Again, since my primary purpose here is to document the objections that traditionalists make against Biblical critics, I will refrain from interjecting personal comments in this summary. Readers can judge for themselves the merits of the author's case (as well as the merits of the critics' arguments.)
Chapter 4: Genealogy and Chronology
“The critics find discrepancies in the genealogical connections of the Bible, particularly in Genesis and the first part of Exodus. From this they wish to prove that the Bible (and particularly the Torah) was compiled from various sources in different periods and by many writers. But the contrary is true. The chain of genealogy in the Bible is unbroken and is linked by the events in the historical narratives. Certain explanations in the Talmud, Midrashim, and by authoritative Jewish commentators sustain this viewpoint.Eisenstein doesn't cover any new ground here; he details the standard chronology through the patriarchs, discusses the 430/400 years of exile (Gen 15), briefly mentions the opinions regarding the age of Jochebed when she gave birth to Moses (130 per Sotah 12a, which Ibn Ezra criticizes and Ramban defends.) Eisenstein calculates that she was actually 83, a "normal" age to give birth "in this period".
Eisenstein takes issue with a number of objections that Spinoza raised regarding the Torah's chronology:
- Problem: Ishmael was sixteen years old when he was cast out of Abraham's household. Yet the Torah calls him a yeled, "child" (Gen 21:13-16). Resolution: the word child is used to arouse sympathy, to show Hagar's helplessness her son became ill with thirst. After relief was round. Ishmael is called naar, "lad".
- Problem: Jacob was 84 years old when he married Laban's daughters, 93 when Joseph was born, 130 when he stood before Pharaoh. Why didn't Jacob marry sooner? Resolution: Jacob had to travel to Padan Aram, he was in constant fear of Esau, he had to work for Laban before he could marry.
- Problem: Judah was 21 at the time of the sale of Joseph, yet during the migration to Egypt he brought down his grandchildren. Resolution: Judah could have been 43 at the time, old enough for grandchildren.
- Problem: Dinah was only 7 years old when she was violation by Shechem, who sought to marry her. Simeon and Levi were youngsters and couldn't have killed all of the inhabitants of Shechem. Resolution: Eisenstein calculates that Dinah was about 11, and the brothers about 14. That was old enough for them to "easily overcome the defenseless invalids of Shechem".
The Torah mentions only the countries of Egypt, Canaan, Cush, and Philistia. "If, as the critics, say, the Torah was compiled in the time of Ezra, who lived in the fourth century B.C.E. under Persian rule, how do they account for the omission of these cities and counties? Persia is mentioned frequently in Esther, Daniel, Ezra, and in Chronicles, which was written by Ezra".
Regarding the Garden of Eden place-names - such as the rivers commonly translated as Tigris and Euphrates - Eisenstein says that we cannot identify with surety the translations. "We may be sure that the description of these places was not written in the Babylonian exile or during the Second Commonwealth, for the geography of Babylon and the principal rivers were better known then and could be easily identified. Notwithstanding this conclusive evidence, Jean LeClerc insists that these place-names in the Torah are of late origin."
Eisenstein argues against a number of other place name problems that critics bring up. For brevity, I'll only mention a few examples.
Mount Sinai or Mount Horeb? "According to the Talmud, the different names refer to different ways of describing the effect of Torah upon idolaters (Shabbat 89a). But the critics insist that Sinai and Horeb are separate mountains in different places. They claim that the author of the Torah confused them, and, in order to maintain his idea that Sinai was the site of the Revelation, he used the term Sinai thirty-one times in the Torah and four times in the other books, inserting "Horeb" twelve times in the former and four times in the latter. The critics do not even give the author, or as they call him, the editor, credit for knowing that he could easily have blue-pencilled the word Horeb and avoided this so-called confusion."
"Rachel was buried on the road to Efrat, which is Bethlehem. (Gen. 35:19) Evidently both names were known at the time of Moses, as they have the same connotation. Efrat, from the root parah, means productive, fruitful; and Bethlehem connotes a store-house for bread."
