Section Five: The Babylonian Captivity
and the Torah
Quick Review
Moses led the people to the Promised Land but could not enter.
Leadership passed to Joshua who conquered the Promised Land
in three swift campaigns (The Book of Joshua)
Joshua assigned each of the twelve tribes (the Levites are scattered
among all the tribes and so have no territory of their own) its own
territory. Joseph is divided among two sons, Ephraim and Manasseh,
bringing the number to twelve (The books of Joshua and Judges)
Each tribe was meant to govern its own territory but, in times
of crisis, Judges were appointed to lead a united front against
enemies of Israel. In the end, disunity and chaos caused the
people to ask for a king (The books of 1+2 Samuel)
The united kingdom of Israel managed to support only three
kings; Saul, David and Solomon. After the death of Solomon (@
975 BCE), the kingdom was divided in two; nine tribes form the
northern kingdom which retained the name Israel. Israel
remained independent from 975-722 BCE when it was conquered
by the Assyrians. Three tribes comprised the southern kingdom
known as Judah. It remained independent from 975-588 BCE
5.1
when it was conquered by the Babylonians
The Babylonian Empire
At its peak, the Babylonian Empire managed to rule most of the Fertile
Crescent. It dominated most of the same lands as the Assyrian Empire with
the exception of Egypt. When the Southern Kingdom of Judah was defeated
by the Babylonian Empire and the Temple of Solomon was destroyed, the
land was depopulated in much the same way as the Northern Kingdom of
Israel when it was defeated by Assyria. Unlike Assyria, Babylon did not
repopulate the land with people from other regions of the Empire
5.2
The Babylonian Captivity
• Judah became part of the Babylonian province of Samaria. In an odd
way, Babylon “reunited” the former Northern and Southern kingdoms.
Babylon decided to allow the land to remain barren. Raiders from Edom
and Ammon from time to time would pick at what little was left
• A Jewish community had already existed in Babylon so there was some
Jewish infrastructure in place to support the captives when they
arrived
• The devastation of the Babylonian Exile managed to accomplish what
Josiah tried to accomplish some decades earlier. The Jewish people, as
in the time of King Josiah, began to refocus on the basics of their faith;
- Religious practices such as circumcision and Sabbath observance
were emphasized maintaining a tight cohesion among the Jewish
community
- The Deuteronomic History (Joshua, Judges, 1+2 Samuel, 1+2 Kings)
along with the writings of the prophets may have been collected and
edited at this time
- The Prophet Ezekiel continued to preach about a future resurrection of
the nation. In anticipation of that future event, Temple practices were
codified
- Babylon, along with Jerusalem, remained a center for Jewish
scholarship for centuries
5.3
The Nevi’m: Both History and Prophets
History
The Torah tells the history of the Hebrew people from Adam to Moses. Their history
from Joshua the time to the Babylonian Captivity can be found in the following books;
-
The Time of the Joshua + Judges
The Time of the United Kingdom
-
The Time of the Divided Kingdoms
The Babylonian Captivity
The Time of the Restoration
Joshua, Judges, 1+2 Samuel
1+2 Samuel, 1 Kings, 1+2
Chronicles
1+2 Kings, 2 Chronicles
Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther
The Prophets of the Hebrew people;
From the Northern Kingdom of Israel
Hosea, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Nahum (Minor Prophets)
From the Southern Kingdom of Judah
- Zephaniah, Habbakuk, Joel, Micah (Minor Prophets, pre-Captivity)
- Isaiah (Major Prophet 1st Is. 1-39, 2nd Is. 40-55, 3rd Is. 56-66)
- Jeremiah, Ezekiel (Major Prophets, during Captivity)
- Haggai, Zechariah, Malachai (Minor Prophets, during the restoration)
Note: The Book of Daniel is often thought of as a prophetic book however it was likely written long
after the time of the prophets and is placed in the Ketuvim (the writings) section of the Hebrew Bible
5.4
Historicity of the Torah Is Questioned
• As the 17th century CE began, it was almost universally accepted by both
Jewish and Christian scholars that Moses was the author of the Torah
and that he received the information for all five books of the Torah
(Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy) directly from
God
• In the mid-17th century, a French Catholic priest, Richard Simon, wrote “A
Critical History of the Old Testament” questioning whether there was a
single author (traditionally thought to be Moses) of the Torah.
