FINDING BIBLE TRUTH - THE PENTATEUCH

Tradition has it that Moses wrote the first five books of the Bible: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy - the Torah or Pentateuch. In Deuteronomy Moses is said to have written a torah and placed it with the Ark, however a 'torah' means no more than a book of instruction; this reference cannot be taken as implying that he is the author of the whole Pentateuch. Nevertheless it might be considered that the nature and amount of precise detail suggests early written records which were available to the final author, and which could possibly have had content attributable to Moses. As early as the third century AD St Jerome (translator of the Bible into Latin - the Vulgate version) thought that Deuteronomy had a different author and was written much later. Through the centuries many others have said the same, although all too often they were forced to recant by the church authorities. While this view is still not universally agreed it appears to be supported by the great majority of today's biblical scholars.

Concerns over the authorship of the other four books of the Pentateuch arose from the existence within them of many doublets, in which the same event is told twice with minor, or even major, differences, some triplets can also be found. Typically in one version God is referred to as Elohim (in NKJV rendered as 'God'), in the other as Jehovah (in NKJV rendered as 'the LORD') other name differences are Horeb vs Mt Sinai, Israel vs Jacob, Jethro vs Reuel. There are also striking differences in vocabulary and in emphasis. An early example of a doublet is the stories of the creation of man in Genesis 1.26 and Genesis 2.7, another is where Abraham is told that Sarah will have a son in Genesis 17.19 and Genesis 18.10. The most credible explanation for the existence of these doublets was developed by Wellhausen around 1900 who, building on much earlier ideas, showed that these books must have been put together from separate accounts embodying different traditions. One source, referring to God throughout as Jehovah, he identified as coming from Judah (the J source), another, initially calling God Elohim, was from Israel (the E source), while he identified a third and rather later source which was primarily concerned with Priestly matters (the P source) and which also initially used Elohim. Once God has revealed his name in Genesis 3.14 all sources normally use Jehovah. This analysis has been widely accepted and subsequent research has allocated individual verses and sections of the Biblical text to their sources in a manner that you may (or may not) find convincing. It should be appreciated that Wellhausen's solution is strongly opposed in the deeper and mustier haunts of conservative theologians who, quoting Jewish and Christian tradition, suggest that there is sufficient internal evidence for a single author - Moses, and suggest that the doublets are merely a literary device to give emphasis.

The Pentateuch is the foundation of Judaism. It shows the origin of the Hebrew tribes, the recognition of a Hebrew God and the establishment of a binding contract between the Hebrew people and the Hebrew God in Genesis, the development into a nation in Exodus. The contract conditions are set out in broad detail in Exodus, and in finer detail in Leviticus, duties and ceremonies in Numbers, the whole being summarised in Deuteronomy. It is astonishing to us today to read the extreme detail and the absolute rigidity in which even the smallest details of the contract - dress, ceremony, observances of every kind - are set out, and perhaps even more astonishing to find every detail still being observed faithfully well over three thousand years later by a substantial part of the Jewish nation. A need to have everything connected with religious observance rigidly defined seems deeply ingrained in the Jewish psyche, even today you can find a document listing, among a large number of other potential catastrophes, `Laws Concerning One Who Makes a Mistake in the Reading of the Shema' and the correct action to be taken by someone who needs to flatulate in the middle of praying.

One initial reason for the rigid and comprehensive structure of rules may have been the difficulty of maintaining coherence and discipline among a very large assembly of people with little or no formal government structure, operating in the harshest of conditions. A reason that would apply equally well during the later dispersions. In these days we are accustomed to laws being reviewed from time to time, and being revised or abolished when they are seen to be out of date, but to the Jews these laws had been dictated to Moses by God himself, they were an indivisible part of their contract with God and any change was unthinkable.

Non-Jews are commonly not aware that the Law was in two parts: the Written Law, as set out in the Pentateuch, and the Oral Law which was maintained by the Priests. Until around 200 AD writing down the Oral Law was forbidden, but it then was preserved in the `Mishna'. The Oral Law consists of specific interpretations and elaborations of the Written Law. For example the Written Law says "An eye for an eye" but the Oral Law explains that this means `measured and just compensation for damage inflicted', and was not to be taken literally.

This was the Law that was relegated to second place, but not cancelled by Christ, for Jewish Christians it is still important. For non- Jewish Christians the Apostles, at the insistence of Paul, decided that only certain provisions should apply: Abstention from things offered to idols. Abstention from blood. Abstention from things strangled. Abstention from sexual immorality. In all other respects non-Jewish Christians were to follow their own laws.

A good example of how an idiosyncratic reading of the Bible can have a serious effect on people's lives can be found in the way that Jehovah's Witnesses interpret the ruling on blood in Acts 15:20, since this sect, and this sect alone, interpret this as forbidding blood transfusion. They agree however that these rules were not intended to create new law, but only to define which of the old laws should be applied.