Eisenstein states that a number of other place name problems are simply the result of them being known by multiple names, such as Bela/Zoar, Hebron/Kiryat Arba, the location of Aharon's death, etc.
"Abraham, in his attempt to rescue Lot from his captors, pursued the enemy "as far as Dan." (Gen. 14:14) The critics say that a place called Dan was non-existent in Moses' time; that until the period of the judges it was named Laish (Judges 18 :29). Ibn Ezra (in his commentary on Numb. 13 :23), however, points out that the Dan in Genesis was another place. The Targum Yerushalmi calls it "Dan Caesaria." There are twenty-five cities named Springfield in the United States of America and no critic asks questions about their relationship. [FH: That's why no one knows where the Simpsons live!!] It is equally possible for two cities by the name of Dan to have existed in Canaan."
Beyond the Jordan. A common objection by critics who interpret this phrase in Moses' farewell address (Deut. 1:1) to refer to Transjordan; they therefore felt that the text was written by someone residing in Canaan and not by Moses. However, the term "eber-ha-Jarden" really means "beyond" in either direction... To the one who stands in the east, Trans-Jordan means west of the Jordan, and to the one who is in Canaan, Transjordan means east of it. The text reads "beyond the Jordan in the land of Moab" (Deut. 1:5), which is east of Palestine. Also: "And all the Arabah beyond the Jordan eastward." (ibid. 4:49) Hence "beyond the Jordan" in the land of Moab means west of the Jordan.
Regarding Demography, Eisenstein doesn't discuss the problems of 600,000 adult males (>2 Million total population). He only describes the multiple counts (Ex. 12:37, Num. 1, Num. 26) and supports this large number by the descriptions of King Saul mobilizing armies of 330,000 and 200,000 both of which were confirmed by census (I Sam. 11:8, 15:4).
Chapter 6: Designations of and References to God.
The fallacy of Astruc's theory that relates YHVH and Elohim to the J and E documents can be shown by the admixture and interchangeability of both names in one running story (e.g., the sacrifice of Isaac, the story of Jacob's dream, the Balaam story). This indicates that they emanate from one source.
That the patriarchs knew of God not just as el-Shaddai (Ex. 6:3), is seen in the multiple occurrences that indicate they also knew of YHVH (Gen. 15:2-8; 26:2, 24, 25; 28:16).
The critics say that the name "Israel" was substituted for "Jacob" by J. However, they concede numerous exceptions in Genesis (46:2, 48:8, 11:21, 50:25). Eisenstein also mentions Gen. 31:3 and - curiously - a number of references in the Prophets.
According to the critics, E alludes without offense to a matzevah, J never. Eisenstein shows a number of places where the so-called J author DOES refer to such stone pillars (e.g., Gen. 28:18, 35:20, etc.) which were used for memorials and oil libations.
Before discussing the traditional meaning of the divine names, he mentions Prof. Erdman of Leiden who withdrew from the Graff-Wellhausen school because the divine names were meaningless with regards to authorship. "So the conflict among critics goes merrily along".
Then the discussion of divine names, which is based on the mission or attribute of God represented (Elohim is God as manifested in nature, and can also refer to judges or mighty and powerful men; attribute of judgment. YHVH is the attribute of grace; it is the only name associated with sacrifices. Elohim with YHVH is tiferet - justice tempered with mercy. And so forth.)
The suffix YH is used only once in a proper name in the Torah - Moriah (Gen. 22:2) - but 107 times in other biblical books. Some names ending in EL were changed to YH (e.g., Uzziel to Uzziah), showing that the spelling was changed after the era of Torah. This nullifies the theory that some parts of the Torah were composed at the same time as the Books of Prophets.