• A century later , German Protestant scholars began a more
comprehensive investigation on the authorship of the Torah
• By the late 19th century, Biblical scholars, led by other groups of German
Protestants, began to question the notion of a single source of the Torah
and also began to question the reliability of the historical
information found in the Torah
• By the middle of the 20th century, archaeologists began to raise similar
questions about other parts of the Hebrew Scriptures (and also about the
Christian Scriptures as we shall see later in this course)
5.5
Scholars Raise Questions About the Torah
We have already discussed a number of reasons why biblical scholars question
the origin of the Torah as well as the accuracy of its historical information
• Genesis has examples of doublets suggesting more than one author
2 creation stories; God is called YHWH in one and Elohim in the
other .
two stories of Abraham passing Sarah off as his sister
(Gen. 12:10-20 and Gen. 20:1-18)
• There are contradictions in the Torah suggesting more than one author
Genesis 15:7 God says to Abraham “I am the LORD (YHWH) that brought
you out of Ur of the Chaldees” but in Exodus 6:2-3, God told Moses that He
did not reveal Himself as YHWH to any of the patriarchs.
• There are anachronisms in the Torah suggesting later editors
Abraham encountered the Philistines who did not arrive in the region
until 500-600 years after Abraham’s death.
In Genesis 36, Abraham encounters Edomite Kings who did not exist
until after the time of Moses
Abraham was born in Ur of the Chaldees but there were no
Chaldeans in the region for another thousand years
Deut. 34:1, Moses can see the promised land as far north as the city
of Dan but there is no city called Dan until well after Moses’ death
5.6
The Big Debate:Monotheism or Henotheism
Several modern biblical scholars (Mark S. Smith NYU, Diana Edelman,
Univ. of Oslo) have raised one of the most controversial issues in Biblical
studies. They claim that Judaism was not originally a monotheistic
religion but rather a henotheistic faith
Henotheism is defined as a situation where a number of deities exist but
each deity is assigned to a specific group or tribe of people. So, while
multiple ‘gods’ exist, each group is assigned to worship and follow the
‘god’ assigned to that group and are forbidden to worship any other god
not assigned to its group
When this possibility was raised, a number of passages of scripture can
be looked on in a different light.
“I am the Lord your God (YHWH) who brought you out of the land of
Egypt. ….You shall have no other gods (elohim) before me” (Ex. 20:2-3)
Or this, the Shema
“Hear, O Israel, The Lord (YHWH) our God (eloheinu) is one and you shall
love the Lord (YHWH) your god (eloheika) with your whole heart” etc.
5.7
What Passages of Scripture Hint at Henotheism?
• We have seen that many different terms in the Torah are translated as
“God” (El, Elohim, El Elyon, El Shaddai, YHWH) and “Lord” (Adonai
which some consider a variant spelling of Aten) yet;
El, one of the Hebrew names for God, was both a common name
for God and also the name of the creator God in the Canaanite
religion.
Elohim is a plural form of Eloah (a variation of El) but keep in mind
that it is also true that, in the Hebrew Scriptures, when Elohim is
used to refer to the Hebrew God, it takes a singular verb. Some
scholars, though, have speculated that this plural form of a name
may a collective term meaning the “Council of El” or the
“family of El” or even “the pantheon of El”
• In any case, there is a passage from Deuteronomy (32:8-9) that uses a
name for God found in Genesis (Elyon) that has caused some controversy
“When the Most High (Elyon) gave the nations their inheritance, when he
separated the children of men, he set the borders of the peoples according to
the numbers of the sons (children) of Israel. For the portion of YHWH is His
people, Jacob, the lot of his inheritance.”
