The Old Testament by Theodor H. Gaster 1969 

Beginning Page 9 “This fancy [referring to Man formed from Clay/Earth] is, however, by no means confined to scripture. The Mesopotamians too conceived man to have been fashioned in such a manner.”  The goddess Aruru is said to have pinched him out of clay.  The mother-goddess Mama/Mami  formed seven primeval males and 7 primeval females out of clay. [There is that magic number 7 again.]

Egyptian Mythology - the potter god Knum molds man on the wheel.

Greeks - Prometheus molds the first man out of clay and water.

Similar types of stories are found among the aborigine Australian Blacks, the New Zealand Maoris, the Indian classic Satapatha Brahmana,  and on and on. 

Beginning on Page 19 “The rude clay, we are told, was animated by  the breath of God. This Idea too is by no means exclusive to the Bible.”

Here are a sampling of examples from the book.

Hindu myth has creator god Prajapati bring life to man in the same way thus imparting to him mental and spiritual faculties.

Yorubas of West Africa have the supreme god Olorun give life to an insensate clod in a similar manner.

Similar stories are found among some native American tribes, some Eskimos etc: etc:
------------------------------------------------

Is the Genesis false myth consistent with the hypothesis that the Torah is true ? That the Torah is from God ? In other words, does this verse increase our confidence that the Torah is true ? That it is from God ? I would say no and no. Not just that. I would argue it is evidence against both those hypotheses. 

Now onto the argument Proof of  God from Origin of Life. (Related to this argument see Proof of God from Origin of Life,  Proof of God from Free Will, Justice, Consciousness, BLANK )

It is obvious that say a rock is different in so many ways from a living moving human being or animal or perhaps even plants . There must be a thing that differentiates inanimate things from the animate and give living things the ability move etc: and that thing must be spiritual since we can not detect or see that thing as we would regular physical things. The thing may be called a spirit or soul - something that animates the inanimate. Moreover, death can be explained by that spirit or soul leaving the Human/Animal/Plant. (The above is similar to Animism a widely held ancient belief.)  To the argument we may add humans have consciousness, self awareness, feelings, memory etc: and a spirit or soul can account for such things.
It is a short leap to add god giving the soul or spirit or breath.

It could be ancient man came up with similar reasons for the existence of souls or spirits and may be the basis for the commonality of the ghost/soul/spirit/supernatural breath  mythology. 

{Wikipedia Life - Life is a process, not a substance. Life is a self-sustained chemical system.}

A rock is not living because it’s type of atoms and arrangement of atoms is not in a configuration to provide the appropriate chemical reactions as in life. 

There is no evidence for souls or spirits or supernatural breaths. There is nothing in physics, biology or chemistry that allows for the introduction of spirits/souls/supernatural breaths into any of the equations or any of the theory.

Near Death experiences, memories, feelings can all be accounted for by modern science thru materialistic biological effects. There is no need for ghost, spirits and souls to explain any of it. 

Jewish Oral Tradition - Part 1 - Introduction

Updated Thru 9/11/2016

Orthodox Jews claim there is the written Bible and an associated Oral Tradition going back to the Moses. 

Which religious books (if any) are included as the Oral Tradition of Judaism ?

What is meant by the Oral Tradition of the Jews ?

Which Rabbis speak the Oral Tradition ? How do we know their opinion is authentic Oral Tradition ? 

Those questions have no easy answers. I am not sure there are agreed upon answers by Orthodox Jews. If so, the assertion of an Oral Tradition is virtually undefined and almost useless.

Is there an unbroken chain or Oral Tradition back to Moses ? Is it a reliable chain or does it have some weak links ?  

I am going to assume the Mishna and Talmud are essential parts of the Oral Tradition according to Rabbinic Jews. Those books have shaped the beliefs of most of ‘Rabbinic’ Jews, by which I mean ‘traditional’ Jews or ‘Orthodox’ Jews who claim to be following the Oral Tradition.

There is an enormous amount of what is most likely 'nonsense' in the Talmud. This has prompted the ‘rationalist’  Orthodox Jews  to distance themselves  (from at least some of ) the ’nonsense’, usually citing some Rabbi, perhaps Rambam for support.

