the Hebrew could spend centuries with the Egyptians…
a people who were the first to idealize the potential of the Afterlife …
and have their leader (Moses) grow up in the highest culture of the land …
and find their dramatic freedom due to a religion of Salvation …
And yet virtually have NO MENTION of a an idyllic afterlife of their own !!!
And yet Judaism is supposed to be the very ROOT of messianic salvation with an eternal afterlife?
If we look at the Samuel story where someone is raised from the dead … this is classic Semitic metaphysics where the afterlife is a dull and boring (if not sad) existence.
It is not until well after contact with the Zoroastrian view of messianic religion and a glorious afterlife, that we actually get the kind of religion that we always think Judaism is supposed to inspire.
What evidence is there of an “idyllic afterlife” in Genesis 1-11? If none, then what’s the relevance?
What do you mean by “idyllic afterlife”? There is a hint of “resurrection to justice” in Job, which I believe is dated by some as the earliest-written book in the Old Testament (although probably not of Hebrew origin). I think the best encapsulation of an undeveloped “age to come” is “every man under his own fig tree (or vine),” which is found in Micah, a book dated prior to the Exile.
So…that’s one example that doesn’t really address my questions…
…I’m not sure anybody here would suggest that a fully-developed Judaism emerged out of Egypt.
It is extraordinary to realise that in spite of the powerful nations around them, and the equally powerful and pervasive cultures, the Hebrews somehow maintained their national identity. I have studied ancient history on and of, so I will not pretend to be a scholar, but from what I have gleaned, the preservation of the OT is nothing short of miraculous (or at least displays the great faith and dedication of some of the Hebrews).
I am not sure how I feel about the theories you present, but I must admit they are impressive. Is it based upon the Wellhausen Theory? God bless and have a good day.
I can see your point; however, there is a lot of research in what he says. I must admit that and I am theologically conservative. What Jon says does not harm my faith. It is just good scholarly conversation. However, you also make a good point.
Thank you for your kind comments. Jonathan correctly describes the situation - - the Wellhausen Theory is not in play here in my view.
However, when it comes to that school of thinking, even the “rivalry between North and South” seems more appropriately placed in the Ezra/Nehemia phase of Hebrew history.
Okay, so let’s say we have this “black box” of the Babylonian Exile out of which emerges an “almost-fully-developed” proto-Judaism (albeit still centered on Temple worship, still violent, pre-Hasmonean, etc.).
It seems pretty clear that some kind of backward editing happened at some point–e.g., Judah’s children are subject to the expectation of levirate marriage (named after…his brother?; as an aside, if I ever owned a pet bird, I would name it Onan).
But what went into that box?
Temple worship? Out of the Exile emerges the “2nd Temple Period”–was there a first Temple?
Tribes? If so, from whence cometh they? If not, how do we explain the post-Exile census (and most specifically, the people that were excluded because they could not trace their ancestry)?
Monarchy, or to be more precise, two monarchies? Somebody alluded to the North-South rivalry as emerging in the Exile…does this imply that there was no Assyrian Exile?
It certainly lands a long way short of Wellhausen, and any idea of Persian authorship of the Pentateuch and establishment of the priesthood. Elephantine Papyri, yo!
Well that is the general socio-cultural tendency - that superpowers tend to influence smaller nations more than vice-versa. Barring specific disconfirming evidence to the contrary, it is the most likely supposition in any particular case. Consider how much American culture has influenced numerous small countries, compared to vice versa - it is quite asymmetrical.
The reason I have no trouble concluding that Genesis has a faulty understanding of chronology is because the whole Bible appears to share this faulty understanding. Let’s itemize:
Moses avoids the Philistines, and travels into a Palestine well devoid of Egyptian hegemony. The time when that is possible is no sooner than 1130 BCE. Allowing for the writer to actually FORGET when Egyptian hegemony existed in the Levant brings us at least to 1100 BCE.
This also means that if Exodus occurs some time AFTER 1100 BCE, then everything that happens from the Book of Exodus to the death of Solomon (which represents about 400 years in the Bible) brings us to Solomon’s death around 730 BCE!!! - - which would be just before Israel was destroyed by Assyria and around when Hezekiah began his rule in Jerusalem (2 Kings 18).
The lack of knowledge about the former Egyptian hegemony is so complete that Genesis tells us about Abraham cavorting with the Philistines in 2200 BCE … some 800 years is clearly missing from the legitimate chronology. [Abraham when he leaves Haran approximately 1926 BCE (Genesis 16).]
But is this surprising? The Biblical narrative is so disjointed, we have Abraham **pretending to be Sarah’s sister to avoid violent jealousies over her beauty - - and she’s somewhere in her SIxties - - WITHOUT MAKEUP.
This early phase of the Philistines is also muddled deep into the Iron Age… rather than the Bronze Age which is when the early Philistines actually arrived:
And then there is the confusion over the 10 and 12 tribes of Israel. Simeon becomes one of the 10 tribes of the Northern Kingdom, right? And yet, we are also told that Simeon’s traditional territory is either SOUTH of Judah… or WITHIN the South of Judah. How this works is rather beyond anyone’s understanding …
A faulty understanding of chronology (which can easily be explained by anachronistic story-telling–we do it all the time) is a far cry from “fabricating the patriarchs.”
So… if Abraham existed and met with the Philistines sometime after 1100 BCE … it means 400 years later, when Solomon’s time comes (400 years after Abraham) - - it is 700 BCE. Does that work for you? Solomon builds a temple in Jerusalem in 700 BCE…
Archaeology tells us that there was no way to ESCAPE the Egyptians by lingering in the region of Sinai any time before 1130 BCE… because the Egyptians regularly exerted their power and presence in the Levant until the Philistines established themselves militarily right in the middle of it!
QUOTE:
"The destruction of the Egyptian-allied city at Megiddo marked the end of
Egyptian power in the Levant for the next several centuries, except for the
three years following its reconquest by the Pharoah Shehsonq I of the 22nd
Dynasty, 925-922 BCE. Palestina, as it was then known to the Greeks, didn’t
come under the sway of Egypt again until its conquest by Ptolemy I in 301
BCE.
Egypt ruled southern and central Palestine from 1530 BCE when they chased
the Hyksos back into Palestine and northern Palestine and Lebanon from 1457
when they conquered Djahy, eventually conquering the entire Levant and part
of Anatolia. The New Kingdom ruled all these areas, except for the
territory the Hittites took from them down to Qatna with the defection of
Amurru, until the Late Bronze Age Collapse, with the last bit of its hold
there vanishing in 1130 BCE. Clearly, there was no room for the Israelites
to escape from Egypt into the Land of Canaan because they would have just
been “escaping” into more of Egypt."