This same passage in the Dead Sea Scrolls uses “children of Elohim”
instead of “children of men” and that change can give the passage and
entirely different meaning
5.8
Additional Questions Concerning Deuteronomy 32 8:9
The Masoretic Text (9th-10th century CE? ) of the Hebrew Bible uses the
standard text for passage for Deut. 32:8-9
‫ ְבּהַ ְפ ִרידוֹ ְבּנֵי אָ דָ ם; יַצֵּ ב גְּ ֻב ת ﬠַ ִמּים‬,‫ְבּהַ נְ חֵ ל ﬠֶ לְ יוֹן גּוֹיִ ם‬
.‫לְ ִמ ְספַּר ְבּנֵי יִ ְשׂ ָראֵ ל‬
.‫ חֶ בֶ ל ַנ ֲחלָתוֹ‬,‫ ַיﬠֲקֹ ב‬:‫ ﬠַ מּוֹ‬,‫כִּ י חֵ לֶק יְ הוָה‬
“When the Most High (Elyon) gave the nations their inheritance, when he separated
the children of Adam, he set the borders of the peoples according to the numbers of
the children of Israel. For the portion of YHWH is His people, Jacob, the lot of his
inheritance.”
The Dead Sea Scroll fragment of Deut. 32:8-9 does not have ;‫ְבּנֵי אָ דָ ם‬
but rather ‫ בני אלוהים‬Consider just how much this changes the passage
“When the Most High (Elyon) gave the nations their inheritance, when he separated the
children of Elohim, he set the borders of the peoples according to the numbers of the
children of Israel. For the portion of YHWH is His people, Jacob, the lot of his
inheritance.”
The first passage seems to describe how God set aside the Promised Land
for Israel. The second passage seems to describe how El assigned each
nation a specific deity that belonged to the Elohim. Each nation was then to
worship and adore its own deity but never the deity of another nation. This is
the definition of henotheism
5.9
And Then There is Psalm 82
See, where he stands, the Ruler (Elyon) of all, among the rulers (Elohim)
assembled, comes forward to pronounce judgement on the rulers
themselves! Will you never cease perverting justice, espousing the cause
of the wicked? Come, give redress to the poor and the friendless, do right
to the afflicted and the destitute; to you need and poverty look for
deliverance, rescue them from the hand of the wickedness. But no,
ignorant and unperceiving, they grope their way in darkness; see how
unstable are the props of earth! Gods (Elohim) you are, I myself have
declared it; favored children (B’nai), every one of you, of the most High
(Elyon) yet the doom of mortals (k’Adam) awaits you, you shall fall with
the fall of human princes. Bestir thyself, Lord (Elohim), bring the world to
judgement; all the nations are thy own domain.
So, this passage, proclaimed by the Psalmist, seems to say that Elyon is
the chief God who appointed other gods (Elohim) to rule over men but
because they have ruled unjustly they shall no longer be children of Elyon
but shall die like children of Adam?
The text says what the text says. The rest is scholarly speculation, based
on some evidence, that Judaism was originally a tribal, henotheistic faith
that developed into a monotheistic faith over time. The idea is not
unreasonable but is also not proven. It remains speculation.
5.10
Another Way to Read Psalm 82
See, where he stands, the Ruler (Elyon) of all, among the rulers (Elohim)
assembled, comes forward to pronounce judgement on the rulers themselves! Will
you never cease perverting justice, espousing the cause of the wicked? Come,
give redress to the poor and the friendless, do right to the afflicted and the
destitute; to you need and poverty look for deliverance, rescue them from the hand
of the wickedness. But no, ignorant and unperceiving, they grope their way in
darkness; see how unstable are the props of earth! Gods (Elohim) you are, I myself
have declared it; favored children (B’nai), every one of you, of the most High
(Elyon) yet the doom of mortals (k’Adam) awaits you, you shall fall with the fall of
human princes. Bestir thyself, Lord (Elohim), bring the world to judgement; all the
nations are thy own domain.
God (Elyon) appointed did appoint representatives (Elohim) to serve his people.