Too bad the architects of the foundations of Rabbinic Judaism never heard of those Rabbis or Rambam; since the latter are born after the compilation of the Talmud. Moreover,  Rambam was  disparaged by many. and even his books were initially burned by some Rabbinic  Jews.  {ETA 9/11/2016 - Correction -  The actual burning of the books may not have been done by Rabbinic Jews. I am not sure if any Rabbinic Jews actually burned his books. However, it seems clear some Rabbis wanted a ban placed on some of his writings.} Those Jews probably did not consider at least some of Rambam opinions as authentic Oral Tradition.  

 Many Rabbis cited in the Talmud most likely believed their ‘science’, astrology, magic, amulets, demons, apparitions, golems, reincarnations, and probably some of their other assorted legends/fables, previously referred to by me as 'nonsense'. By putting such material into writing the Talmud authors implicitly validated at least some of  it  and so followers of Rabbinic Judaism for the most part accepted it.  It also raises several other issues.

To what degree were those Talmudic Rabbis relating authentic ‘Oral Tradition’ or just making up things or citing information  that is not really part of Oral tradition ? How can we separate the strands ? 

How much reliance and trust should we have in such ignorant people ? That they would accurately understand an Oral Tradition (even assuming an authentic one existed)  and be able to transmit it faithfully ? That they could  make correct deductions from the Torah ? 

We also know that as oral information is passed on and shared it becomes corrupted over time. There is a high probability that even if there was an authentic Oral Tradition it became corrupted. 

It is patently clear that on almost every issue discussed in the Talmud there are divergent and contradictory opinions.  So which one is the real Oral Tradition ? They all can not be correct.

Another major issue is that large portions of the written Bible have no Mishna/Talmud commentary. This is suggestive that Oral Tradition is incomplete and thus there must be portions of the (alleged) authentic Oral Tradition as well as the written Bible that are impossible to be understood fully. It also suggests that there were people 'developing' the Oral Tradition and they never got around to finishing the job. 

There is a section of  Talmud (Menachot 29b) that conflicts with the notion that ‘Oral Tradition’ goes back to Moses.

“Rab Judah said in the name of Rab, When Moses ascended on high he found the Holy One,
blessed be He, engaged in affixing coronets to the letters. Said Moses, Lord of the Universe, Who
stays Thy hand? He answered, There will arise a man, at the end of many generations, Akiba b.
Joseph by name, who will expound upon each tittle heaps and heaps of laws. Lord of the Universe,
said Moses; permit me to see him. He replied, Turn thee round. Moses went and sat down behind
eight rows {and listened to the discourses upon the law}. Not being able to follow their arguments
he was ill at ease, but when they came to a certain subject and the disciples said to the master
Whence do you know it? and the latter replied It is a law given unto Moses at Sinai  he was
comforted. There upon he returned to the Holy One, blessed be He, and said, Lord of the Universe,
Thou hast such a man and Thou givest the Torah by me!  He replied, Be silent, for such is My
decree. Then said Moses, Lord of the Universe, Thou hast shown me his Torah, show me his
reward...” 

If the Oral Tradition goes back to Moses should he not be cognizant and understand the lecture  ? 

Based on this Talmud alone we have reason to be skeptical that the Rabbinic Oral Tradition is authentic and goes back to Moses. 

And if there was an authentic Oral Tradition going back to Moses why is it that the Sadducees, Samaritans, Beta Israel, (and the Essenes ?)  did not accept the Oral Tradition as found in the Mishna/Talmud or were unaware of it or had an alternate oral tradition ? 

Continued Jewish Oral Tradition - Part 2,  Treatment of Women

Proof of God via Jewish Survival, Jewish Suffering, and the Bible Predictor (Part Two) ?

Updated thru 3/23/2106 1/2/2018

Part one outlined the argument and provided some critiques. This post will continue the discussion and provide a note on the Kuzari argument. 

‘Judaism’ is a very old religion, amongst the oldest surviving. Religions evolved over time. The claim that Orthodox Judaism is essentially the same religion as given at Mt. Sinai is so contrary to every single thing we know about religion, society and culture  that it should be treated with the utmost skepticism and rejected outright unless there is overwhelming evidence that it is true.

