Who Wrote the Bible and When?

Please, go ahead

 

With what? Why I think that? Well, it presumes Jesus did all that they say, and we know he didn't.

 

A book doesn't presume anything, it conveys information.

 

Ok, it conveys inaccurate information.

 

there isnt " one " person who wrote the Bible there is several i dont think anybody pinpointed on the exact author of the bible to my knowledge i dont know i could be wrong

 

I think the majority of people that spoke of him were edited out

 

Yes, indeed. That's my point. Nothing is certain in this area. I've started to address the issue of authorship of the first five books of the OT, which were traditionally attributed to Moses. The Documentary Hypothesis posits at least four authors and at least one (probably two) redactor(s). The sources called J (Jehovah or Yahweh) and E (Elohim) are thought to be the oldest. J is believed to have lived in the southern Kingdom (Judah) around 950 B.C.E. E seems to have been a northerner from around 850 B.C.E. They both use a very early form of Hebrew, so they are thought to be the oldest writers. Both of them have God doing a lot more standing and walking. The author of J seems to have been a layman, while E was a Levite priest, tracing decent from Moses. According to the theory, J was the version followed in the south; E was followed in the north. When the northern kingdom (Israel) was destroyed by the Assyrians in 722 B.C., and vast numbers of northerners moved south, the two versions were combined by a redactor in the interest of national unity around 750 B.C. E. . Since the J narrative refers to the dispersion of Simeon and Levi, but not the other tribes, it must have been written before the Assyrian destruction and exile of Israel. The numerous dublets (duplications) reflect a cut and paste job. There are mostly similarities, but some differences. J, but not E, has God personally making Adam and Eve's clothes. J makes no mention of the sun and stars being created. J doesn't tell the story of the Golden calf and the sacrifice of Isaac. J , but not E, has the story of the three visitors to Abraham. D is believed to have been written by the priests in the Temple during the reign of King Josiah. It's distinctive term for God is YHWH Elohainu (the Lord Our God). P seems to be the work of Aaronite priests, for whom there were no intermediaries (prophets, angels, tailoring animals, or dreams) between God and humans, except the priests. Another redaction occurred around 450 B.C. E., possibly by Ezra, following the Babylonian captivity. But of course, it's only a hypothesis.

 

Makes you wonder if we know him at all...

 

(2 Kings 22:8) . . .Later Hil·ki′ah the high priest said to Sha′phan the secretary: “The very book of the law I have found. . .

It says that Hilkiah found the book of the law, it doesn't say that Hilkiah found just the book of Deuteronomy, making Deuteronomy no more a special case than any of the other four books of the Pentateuch.

Two different questions to you perhaps.

(Romans 10:5) For Moses writes that the man that has done the righteousness of the Law will live by it.. . .

Yeah, questioning starting some 1300 years after the fact.

As for this; "..There is hardly a biblical scholar in the world actively working on the problem who would claim that the Five Books of Moses were written by Moses". When who wrote the Pentateuch is the "problem", then of course these "Biblical Scholars" won't get paid for just saying it was Moses.

They "permitted the Heavy Burden of the Law to be imposed upon them" because they believed at the time Moses was the spokesman for God and so accepted that Law that he had written under inspiration of God, if as you seem to believe the law was not written by Moses and it was merely some conglomeration of things already written that Moses had nothing to do with, why would they now accept it?

So the fact that at the very end of the Pentateuch the very last chapter at that, Moses' death is described, that calls into question whether Moses wrote all the rest? As if someone else writing a postscript proves at the end of the law proves that Moses wrote none if it.

As for Moses writing that he was the meekest of men and also that "There never arose a prophet in Israel like Moses" is not contradictory seeing as Moses wrote what God inspired him to wrote not what Moses wanted to write.

 

I can see why you might like the "Documentary Hypothesis" but the simple truth is that same thing can be done to modern books that are known to have the same author.

As for the stylistic differences in the Pentateuch being evidence of multiple authors. K. A. Kitchen notes in his book Ancient Orient and Old Testament: “Stylistic differences are meaningless, and reflect the differences in detailed subject-matter.” Similar style variations can also be found “in ancient texts whose literary unity is beyond all doubt.”

The argument that the use of different names and titles for God is evidence of multiple authorship is particularly weak. In just one small portion of the book of Genesis, God is called “the Most High God,” “Producer of heaven and earth,” “Sovereign Lord Jehovah,” “God of sight,” “God Almighty,” “God,” “the true God,” and “the Judge of all the earth.” (Genesis 14:18, 19; 15:2; 16:13; 17:1, 3, 18; 18:25) Did different authors write each of these Bible texts? Or what about Genesis 28:13, where the terms “Elohim” (God) and “Jehovah” are used together? Did two authors collaborate to write that one verse?