They were the Judges (the Judges of the Book of Judges) but many Judges failed
to show the love of God (Elyon) to his people and would die, not as favored sons of
God but rather as sons of man
Consider this as well. If you only read Psalm 82, you might have some sympathy
with the henotheistic theory but scripture was never meant to be understood in a
“passage-by-passage” manner. It was meant to be understood as a whole. For
example, if you read Psalm 50, you find the following; “The mighty God (El of
Elohim), the Lord (YHWH) has spoken.” Here, YHWH is saying that he IS El of
Elohim and not one of El’s children or subordinates assigned to be worshipped by
Israel. Also, when Psalm 8:5 says, “You have made man a little less than the
angels”, the word for ‘angels’ in Hebrew is Elohim. This passage seems to say that
YHWH is El and Elohim ar his representatives; in this case, angels
5.11
And Then There is the Famous Passage from Exodus
What might be the most profound passage of all the Hebrew Scriptures
gives perhaps the most definitive insight into all of this. In Exodus 3,
Moses confronts God in the burning bush. God tells Moses that he is to
go the Pharaoh and ask that Pharaoh set his people free. Moses than
asks what name should he give to Pharaoh and to the Israelites when they
ask in whose name Moses is doing all of this. God tells Moses his name,
‫שׁר ֶ ֽא ְהיֶ ֑ה‬
֣ ֶ ֲ‫ֶ ֽא ְהיֶ ֖ה א‬
I am who I am or I will be who I will be
And then says that Moses should tell that Children of Israel that he was
sent to them by, ‫ֶ ְֽהיֶ ֖ה‬
I am
I have not come across any scholar that would claim that the Book of
Exodus was not an original book of the Torah (such a claim has been
made about Deuteronomy and Leviticus). Yet, here, in language so plain
that it is also profound, YHWH is identifying himself as the one entity that
is the be-all and end-all of the created universe.
The lesson here remains that, while interesting passages can be found
throughout both the Hebrew and the Christian scriptures, they are best
understood when seen in the context of the entirety of scripture and in the
context of the time period in which they were written. With that said, let’s
examine the basic tenets of higher biblical criticism
5.12
Biblical Criticism of the Hebrew Scriptures
Julius Wellhausen
Julius Wellhausen was a Protestant pastor who worked primarily at the
University of Gottingen from the end of the 19th century through the early 20th
century and perhaps the most famous of the biblical scholars of his era
Wellhausen believed that four separate sources contributed information to
Hebrew writings that later became the Torah. (Each source will be discussed
in slides that follow)
Wellhausen is probably the best-known of the early critics of the single-source
understanding of the Hebrew Scriptures. His work opened the door to all sorts
of insights into the Hebrew Scriptures along with new insights into the
understanding of the Christian Scriptures
Wellhausen is most known for his claim that the Torah was actually an edited
blending of four sources of information. Wellhausen identified these sources
as; the Jahwist sources (J), the Elohist source (E), the Deuteronomic source
(D) and the Priestly source (P). His theory was called the Documentary
Hypothesis
In the next slides, we’ll give a brief overview of the Wellhausen’s ideas about
the contributions that each source made to the Torah
5.13
Source Criticism of the Hebrew Scriptures - J
The J (Jahwist) Source
The J source derives from the German spelling of the name Hebrew name
for God ‫( יְ הוָה‬YHWH in English but JHWH in German) In J, God is earthly,
almost humanized. He interacts directly with his human creations
• God molded Adam from the dust of the earth.
• God created Eve from Adam’s rib.
• God walked with Adam and Eve in the Garden “in the cool of the day”.
The Jahwist author was thought by Wellhausen to have been from the
southern kingdom of Judah and lived sometime around 900 BCE because
he is concerned largely with areas of the promised land located in that
kingdom. His description of the kingdom promised by JHWH to Abraham
also corresponds to the united kingdom at the time of David and Solomon,
whose capital city was in the Southern Kingdom
The Jahwist author seems to prefer to the call the mountain on which
Moses encountered God by the name Sinai.
