Biblical Criticism

Found 16 Search results

The Tragedy of Yoshiyahu
Rabbi Alex Israel
Yoshiyahu's dramatic religious revolution led him to two erroneous conclusions, giving him the confidence to confront Pharaoh Nekho who lead his army through Israel in order to confront the emerging Babylonian empire. Firstly, he believed that the religious level that was achieved was one that would make God support him against an idolatrous king. Secondly, he believed that the revolution was sincere and accepted among the people, when in fact in the short amount of time since the major change it was imposiible to uproot norms and beliefs that had set in over such a long period. This folly decision led to his death by the archers' arrows ending abruptly the reign of a righteous king. The lack of real change among the people means that wheels of Hurban that were set in motion by Menashe were not stopped - though they might have had the chage been sincere.

Modern Biblical scholars claim that Devarim was the Sefer Torah that Yoshiyahu discovered and it was written in his time and not by Moshe. The claim of the 7th century authorship is refuted by a series of simple proofs.
Verses Added to the Torah at a Later Date: The Phenomenon and its Ramifications
Part 3
Rabbi Amnon Bazak
Among the medieval commentators there are two different approaches concerning the verses that appear to have been added at a later time. The more widely accepted approach attributes them to Moshe, who wrote them in a spirit of prophetic foresight. The other approach, advocated by Ibn Ezra and some of the sages of Germany, maintained that the Torah contains verses that were added by prophets at a later stage.
Verses Added to the Torah at a Later Date: The Phenomenon and its Ramifications
Part 4
Rabbi Amnon Bazak
Certain places mentioned in the Torah are called by names that are only given to them many years after the death of Moshe. Spinoza claimed that such examples indicated that the Torah as a whole was written at a much later date than is traditionally assumed. Medieval commentators make several suggestions to solve this question.

In modern times Yehuda Elitzur suggested a different approach. In many places the Torah alludes to the fact that the division of the land existed and was known in general form from ancient times, going back to the blessings of Yaakov. Therefore, the familiarity of the writer of the Torah with the division of the land, which would only occur later on, cannot serve as proof of later authorship of the Torah, since the division of the land is frequently presented as ancient knowledge.
Duplication and Contradiction
Part 1
Rabbi Amnon Bazak
The awareness that the Torah contains many instances of duplication, as well as contradictions between different sources, has always existed. Chazal address these phenomena in many places, and note them. Many contradictions have been debated over the generations and various explanations have been proposed. However, in many instances the solutions are less than satisfactory, since they interpret the text in a manner that does not sit well with the plain meaning; one who seeks to understand the literal meaning of the text has trouble reconciling the various explanations with the plain meaning. Additionally, it is necessary to address this phenomenon from a broader and more all-encompassing perspective and not merely answer each case individually.

An overview of Documentary Hypothesis, a theory that views the authorship of the Torah as a combination of different sources, is presented. According to this theory, the Torah is neither Divine, nor authored by Moshe.
Duplication and Contradiction
Part 2 - Historical Claims of Documentary Hypothesis
Rabbi Amnon Bazak
The prevalent view in academic circles, has been that the major part of the Book of Devarim was written in the 7^th century B.C.E., as part of the battle waged by Chizkiyahu and Yoshiyahu for centralized ritual worship. This assertion is based mainly on the argument that Devarim is the only Book of the Torah which speaks of the selection of a single location for Divine service, and rejects worship outside of this location. A series of questions and proofs are brought against this theory, leading to the conclusion that the central argument for the claim of late authorship of Devarim has multiple and serious flaws.
Duplication and Contradiction
Part 3 - Historical Claims of Documentary Hypothesis and Linguistic Layers of the Tanakh
Rabbi Amnon Bazak
Another argument that is central to Wellhausen's approach, and which was contested by many in the previous generation is the dating of the Priestly source to the Second Temple Period.

In terms of subject matter, it is difficult to understand why the Priestly source, which includes major sections of Shemot and Bamidbar and almost all of Vayikra, would include laws that have no connection with the Second Temple Period.

In light of archaeological finds from the ancient Near East, it became clear that phenomena such as a multitude of ceremonies and sacrifices existed even hundreds of years prior to Israel's entry into the land.

In general, the study of the development of biblical Hebrew provides a very strong indication that the Chumash predates not only the later Books of Tanakh, but also the Books of the Prophets. This is shown most strongly when we contrast the language of the Chumash with the Books of the Prophets where, despite the general similarity between them, we find a number of motifs that appear exclusively in one but not the other.

The absence of common expressions from the Torah, found in the Books of the Prophets and variant spellings of the same words would suggest that the Torah’s Hebrew is a more ancient stage of the language than that which is found in the Books of the Prophets. Had some parts of the Torah been written from the period of the monarchy onwards, there would be no reason for these discrepancies.
Duplication and Contradiction
Part 4 - Breuer's Aspects Theory
Rabbi Amnon Bazak
A revolution in the attitude of Jews who believe in the unity of the Torah towards the research by biblical scholars was brought about by Rav Mordekhai Breuer who developed the "aspects approach.” The principal innovation of the approach was to acknowledge and utilize the claims of the documentary hypothesis which saw the Torah as made up of multiple and frequently contradictory texts, while maintaining that these differences and contradictions were nevertheless Divinely authored and intended, rather than a combination by a later editor of multiple human authors and traditions.
Duplication and Contradiction
Part 6 - Three Themes Unique to Sefer Devarim
Rabbi Amnon Bazak
Devarim has a special nature with its idiosyncratic style and unique ideas. Moshe, in his speeches, treats identical topics found in Devarim and in the other books of the Torah with different emphases utilizing specific themes. This provides a convincing response to the questions raised by Biblical scholars from de Witte onwards regarding the disparities between Devarim and other books of the Torah.