The Judaism of the ancient Israelites is almost certainly not the same Judaism of any Jewish denomination around today. Even if there was an Avraham Avinu (Abraham),  he did not invent a religion from scratch. The idea of gods and how to worship them predate him.  Nor did Judaism start at an [alleged] Mt Sinai event since some Torah commands predate it and there was a prior relationship between the Jews and El/Yahweh before that date. The same is true for many other religions, there are probably several African, Asian, North and South Native American religions that have prehistoric roots. Also for example when did Christianity start ? With ‘Jesus’ or  with Paul or some other founder ? I would argue no. Christianity  had it’s roots in preceeding religions, including Judaism which had it’s roots in etc: The same would apply to Islam. 

When some Rabbis advocate the Kuzari argument and claim religions require a giver or founder they are either lying or ignorant.  Some religions may have a founder others do not. And ‘Judaism’  has a fare number of potential ‘founders’ as mentioned in my discussion of the Kuzari argument. 

{ETA 1/2/2018 I need to add the obvious. Thousands of religions, myths, legends etc; have no known founder. Consider those from native American Indians, African tribes, ancient near east cultures, ancient Europeans etc: etc: }

Here are some old religions from the book Charts of World Religions by H. Wayne House 2006 

Chart 8

Hinduism  c.1800 BC - founder unknown or none

Zoroastrianism c. 1300 BC founder - Zarathustra

Shinto c. 600 BC founder unknown or none. [However per World Religions MacMillan Compendium  page 995 - regarding Shintoism - it has no founder with the exception of several sects. ] 

{ETA 3/9/2016 And from the book The Great Religions of the Modern World - E.J. Jurji editor, 1947.  Beginning on page 141 - Shintoism lies at the center of an intense nationalism. “For some two thousand years it has furnished an interwoven system of beliefs and ceremonies whereby the Japanese  people have dramatized and suported the chief interests of their national life.”  IT IS THE ONLY EXAMPLE ON EARTH TODAY OF AN ANCIENT TRIBAL FAITH THAT HAS SURVIVED THE CENTURIES AND LIVED ON INTO THE PRESENT AS THE NATIONAL RELIGION OF A CONTEMPORARY STATE. [my capitals. Does this uniqueness imply Shintoism is true ? Does this prove the Japanese gods/spirits has been protecting the Japanese ?  

Shintoism shares some beliefs  with Judaism including:]

Immortal Soul, 
Divinely ordained national destiny, 
Guardianship over the nation by the supernatural - for Shinto it is the eternal ancestral spirits,
Efficacy of Prayer and Offerings
The presence of invisible gods at shrines.}

[ When was ‘Judaism’  founded - Do we begin with the alleged Abraham ? Or the alleged Sinai revelation ?  One or more Jewish Kings or perhaps one or more of the Prophets. Perhaps Ezra ?  Abraham according to the chart is 2100 BC and the chart uses that period.]

Hinduism is the third largest religion in the world 762 million (chart 58) and Zoroastrianism has 2.5 million followers (chart 79). Both are of comparable age to Judaism.

[Longevity of a religion is not evidence of the truth of the religion.]

From Encyclopedia  of Religion and Society 1998 W. Swatos, Jr (Editor) 

Page 226 Hinduism has no recorded founder and has sacred text dating back as far as 1500-1200 BCE. 

P 571 Zoroastrianism formed in the early part of the first millennium BCE. “The Judeo - Christian Idea of the Devil was borrowed from Zoroastrianism at the time of the [Jewish] Babylonian exile.” [This is what is called evolution of religion. It is one reason ‘Judaism’ survived - the Jews  adopted from surrounding cultures and adapts to them. Another good example of this is Philo and Rambam adapting and adopting Greek Philosophy into Judaism. Today ‘rationalist’ or the more scientifically educated Jews twist themselves into a pretzel attempting to adopt to and adapt to modern scientific ideas to Judaism. I will come back to this notion later.] 

{ETA 2/22//2016 From the Book How The Great Religions Began by Joseph Gaer 1951 New and Revised Edition

Beginning on Page 201 “Zoroaster was the first religious leader in the world to teach the belief in an abstract god, a god one could not touch or hear or smell or see.” 300 years after Zoroaster dies, Alexander the Great conquers Persia and sets up the Greek religion. People secretly teach Zoroastrianism to their children. 500 years later Zoroastrianism religion is restored. 400 years later Arabs force a new religion on to them under the threat of death. Some choose death, some accept the new religion, and some flee and practice their own religion  in new places. Zoroastrianism prohibits anyone joining their religion; you have to be born into it. [This last requirement should sound familiar to Jews, however Jews do allow converts.]