5.14
Source Criticism of the Hebrew Scriptures - E
The E (Elohist) Source
In the E source, God is called Elohim (Gen. 1). Elohim is the opposite of
JHWH. He is majestic and transcendent.
While J created ha adam (man) from the adamah (earth), E created the
universe by simply speaking it into existence. Adam and Eve were the
pinnacle of that creation.
While J interacted directly with human beings, E interacted with them via
messengers or angels
As we have already seen, the word El and Elohim were common words for God
among the Canaanites many of whom who lived in the regions where the
Northern Kingdom of Israel had been established after the death of Solomon.
The Elohist author’s use of these words for God and his interest in the
important cities in the north led Wellhausen to believe that the Elohist lived in
the Northern Kingdom sometime around 850 BCE
For the Elohist, the mountain of God was called Horeb and not Sinai
Reminder: Elohim is a plural noun however when Elohim is used to refer to the God of
the Hebrews, the verb is always 3rd person singular. When the word is used to refer to
foreign gods, the verb is always 3rd person plural
5.15
Source Criticism of the Hebrew Scriptures - D
The D (Deuteronomist) Source
While the J and E sources are found all throughout Genesis and Exodus, the
product of Deuteronomist source in the Torah is almost exclusively limited to
the Book of Deuteronomy and the historical books of the Ketuvim; Joshua,
Judges, 1+2 Samuel, 1+2 Kings sometimes called the Deuteronomic History
Many biblical scholars believe that the scroll of the law that Hilkiah found
while the Temple in Jerusalem was being refurbished during the reign of
Josiah (2 Kings 22:8) was actually the book of Deuteronomy (the second law)
and not a copy of the entire Torah
The scroll emphasized the need for many of the reforms put in place by King
Josiah (e.g. recommitment of the people to the worship of one God,
centralization of worship) Given that this “discovery” fit so well with Josiah’s
reform, it may well not have been found but written either by Josiah and
Hilkiah themselves or by a scribe under their direction
Another theory holds that the discovery was a genuine find. One version of
this theory speculates that refugees from the destruction of the Northern
Kingdom (Israel) fled to the Southern Kingdom (Judah) and brought the scroll
with them. The scroll was then deposited in the Temple and forgotten until it
was rediscovered by Hilkiah some decades later. This theory believes the find
was genuine because, while the scroll did mention the need for centralized
worship, it did not specify the Temple of Jerusalem. Perhaps this is because
Northern Kingdom also had a central location of worship at Mount Gerizim
5.16
Source Criticism of the Hebrew Scriptures - P
The P (Priestly) Source
Before the time of the Babylonian captivity, the position of King in the history
of the people of Judah had been well established for several centuries. The
role of the High Priest (Kohen ha-Gadol) also seemed well established.
Some critics, however, note that other passages in the Torah do not seem to
show the reverence that one would expect to be given to the Kohen haGadol. For example, Aaron was simply called ha-Kohen (the priest) as was
Eleazer, Aaron’s successor. They added that, during the reign of King David,
there were two men in Jerusalem who were simultaneously called ha-Kohen,
Abiathar and Zadok (2 Sam 8:17 and 19:12 along with 1Kings 1:7 and 4:4).
These critics suggest that passages such as Ex. 29, Ex. 40:15 and Lev. 8 and
9 that do stress the High Priest were inserted later by P to provide an historic
basis for the increasing importance Jewish cultic worship in the Temple and
the role of the High Priest among the people in the absence of a true King.
Biblical scholars suggest that the biggest impact of P can be found in the
Book of Leviticus and the non-narrative sections of the Book of Numbers.