 

So are you saying Hilkiah found the entire Pentateuch in the reign of Josiah, and that it was previously undiscovered during the time of David, Solomon, etc.? Or that it had been lost sometime before a "rediscovery"?

So you're content to ignore their arguments and evidence and to assume they're just making something up to get their paycheck?

Because they thought it came from Moses?

So you're willing to accept that "someone else" can write a postscript without acknowledging that it is "someone else" writing it?

I see. And since God knew the future he could have Moses compare himself with the other prophets who hadn't come along yet. Nice try? Does that sound convincing to you?

 

I would image that both David and Solomon followed what was written and they had made copies of the law for themselves and had read them daily.

I would say that the idolatrous Kings Manasseh and Amon did no such thing and probably had tried to get rid of all copies of the Law, as not to let the people know how far they had strayed from true worship.

So when Josiah wished to return to true worship, Jehovah allowed Hilkiah to find "the book of Jehovah’s law by the hand of Moses", which may mean that he found the original book written by Moses.

I don't ignore their arguments and they have no evidence, it's all conjecture and assumptions.

So what do you believe? Do you believe that there was some sort of a conspiracy that the people didn't know about and Moses cobbled together the Pentateuch from other peoples writings and passed it off as his own and then made the people to agree to it without knowing what was going on? And where was God when this was happening?

Yes

Have you even read the Bible? Do you know who Moses was? Do you know who he was a prophetic picture of?

Yes, I'm convinced that God knew what he was having Moses write under inspiration.

 

You "would image" this? In other words, it's a "just so" story without any basis in fact but designed to explain or rationalize what would otherwise be a paradox? As you say of the scholars you're criticizing, you "have no evidence, and its all conjecture."

Have you read any of these books and articles? I have, and they do present what reasonable people would consider to be evidence and arguments. Some of it is "conjecture and assumptions", which I take with a grain of salt, but they present these clearly, along with their reasons for believing them. I respect that approach much more than I do the position of someone who has made up his mind for once and for all, and is willing to dismiss arguments and evidence for other positions without bothering to read or listen to them.

No. I believe that people other than Moses "cobbled it together" at different periods of time, and that they thought they were inspired by God, because they were. The idea that Moses wrote it is a tradition. Your quotation from Deuteronomy is applicable at best to Deuteronomy.

Is it possible that someone could doubt Moses' authorship and still accept the "heavy burden" of Judeo-Christian religion. I think so, because I do. As I've stated possibly too often, I believe that much of the Bible, including Genesis, is myth and metaphor, but I also believe it is true and inspired by God. In fact, I became a Christian as a result of an understanding of Genesis that is still the root of my world view, and that I believe is pure metaphor that didn't "really happen".

By the way, I don't necessarily accept the documentary hypothesis in pure form. There is something to be said for van Seters' view that the Torah was composed by a series of authors expanding on original J and P sources from the 7th to the 5th centuries,and also for the Rendtorff/Blum thesis that the Bible incorporated a slow accretion of fragmentary unwritten traditions. I don't see these views as inconsistent.

Let me be upfront about my own position. I don't believe the Bible was intended as history any more than it was intended as science. It was written to convey theological and moral truths in the most effective way for engaging us emotionally and intellectually: by means of allegory and metaphor--much as Jesus used parables to convey truths. When he tells us about the Good Samaritan, is it important for us to believe that it actually happened? That there was actually a person lying near dead by a road, that the persons passing by were a Priest and a Levite, and that there actually was a Samaritan who performed the rescue operation? Likewise, is it important for us the believe that Jonah really survived for three days on the belly of a fish, or does it distract from our understanding of the message to think about whether or not that actually happened? Saint Augustine puts it well:
"With the scriptures it is a matter of treating about the faith. For that reason, as I have noted repeatedly, if anyone, not understanding the mode of divine eloquence, should find something about these matters [about the physical universe] in our books, or hear of the same from those books, of such a kind that it seems to be at variance with the perceptions of his own rational faculties, let him believe that these other things are in no way necessary to the admonitions or accounts or predictions of the scriptures. In short, it must be said that our authors knew the truth about the nature of the skies, but it was not the intention of the Spirit of God, who spoke through them, to teach men anything that would not be of use to them for their salvation." – De Genesi ad literam, 2:9

Yes, I've read the Bible. Matthew, in particular, brings out the parallels between Moses and Jesus. That still doesn't answer the question whether or not Moses wrote the Pentateuch. It's hard enough to come up with solid evidence outside the Bible that he or Jesus existed (but I believe they both did).

