It’s a combination of my own research and some information I have found in commentaries.
1. Certain vocabulary in Genesis 1-3 is used elsewhere only in books written during the monarchy or later. I found most of this in commentaries, and some of it myself through word searches.
2. Certain names appear only in Genesis 1-11 and books written during or after the Babylonian exile. I found this information myself by making repeated word searches.
3. Some verses in Genesis 1-11 use place names which help date the text. I found some of this information in commentaries, and some of it I worked out myself by choosing a place name then looking for its earliest use in the Bible and looking in history for the earliest date at which it could have been used in the Bible in the way it’s used in Genesis 1-11.
What an irony that you and are part of the minority that think Genesis was written AFTER the Exile… and yet you tortured our discussion with an uber skepticism that Jewish scribes would ever know Sumerian cuneiform.
Clearly you meant only to doubt that they wouldn’t know Sumerian prior to the Exile. But on these grounds you stopped my linguistic and theological assessment dead in the water - - despite its relevance to the post-Exile situation.
I find that odd…
But at the very least, I agree with you completely about Genesis…
It’s not odd George, the simple fact is there’s no evidence for Hebrews in pre-exilic Judea knowing Sumerian cuneiform. It’s that simple. We have plenty of proto-Hebrew and Hebrew texts in pre-exilic Judea. We have absolutely zero Sumerian cuneiform texts in pre-exilic Judea.
We have textual evidence that hardly any Sumerians or Babylonians could even read or write their own texts, let alone Hebrew texts. Scribal literacy was confined to a tiny scribal elite; not even the kings could read or write. The first evidence we have for Hebrews learning cuneiform is in the exilic era, and the first evidence of Assyrian contact with Israel (not even Babylonian contact with Israel), is in the seventh century.
It should be noted that the Ten Commandments found in Exodus 20 include the justification of the Sabbath on the seventh day because YHWH created the universe in 6 days. (Ex 20:8)
This would seem to indicate that Gen 1 was written before the Exile.
It brings to mind that we really do not have a good idea as to what was passed down by oral tradition and for how long before it was written. When passed orally, the linguistic changes would still occur with the passage of time, though we still have faith that God maintained the message intact.
NOR WAS MY DISCUSSION REQUIRING THAT - - I merely stated a hypothetical. I was going to apply it to the historical when I was sure you understood where I was going.
As long ago and as far West as the Levantine Ugarit, Sumerian Cuneiform was read and used. And I wouldn’t be surprised if the Pharaoh didn’t have Cuneiform literate scribes.
So all your blanket statements aside - - all you did was put me off wanting to discuss anything with you.
The reason people say: “Suppose a hypothetical situation …” is to conduct an experiment of the mind. I did not use the phrase to trick you… it was to simplify the scenario. What you COULD have said (considering your strong interest in Genesis composition AFTER the Exile) is say, let’s change your hypothetical to Babylon some time after the Exile.
But a discussion-killer always prefers “killing” I suppose…
OR … Roger, the writer of Genesis wanted to offer an EXPLANATION for the comment in Exodus. And thus provided a more detailed “back story”. This kind of thing happened all the time in the expansion of legendary material for the Greeks. Homer mentions a god once or twice … with no detail … and then someone a century later decides to write out the story of that God or event.
The more a person considers it, the more likely it becomes that Exodus was written before Genesis. It is the book where Yahweh reveals his name.
It is also far more likely that the names of the 12 tribes were settled on BEFORE anyone had histories of the 12 sons of Israel.
Well, Roger, I think what you need is a bigger helping of those things that don’t make sense!
Abraham meets with the Philistines - - Philistines didn’t settle until the time suggested for Moses. The actual year of permanent settlement is around 1130 BCE.
When Abraham DOES visit the Philistines … we are told he pretends to be Sarah’s BROTHER … so he won’t be killed to take her. But the narrative puts Sarah’s age sometime around her 60’s at the youngest. So clearly 2 stories have been joined together - - leaving a narrative conflict that is only barely noticeable.
The Tribe of Simeon, is one of the Ten tribes. Fine. That leaves Judah with Judah and Benjamin … oh, and the sons of Levi - - jeeez… that’s THIRTEEN tribes !!! … But if you count one of the giant half tribes as yet another tribe that’s 14! Gosh … pretty bad counting.
But let’s say Simeon is the 10th tribe… it belongs to the NORTHERN kingdom… the tribe of Israel. But it’s assigned territory is south of Judah (some even say WITHIN Judah) !!! Well, that’s going to make the weekend barbecue pretty awkward - - maybe we SHOULD invite Judah too ?
Genesis and Leviticus mention IRON - - which was an extremely rare metal during the bronze age. But let’s be flexible, right?
But then Numbers 35:16 pops right up and slaps you in the face: "And if he smite him with an instrument of iron, so that he die, he is a murderer: the murderer shall surely be put to death. "
Clearly this was written during the iron age … when instruments WERE made of iron.
Jon provides quite an extensive list of other aberrations… which you would be wise to reconsider. Most of them are far from frivolous problems…
That is an exilic era gloss added to the text. Three lines of evidence indicate this.
No one from Genesis 12 to the end of 2 Kings shows any knowledge of the sabbath being instituted to commemorate the creation.
In Deuteronomy when Moses tells Israel the reason for the sabbath,he says it is to commemorate the Exodus. He doesn’t say anything about it being to commemorate the creation week.