Since P deals largely with themes of cult and ritual, Wellhausen, being a
Protestant scholar having no love for ritual or priesthood, believed that cult
and ritual are always a later, corrupted form of religious experience. For this
reason, he believed that P was the most recent source to be added to the
Torah and speculated that P might have been the final editor of the Torah
5.17
Summing Up
The basic viewpoints of much of the biblical criticism that came from Wellhausen and
those who came after him seem to follow some variations on this theme:
The people that inhabited the land that was known as Israel during the time of Saul,
David and Solomon probably did not all migrate to that land out of Egypt during the
time of Moses
The Torah is an attempt to present the many and varied histories of different peoples as
a common history of a single people
The twelve tribes of Israel may represent the main groups of peoples that finally united
to form a common political union. Perhaps the three patriarchs (Abraham, Isaac and
Jacob) were patriarchs of three of the more important groups that were later made part
of a common lineage
The Exodus never happened at least not as described in the Torah
The Torah was probably edited a number of times but different editors and did not
reach its current form until the time of the Babylonian Captivity. This explains many of
the anachronisms found in the Torah
There are too many other variations on this theme to mention here but if you have paid
close attention you will also have noted the large number of words like “may”, “might
have” and “probably”. These are clear signs of speculation
5.18
Archaeology Weighs In on the Topic
Speaking of speculation, biblical scholars were not alone in their criticism of the
historical reliability of the Hebrew Scriptures. Archaeologists also weighed in. In
their book, “The Quest for the Historical Israel: Debating Archaeology and the
History of Early Israel” authors Israel Finkelstein (Prof. of Archaeology at Tel Aviv
University) and Amihai Mazar (Prof. at the Inst. of Archaeology at Hebrew
University of Jerusalem) describe how archaeologists seem to be divided
concerning the history of Israel as found in the Hebrew Scriptures:
Conservative
Though the early history of Israel as found in the Hebrew
Bible was not likely compiled until the time between Josiah
and the Babylonian Captivity, the information found
therein about the early history of Israel is fairly accurate
Minimalist
The Hebrew Scriptures were likely compiled sometime
during the Persian era (@ 450 BCE) or during the Hellenist
era (@300 BCE) that followed it. The early history of Israel
is nothing more than a collection of folk stories tied
together by one or more editors and is of little historic value
Centrist
The early history of Israel found in the Hebrew Scriptures
represents a view of late monarchic Judah (Josiah).
There are real facts and real characters to be found in this
history but the context of this history represents a
viewpoint of the 6th century BCE read back into the 12th
through the 7th century BCE
5.19
Yet Archaeology Also Confirms Scripture
While archaeology may question parts of the Hebrew Scriptures, it also confirms
much of what those scriptures contain
• Semi-nomadic tribes called ha-bi-ru by the Akkadians and a-pi-ru by the
Egyptians did wander the Fertile Crescent at the time of Abraham
• Canaanite peoples did migrate to Northeastern Egypt at the time of Abraham
• There were Pharaohs of Egypt (the Hyksos Kings) thought to be of Semitic
origin at the time of Joseph
• Pharaohs of Egyptian origin who “did not know Joseph” did manage to
regain control of Egypt from the Hyksos kings
• These Pharaohs did use forced labor to build the cities of Pi-Rameses and
Pithom (Pi-Thom) mentioned in the Torah
• There was an upset of the internal order of the land of Canaan about the time
of Joshua
• Evidence has recently turned up verifying a Northern Kingdom (House of
Omri) and Southern Kingdom (House of David) in the city of Dan
These are facts. It is also a fact that many long-held beliefs by archaeologists have
proven to be way off base. The recent finds at Gobekli Tepe in Turkey and Tel
Qaramel in Syria show evidence of significant culture dating back to around 10,000
BCE. For years. archaeology held that civilization in the region began with Sumer
around 4,000 BCE
5.20
Another Way of Looking at the Centrist View
Since the JEDP hypothesis was first proposed, there have been any number
of variations on that theme among scholars and critics, both biblical and
archaeological. One thing should be kept in mind about all of these
theories. They are theories.
Consider another theory. Let’s assume that some critics are correct. Moses
was not the final author of the Torah. The Torah was edited in its final
written form during the Babylonian exile
There were no Chaldeans in Ur at the time of Abraham but there were
during the time of the Babylonian exile
There were no Philistines in Canaan at the time of Abraham but there were
during the time of the Babylonian exile
The city of Dan had not yet been established during the time of Moses but it
had been long established by the time of the Babylonian exile
You get the idea. When the Torah reached its final written state, it
referenced people and places as they would be recognized by the readers
of that time period not as they were at the time of the actual events
5.21
A Tale (somewhat mangled) with a Moral
A local painter, an artist of some renown, had always bragged that he could paint any scene with
even greater accuracy than the best photograph. Hearing the man brag, a second man, known
for his wealth (as well as for his eccentricity), challenged the painter to prove his talent.