 

Did Moses exist? Did Exodus happen? I think so. But Christians have to contend with a body of evidence from both the so-called Higher Criticism (looking critically and "objectively at biblical documents) and modern archaeologists who proceed on the assumption that "absence of evidence is evidence of absence". There is no substantial evidence outside the Bible that Moses and Exodus were historical realities. That could simply mean that we haven't dug far enough or have been looking in the wrong times and places. But I think the controversy deserves some attention.

A popular summary of the skeptical argument appeared in Harpers, March, 2002, http://www.worldagesarchive.com/Reference_Links/False_Testament_%28Harpers%29.htm ,with the provocative title: "False Testament: Archeology Refutes the Bible's Claim to History", building on the work of archaeologists Finkelstein and Silberman in The Bible Unearthed. They contend that there is no evidence for Exodus or Moses, or of a conquest of Canaan by the Israelites, that the Israelites grew out of the Canaanite population by a process of differentiation, and that the Pentateuch was composed by Yawehists during and after the reign of King Josiah. This would require believing that an elite cooked up the OT to provide a legitimating national ideology for the Jews and to justify a purge of idolatrous elements. It would also require us to believe that the authors of the Bible concocted a story about the conquest of Canaan that would involve the kinds of massacres that have caused some to question the Bible. I personally find that hard to believe. A counter-argument by archeologist Steven Feldman entitled; "Is the Bible a Bunch of Historical Hooey" appeared in Biblical Archaeology Review, vol 28, no. 3, May/June, 2002. http://members.bib-arch.org/publication.asp?PubID=BSBA&Volume=28&Issue=03&Art.

Since I allow for a lot of poetic and literary license in conveying moral and theological truths in the most effective way, and I also allow for distortions resulting from the fact that God is working with blunt instruments, namely humans with free will, I don't expect accuracy about details. I expect literary exaggerations, embellishments and hyperbole to get the point across in oral traditions. With that in mind, maybe we've missed evidence because we've being too literal in what we're looking for.

Using cues from the Bible, scholars have taken several points of departure in looking for Moses. According to the Bible, Exodus took place in the 890th year before the destruction of the Temple by the Babylonians in 421 B.C.--which would put Exodus at 1310 B.C., when Thutmose III became Pharaoh of Egypt and embarked on a series of expansions. Some have focused on the report in the Bible that the Hebrew slaves were conscripted for building the city of Ramses, and concluded from that that Ramses was Pharaoh at the time of enslavement. Others, including the ancient Egyptian historian Meanetho and the ancient Jewish historian Josephus, identify the Hebrews with the Hyksos--Western Asiatic migrants and invaders, including Amalekites and Canaanite peoples, who ruled Egypt for awhile and were then driven out in 1580 B.C. Some of them may have been enslaved for massive construction projects. Both Mesopotamian and Egyptian sources speak of Habiru (Hebrew?) as being among these tribes, and they settled in the land of Goshen. There are no records of any great migrations from Egypt--except the Hyksos. Other scholars, like Barbara Siversten, have focused on a massive Mycenaean volcanic eruption around 1600 B.C. as a possible explanation of the plagues preceding Exodus. Bible scholars say that the Pharaoh who was the ruler at Moses' birth ruled for 94 years, and only one Pharaoh is known to meet that description: Pepy. A more recent theory, by archaeologist David Rohl, posits an early date for Exodus in the middle Bronze Age reign of Pharoah Dudimose. The Biblical reference to construction of the city of Ramses may refer to Avaris, a city built atop the ruins of Avaris. The Bible may have been using the newer name for the same site as a way of orienting the audience of the time: like saying the Dutch settled at New York instead of New Amsterdam. Rohl's theory hasn't gone over well with other archaeologists, because it would require drastic revison of the established dates for Egyptian history, although it would plausibly put together a lot of the pieces about Hebrews in Egypt and Canaan.

All of these theories face the problems that: (1) there are no clear corroborative Egyptian records of Exodus (of course, the Egyptians didn't like to record defeats, (2) there is no evidence of a mass migration of some 600,000 or more people across the Sinai, when anthropologists have been able to detect evidence of much smaller bands, (3) there is no evidence of a blitzkreig-style invasion of Canaan. If these events happened, they may have occurred on a different scale and time frame than the Bible would indicate.