The Laws themselves go back to common near-Eastern traditions; there are many parallels to be found in 'The Code of Hammurabi' (Babylon c 1700 BC) and the dietary laws are widespread. The dietary laws also show a certain lack of knowledge of nature - for example hares do not chew the cud (Leviticus 10:6).

* * * *

THE PENTATEUCH'S IDEA OF GOD.

We can start to get a view from the Pentateuch of how the Jews saw their God. A number of points seem reasonably clear:

Jehovah was a tribal God, a wholly partisan God of the Hebrews. He had no concern for any nation that was not covered by his contract with Abraham, and concentrated all of his favour on a single one of the many tribes descended from Abraham, that of Jacob.

Jehovah was fully prepared to inflict suffering and death on inoffensive non-Israelites in order to induce fear and respect. Genesis records how Pharaoh's heart was deliberately hardened to make him ignore the warnings of the plagues, and later caused to pursue the escaping Israelites so that his forces could be destroyed and provide Jehovah with a great victory. A similar pattern is recorded in the Book of Joshua.

Jehovah carried vengeance to extremes. The Midianites and Amelekites were to be wiped out for causing problems during the Exodus.

Jehovah would inflict very severe punishment for any breach of any detail of his Laws. Jehovah required total obedience and total dependence. The worst of all offences was to reject him.

On the other hand Jehovah was seen as merciful and just and always willing to restore offenders to favour after due punishment and repentance.

Jehovah was presumed never to be arbitrary or unpredictable.

In return for keeping all the provisions of the Covenant Jehovah would provide complete protection and everything necessary for a comfortable life. Israel would be elevated above all other nations.

* * * *

GENESIS.

In the Bible God is referred to in a large number of different ways, the most common being:

`Elohim', which is a collective noun, translated in NKJV as the singular `God'. The old Canaanite Gods were also Elohim - their supreme God El, the secondary Gods and their wives. Jewish translation is `God'.

`YHWH'. Translated as `LORD', or in some bibles as Jehovah. Non-priestly Jews to whom the sacred name of God was not permitted sometimes substitute `Adonoy', which cannot be translated simply, or just `God'.

`YHWH Elohim'. Translated as `LORD God'. Jewish bibles in English use `God' or `Adonoy Elohim'.

Once God has identified himself to Moses in Exodus 3:14 Elohim on its own disappears except where used as descriptive of Gods in general. It remains in the plural form even where the sense is clearly singular.

The word Adonai (translated in NKJV as `Lord') is also used as a synonym for God but can refer to a non-divine dignitary. It is recorded that the post-exilic changes made to the Bible include 134 instances where the word YHWH/Jehovah was changed to Adonai. It seems that this was done where the true divinity of the subject was considered suspect.

A sideline on this is the discovery of inscriptions dating from the 8th century BC linking Jehovah with Asherah, sometimes identified as Astarte, BAAL's sister, referring to "Jehovah and his Asherah," "Jehovah Shomron and his Asherah, "Jehovah Teman and his Asherah.", suggesting that there was a period where some Hebrews thought that Jehovah had a female consort.

There is much confusion in Genesis and Exodus over whom the Israelites identified as their God. The use of Elohim suggests that they may have initially accepted the Canaanite gods. At a later stage they differentiated between El and Jehovah, although they still believed that many different Gods existed. The first Commandment: "You shall have no other Gods before me" seems to suggest that the Israelites considered that there was a choice, while throughout their history whenever times were hard they turned to other Gods to see if they could do better.

Much has been made throughout history of the detail in one of the two versions of the creation of man that Eve was created as an afterthought, as no more than a helper for Adam, created from Adam's rib, to justify a belief that woman must be subservient, and to be the possession of her husband. In the other account of the creation of man both were created together and told "Be fruitful and multiply; fill the earth . . .". You may find that the idea that Eve was created from Adam, and hence should be subservient to man, is one of the many details in Genesis that have to be rejected as pure myth.

Look at Genesis again and try to fathom where legend gives way to reality. Many will perhaps accept that up to the appearance of Abraham all is legend. The notion that there was no rain before the supposed time of the Flood is easily shown to be false, the notion of Angels mating with human women to produce a race of giants (there are other more reasonable interpretations of this passage) will be acceptable to few, the genealogies of the Ancients, their longevity and ages when first producing offspring can hardly be accepted. Even after Abraham legend plays its part; for example the story of `Moses in the bulrushes' is virtually identical to a Sumerian legend about Sargon, King of Akkad. Many more examples can be found. There is no magic way to decide what is legend and what is not; it seems far better to make one's mind on each story than unthinkingly to accept another's view. It must also be far better to conclude that you do not know than to accept another's error.