Finally, anthropomorphism. Torah uses human attributes in its descriptions of God because that is due to the lower state of civilization among the Israelites in the Wilderness. The prophets utilized anthropomorphism "because of custom", but in a lesser degree. They were eventually eliminated during the Second Commonwealth. This disproves the notion that Torah was written in a later time.
[End of Part 2.]
Posts
8 comments:
"how do they account for the omission of these cities and counties?"
Do you mean how do they account for omissions of Persian places in the Torah or omissions of Torah places in Ezra.
"We may be sure that the description of these places was not written in the Babylonian exile or during the Second Commonwealth."
Eisentein seems to be arguing against the rather outdated view that most of the Torah was composed after the exile. I'm pretty sure most scholars nowadays agree that many elements were compiled before the exile. (though redacted afterwards)
"The fallacy of Astruc's theory that relates YHVH and Elohim to the J and E...." Good point. I find it rather amusing how Bible critics conveniently have the redactor insert YHWH passages into Elohim narratives.
"The suffix YH is used only once in a proper name in the Torah"
I recently just noticed the same thing. It would be interesting if the beginning of widespread YHWH worship could be pinpointed by the point in the Tanach when these names become prevalent.(The first name i can think of offhand is David's son Adonia) Einstein's argument here is pretty good evidence that the characters in the Torah are somewhat historical and are not purely later inventions by YHWH worshipers. (On the other hand Maybe they were later inventions by Elohim/El worshipers and YHWH worshipers adopted them. However one would expect the YHWH worshipers to have some of their own characters in the Torah with the YH suffix)
A lot of these arguments are against the specifics of DH and don't adress the overall issue. I'm waiting to see if Eisentein deals with some of the contradictions in the Biblical narrative and law.
Do you mean how do they account for omissions of Persian places in the Torah or omissions of Torah places in Ezra.
He means that one would expect the incorporation of names known to the redactor.
I'm pretty sure most scholars nowadays agree that many elements were compiled before the exile.
Keep in mind that the book was written in 1952.
I find it rather amusing how Bible critics conveniently have the redactor insert YHWH passages into Elohim narratives.
Agreed. They seem have no concept of context. Of course, Bible critics don't rely on different names of God in isolation from other textual features.
I'm waiting to see if Eisentein deals with some of the contradictions in the Biblical narrative and law.
Not in depth until Chapter 13.
He means that one would expect the incorporation of names known to the redactor.
Does he offer the names of any places specifically? Either way I think even the redactor would try his best to avoid anachronisms. History books in general discuss regions and cities using the names places were called at the time being described (e.g. Gaul instead of France, Asia Minor instead of Turkey etc.)
Does he offer the names of any places specifically?
He says: "No mention is made of the land of Assyria or Syria." The former was "established by the Babylonians in 1272 BCE, the same year in which Moses completed the Torah." While Sidon is mentioned, Tyre is not, since it was founded later "just after the Torah was written. " Zion and Jerusalem are not mentioned. (He says that Jerusalem and Salem are different places.) Samaria is not mentioned. Persia does not appear earlier than Ezekiel.
Assyria is mentioned 4 times in Breishit (2:14 10:11,22 25:18)
and twice in Bamidbar (24:22,24)
Persia being called "Persia" only happened around the time of alleged redactor. Since the empire was relatively new in the redactor's time it wouldn't make much sense to refer to ancient events with that name. (The Torah calls the region Elam)
Good! Here is what he has to say about that; it actually directly precedes the previous quote above:
"Ashur is the name of the second son of Shem, grandson of Noah who built Ninevah (Gen 10:11). The name of Ashur, perhaps a chief or king, appears in the fourth book of Moses (Num. 24:22, 24). The country of Assyria was established by the Babylonians in 1272 BCE..."
Now I'm lost is he saying Assyria is in the Torah or not
I think what he is saying is that references to Ashur are to names of people (and perhaps the areas of Mesopotamia in which they resided), not specifically to the country of Assyria which was established later.
Post a Comment