The expression "remember that you were a slave in the land of Egypt", which occurs five times over the course of Devarim, is a motif that reflects the emphasis in Moshe's speech on the moral dimension of the commandments, in contrast – or in addition – to the religious aspect that is emphasized in the other books of the Torah. Moshe delivers his speeches as the nation is about to cross the Jordan and enter the land, undergoing a great transformation from a nomadic people to a nation living in its own land. For this reason, Moshe regards it as essential to emphasize the social aspect of the commandments, as a fundamental condition to sustain Israel’s presence in the land for the coming generations.

Moshe's speeches are the only sources in the Torah that treat the relationship between God and Israel from a perspective of love and the reciprocal command for Israel to love God. Only in the Land of Israel can the relationship between God and Israel reach a level that may properly be called "love." For this reason, it is just prior to entry into the land that Moshe permits himself to mention this concept to describe the bond between God and the nation.

The phenomenon of the sanctity of Israel appears so prominently in Devarim. It would seem that on the eve of the entry into the land, Moshe describes a utopian reality – the ideal situation of Israel. The whole nation was indeed supposed to be imbued with the same sanctity as that of the kohanim, but only if Israel were truly deserving of their status as a holy nation. This question – of whether Israel merit God’s benevolence and designation as a holy nation – is one of the central themes of Moshe's speeches throughout Devarim. On the one hand, he asserts that the people are indeed holy. On the other hand, this vision itself hints strongly that this holiness is not automatic; rather, it is contingent upon observance of the commandments. This idea, too, recurs in Moshe's speeches on the eve of the entry into the land.
Duplication and Contradiction
Part 8 - Bias in the Writing of Tanakh?
Rabbi Amnon Bazak
Despite making identical use of the same literary tools, the most fundamental difference between the documentary hypothesis and the aspects approach concerns the question of whether the Torah is of Divine origin or a human creation.

Only by reading the Biblical text on its own terms can its messages be appreciated, and that searching for agendas behind the text ends up obscuring far more than it illuminates.

The tendency of biblical critics to view biblical narratives as agenda driven leads them to ignore the possibility that this profound and complex story was written in order to teach the important lessons that it contains, preferring the assumption that it was created by people who sought to further their own views by disseminating it. Subservience to the assumption of bias in Tanakh is not only mistaken in its own right, but also problematic insofar as it leads one to ignore the messages arising from the narrative, such that Bible study loses all independent value.
Authorship of the Books of the Prophets and Writings
Part 2
Rabbi Amnon Bazak
A fundamental difference of opinion exists between the secular, critical view of Tanakh, and the religious view. If a person believes that the Tanakh possesses sanctity and that the prophet receives his messages from God through prophecy and Divine inspiration, then he will obviously regard as illegitimate the view that a prophet is simply an eloquent and insightful member of the general population with no real ability to discern the future. Such a position represents a denial of the whole concept of prophecy, regardless of one's position on the question of whether Sefer Yishayahu is a single work or two separate ones brought together. It was this, then, that caused the great controversy concerning the existence of a second prophet prophesying the prophecies from chapter 40 of Yishyahu and onwards.
Authorship of the Books of the Prophets and Writings
Part 3
Rabbi Amnon Bazak
Internal contradictions within the appointment of Shaul as king and the crossing of the Jordan in the time of Yehoshua are examined. Bible critics over the generations have raised suggestions as to how the various verses represent different sources, without any such division successfully solving the issue. Here, too, it seems that the aspects approach may be utilized to show how the text endeavors, by means of overlapping descriptions, to convey the different aspects of the story.

These examples demonstrate that the "aspects approach" represents an effective and practical way of understanding textual difficulties in the Books of the Prophets, just as it is in explaining similar difficulties that arise in the Torah itself.
Nusach Ha-mikra – Accuracy of the Biblical Text
Part 1
Rabbi Amnon Bazak
From time immemorial, great care has been taken concerning the precise transmission of the text of the Tanakh, which has been regarded as having the utmost importance.

Chazal were altogether proficient with the entirety of the biblical text, as we may deduce from the corpus of midrashim, in which verses from throughout the Tanakh are treated. In addition, the Sages also concerned themselves with the clarification of the precise text of the Tanakh, and many sources testify to the tremendous care taken concerning textual details.

It is clear that, in general, Chazal worked with a single textual version that they all shared. Nevertheless, this does not mean that there was a single textual version that was agreed upon absolutely in all its details, as can be gathered from various sources in Chazal.
Author of the last verses of the Torah
Rabbi Amnon Bazak
Breuer’s Aspects Theory part 1
Rabbi Amnon Bazak
Themes Unique to Sefer Devarim
Rabbi Amnon Bazak
Authorship of Sefer Yishayahu
Rabbi Amnon Bazak