The text changes from first person (God speaking), to third person (someone else speaking about God), indicative of a gloss.
If the events of Genesis 1-11 were being transmitted by oral tradition, it wouldn’t explain why no one from Genesis 12 to the end of 2 Kings ever mentions them.
One question is where did the Book of Deuteronomy come from. In 2 Kings 22 it is reported that someone found a new book of the law. After it was verified by the prophetess Hilkah, Josiah read it ands based his reforms on this new book of the law. This book would seem to be Deuteronomy, which means Second Law and is the final book of the Torah.
The Decalogue found in Deuteronomy is exactly like that found in Exodus, except for the rationale behind the Sabbath. I would agree that the Deuteronomy tradition is earlier, but I think that the Exodus tradition goes back to the Genesis 1-4 edit during the time of Empire.
It seems this whole thread was intent on discrediting the bases of the Israelites as a people. That would discredit anything said in the Bible. Jesus becomes ridiculous. You might as well give up on any god being real. The atheists win.
Not mentioning “history” stories does not mean history stories did not exist. Most of the books in your list convey “recent history.” Why would you require them to mention “ancient history” just to verify that those were ancient? On the other hand, the Psalms does mention Gen 1 several times.
Your comments to support your “post-exile” theory are not enough to base a belief that the exodus from Egypt never happened. Mostly you have words and places used from Babylonian times. We know the books were compiled after the exile, but that is not enough evidence to insist every story, or any of the stories, originated at that time.
I don’t think you comprehend the concept of iron. Numbers 35:16 does not say the murder was done by an instrument like a sword. Iron use was limited in the Bronze Age, but the material was not “extremely rare.” People could not smelt iron ore into steal or even pig iron until the technology was invented. However, they could use the metal in other ways by cold hammering small peices. That made it very labor intensive thus expensive. It is possible that expensive items were often used religiously, thus bringing harsh penalty upon people who used it improperly. Another possibility for the “intent” part of the law is that a lump of iron is heavier then a lump of rock of the same size but less likely to be at hand. This would show premeditation.
I think you need to read the whole paragraph Numbers 35:16-21. The iron object (not specifically a sword) is equal to a rock, stick, or fist. In v 20, something thrust is outlawed as a murder weapon. No material or shape is specified. It could be a spear, knife, or sword etc made out of anything hard and sharp including rocks and sharp sticks. Then the verse adds the act of throwing something, again no specifics of what (rock, slingshot, spear, bag of angry bees).
Numbers 31:22 lists metals won as spoils of war: gold, silver, bronze, iron, lead. Most of these are not good for battle weapons unless you tie a big chunk on the end of a stick and hit your opponent. In a non-war situation, such an action would be murder. Simple.
You assume this passage must be a weapon of war, like a sword. You assume that because it does not mention other sword materials that the passage must originate from a time within the Iron Age. Now, that is contrived and a major jump in logic. Your conclusion is faulty because other objects could be made from iron, including a lump tied to a stick to act as a hammer. Someone doesn’t even need the stick to commit murder.
No. It is intent on reading the Bible accurately. This provides greater support for the Israelites as people, not less.
I agree. But it is significant negative evidence. Where is the evidence that such stories did exist? There isn’t any.
The complete lack of any reference to those events in pre-exilic books, combined with the fact that reference to those events suddenly appears and is introduced only in exilic or post-exilic books, is strong evidence that those living in pre-exilic times knew nothing about those events.
No one from Genesis 12 to the end of 2 Kings shows any knowledge of Adam whatsoever. This is particularly curious given the amount of time the Law of Moses spends talking about sin. But Adam is never mentioned at all. The word is only used as a generic term for humans, or as a place name.
The post-exilic 1 Chronicles opens with a reference to Adam, with whom the reader is assumed to be familiar. The missing link is Genesis 1, which introduces who Adam is, and in the case of Genesis 1-11 the evidence is overwhelming that these chapters were only written in the exilic era at the earliest, and that the specific people and events in these chapters were not known to people before the exile.
There is no need to introduce people if the audience already knows them. So we find Adam first introduced in Genesis 1-11, which is exilic. The reader is given an explanation of where he came from, and his position in human history. This was clearly necessary because no one knew this before. But in the post-exilic era, 1 Chronicles opens with a reference to Adam which is expected to be understood by the reader; the reader already knows about Adam because Genesis 1-11 had been written earlier, during the exilic era.
I don’t require them to mention ancient history just to verify that the history is ancient. The point is that this ancient history is actually mentioned in the most recent books. Adam appears in 1 Chronicles, which is very clearly not describing “recent history” from the point of view of its writer. However, most of the books on my list also convey “ancient history”; Genesis 12 to the end of 2 Samuel all convey “ancient history”. Yet they make no mention of any of the people or events in Genesis 1-11. Why is it that those people and events only appear in later books, not earlier books?
Which psalms?
I agree. I believe the exodus from Egypt did happen. I even started a thread in which I presented my argument that it did happen.
I am not arguing that every story originated at that time. I am arguing Genesis 1-11 was written during the exile. The evidence we have is not that these accounts already existed and then had words and places from Babylonian times added to them. The evidence is that they were actually written in Babylon.
I assume that it means ANYTHING made of iron… A casual object made into a weapon of opportunity…
This verse was definitely written at a time when casual objects were so commonly made of iron that to SPECIFY the composition of iron would not be strange.