Beginning page 267 Regarding Judaism - At the time of Cyrus the Zoroastrian Persians were friendly to the Jews and the Jews studied the Persian religion and learned from it. Yahweh the god of several tribes and protector of Israel now becomes the creator of the world, the latter  similar to a concept in Zoroastrianism. Jews also learn from Zoroastrian life after death, heaven and hell and carried these beliefs into Judaism.  From the Zoroastrianism Saoshyant (redeemer), the Jews invent the coming of their own redeemer and give him additional attributes not found in Zoroastrianism.  By the time the Jews return to Israel with the help of Cyrus Judaism had greatly changed. 

[The book argues that Zoroastrianism influences Judaism and that argument has merit.  But Judaism most likely was also influenced by  Egypt and other ancient near east cultures. Cultures that may have influenced Zoroastrianism.]}

So what additional mechanisms (reasons I may not have previously provided - I can not remember) can account for Judaism’s survival ?

A) There is an element of Jewish Tribalism.  Also an element of nationalism/patriotism - that Israel is their land  given to them by their God.

B) The ‘Jewish’ God can adapt  to all sorts of fancies. The State God, The Divine Warrior, The Fertility / Rain Giver God, The Vengeful God, The Loving God, The Mighty God, The Threatening God , The Mystical God, the Redeemer God, The Just God, The Merciful God, The Law Giving God etc: etc: . He can be the Creator God, The Philosopher’s God, The Metaphysical God, The Theologian’s God, The Source of Morals God etc: etc etc. In short, a flavor to suit just about anybody’s taste (except us skeptics and atheists) and in any period of history.  

C) Judaism includes a mix of miracles, holidays, magic, amulets,  harvest (fertility) festivals, spirits, demons, angels, prayers, incantations, superstitions, holy objects, rituals and souls.  There are fascinating legends and myths passed on in the Torah, holy texts and oral traditions. There are alleged holy people who have special powers and abilities. {ETA 2/28/2016 - Some Orthodox Jews give credence to dream visitations from dead ancestors and relatives.} Those provide a sort of mass folk appeal. In addition they create social cohesion and alliances. 

D) For the Jewish elitists, they may find refuge in ‘rationalistic’ Judaism, which tends to pooh pooh some of the things mentioned in C), things  that have so much folk appeal. Philo and Rambam accommodated Judaism to Greek Philosophy.  In more modern times the rationalists try to accommodate Judaism to science ending up twisting themselves into pretzels in the process.  Typically these innovators are  first disparaged but eventually find a stream where they can fit in and eventually are accepted by most more or less.

E) Eventually Judaism becomes essentially Monotheistic with one God Yahweh. By definition that means no other gods. Polytheists when captured by another ‘tribe’ can readily usually adopt to that new god, so their religion can more readily change and  individuals can more easily adopt the new religion.  However, the monotheistic Jews would have a difficult time changing their God. 

{ETA 2/22/2016 F) Judaism is not monolithic. Part of it's staying power is the numerous denominations ranging from Humanistic Judaism to the numerous sects of Ultra Orthodox. Jews can usually cross from one denomination to another. Again providing a sort of menu. This same situation was most likely true in ancient times - the various forms of the ancient Israelite religions or for example Hellenizing  Jews versus the Maccabees. 

A  mix of stiffness and flexibility characterizes Judaism and this likely plays a role in it's survival. }

{ETA 3/23/2106  Orthodox Jews consider the future resurrection of the dead and the world to come as important principles of Judaism. 

From the Book Understanding Judaism - Jacob Neusner Editor- Beginning Page 35 The [Rabbinic Jewish] belief in the world to come with it’s concomitant belief in bodily resurrection is an importation from Zoroastrian civilization. Both stem from non Jewish sources. }

The essential ideas of A) thru F) most likely provide staying power for Christianity and Islam. 

Related Posts Proof of God from Prophecy , Proof of God from Israel  , The Tenacity of Unreasonable Beliefs 

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.]