Legend is also to be found throughout the Bible. Two examples:

The story of how Jonah was swallowed by a "great fish" but was subsequently disgorged intact finds a parallel in the Indian tale of the hero Shaktideva, who experienced the same thing during his quest for the Golden City.

The celebrated judgment of Solomon concerning the child claimed by two contending women is told also about Buddha, Confucius, and other Oriental sages.

It is instructive to follow the story of Melchizedek, king of Salem, through the Bible, to see how an ancient tale is later used (or mis-used). He first appears in Genesis 14:18 after Abraham has returned to Sodom after rescuing his nephew Lot, captured in a local war. 'Melchizedek' appears, the only details given are that he was King of Salem and that he was a priest of God Most High. The suffix 'zedek' appears to have been a title given to successive Kings of Salem,and Melchizedek translates as `Righteous King'. This Melchizedek brings out bread and wine, congratulates, praises, and blesses Abraham, who thereupon gives him 'a tenth of all'. One very logical interpretation of this tale is that Abraham is accepting the suzerainty of Salem and paying the normal tithe in return for the use of Salem's pastures and for protection. The most interesting question is that of which God Melchizedek was serving. The designation `God Most High' only appears in this chapter and in Psalm 57. There is no identification with either Jehovah or El, although in his reply in v.22 the text has Abraham referring to `Jehovah God Most High'. It seems pretty clear that Melchizedek is referring to his own God, probably the Canaanite El, and that Abraham understands him as referring to HIS god. Since this was before the name YHWH had been made known Abraham's God, often referred to as Elohim, could conceivably also have been El.

The only other reference to Melchizedek in the Old Testament is in the Messianic Psalm 110:4 "You are a priest forever According to the order of Melchizedek", where he is accepted as a Priest of Jehovah and as initiating a priestly order parallel to the Levitical priesthood. In the Letter to the Hebrews Ch 7 the unknown author gives this Melchizedek an entirely new persona, "without father, without mother, without genealogy, having neither beginning of days nor end of life, but made like the Son of God, remains a priest continually", and is turned into a near God-like figure, so that Christ can be compared with him as a sort of High Priest of Heaven.

* * * *

DEUTERONOMY.

Returning to the problem of Deuteronomy. Just as there are readily recognisable differences between the language of Shakespeare and present-day English, so there are between early Hebrew and later writings. For most of us these are completely masked by translation into the English translator's own style and usage, but to the textual critic, looking at the text in its original language, the differences are more obvious even where the text has been rewritten by a later redactor. To translators such as St Jerome, it was obvious that Deuteronomy had a different author, and was written in a different age to the rest of the Pentateuch.

Translation, however, will not obscure all differences. For example the phrase "The Lord your God", used sparingly in most of the Books (Genesis 1, Exodus 16, Numbers 3, Leviticus 24) occurs some 240 times in Deuteronomy.

Biblical scholars refer to the Deuteronomist as the `D' source, adding to the `J';, `E', and `P' sources discussed earlier, and many, finding textual similarities, attribute the historical works that follow through Judges to Kings as the work of D.

Deuteronomy includes, along with historical detail, a comprehensive summary of the Mosaic Law as set out in the earlier books; however in comparing the details of these Laws with their originals it is found that some have been significantly modified, usually in the direction of making them less restrictive. This has to indicate both a different author and a not inconsiderable lapse of time.

Generally the phrase "The Law" or "The Law of Moses" refers to the whole of the Pentateuch, however in many instances it is used specifically to refer to Deuteronomy, perhaps as an acceptable summary of the Pentateuch. It may be used in this sense through the books of the Judges. However in Kings 2:22 and repeated in Chronicles 2:34, during the rule of Josiah, a most astonishing event occurs: a new and previously unknown Book of the Law is found in the Temple. The reforms that followed (known as the Deuteronomic Reforms), closely match prescriptions new or strongly emphasised in Deuteronomy, and can be considered as identifying the new book as Deuteronomy. The idea that a book of such overwhelming importance, supposedly written by Moses himself, could remain hidden for any length of time, and that any scroll referred to in existing books could be regarded as new or unknown, raises intriguing possibilities. When you add the facts that the book was found by a High Priest named Hilkiah, that Jeremiah's father was a priest named Hilkiah, and that Jeremiah is traditionally regarded as the redactor of the Judges and Kings, the stage is set for a conspiracy theory of major proportions.

Deuteronomy shows clear signs of having been added to at a later date, possibly under Ezra in the time of the 2nd Temple.

By way of a conclusion it may be considered that if the implications of the stories of Adam and Eve and of the Flood are rejected, and that the Law of Moses has been superceded, the Pentateuch has little significance for Christianity.

* Return to HOME