A certain area of beach and a certain date and time of day was chosen. The wealthy man
challenged the painter to represent on canvas the beach scene exactly as it was on that date and
at that time. The wealthy man would take his own photo and, if the painter could produce a
canvas that accurately matched the detail of the scene as provided by the photograph, he would
make the painter a wealthy man
The painter set about his work. He took his paints, his easel and a blank canvas and walked out
onto the beach. At the appointed time, he took in the entire scene in his mind’s eye and then
went about putting that scene onto the canvas. When he was finished, the painter was certain
that his work would surely meet, if not exceed, whatever even the best camera could produce.
When the wealthy man saw the painting, he told the painter that his work was, indeed,
wondrously beautiful and full of detail. The wealthy man said that, despite the painting’s beauty,
the painter did not accurately depict that beach at that time. When the painter asked how that
could be, the wealthy man showed him the photograph that he had taken. The photo showed the
agreed upon beach and the painter standing there painting the scene. The artist asked how he
had failed. The wealthy man replied that the task was to paint the beach exactly as it was on that
day at that time. The painter agreed that was the task. The wealthy man replied “You were
standing on that beach. Where are you in your painting?”
Moral: A person should never forget that, in this world, the observer is always an integral part of
the process of observation. Only God, who stands apart from his creation, sees and understands
the entire length, width and breadth of what he set in place
5.22
Limits of Human Knowledge
Human beings claim to “know” a lot of things. Some scholars and critics have been
known to promote themselves and their ideas from the category of theory into the
category of knowledge. But there are limits about what human beings are capable of
truly knowing and the great minds of science and philosophy have recognized these
limits and approach their work with a certain humility
Bertrand Russell, a famous twentieth century philosopher and ardent atheist,
demonstrated a humility derived from honest self-reflection, which should be common
to all honest men of reason. In his work, The Problems of Philosophy, he stated that any
system that requires an unproven (and unprovable) set of universal “givens” can never
produce a set of universally reliable truths
The twentieth century mathematician, Kurt Gödel, put forth his theory of incompleteness
which stated that no method of describing a system that had even the smallest level of
complexity, could do so without ultimately being self-referential (i.e. relying on a set of
unproven universal “givens”)
Werner Heisenberg has given us his Principle of Uncertainty which says that we can
only speak about truths in degrees of probability
Kurt Schrödinger has proposed a cat who is both living and dead at the same time.
Probabilities only collapse into actualities upon looking
There is no such thing as settled science. While there may be limits to knowledge,
science is always seeking to push those limits as far as possible
5.23
Knowledge Versus Speculation
I believe that there will always be limits that the universe will impose that will
prevent science from ever fully and completely describing the universe.
Every scientist who makes attempts to observe creation must understand
that he or she is part of the system that is being observed. There will never
be a complete and unbiased observation of creation unless the observer
stands outside the system being observed.
On the other hand, science impresses me because, despite these limitations,
it continues to look ever more deeply into creation to try to understand as
much of its truths as possible. The scientific method also impresses me
because, when it is fully applied, it offers a mechanism for ongoing selfcorrection
There is a sense of beauty and magic to science much as there is to God.
Real science is humble in the face of this and real scientists, at least the
ones that appeal to me, reflect that humility. Here is a brief video that
explains some of the beauty of the scientific method with an honest
evaluation of its limits. It also does so with a little bit of humor
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A9tKncAdlHQ
5.24
My Favorite Quote
There are things that I may find true that are not true for you. There ae things
that are true sometimes but not true at other times. One thing is certain
however;
THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS ABSOLUTE TRUTH!
5.25
The Best Approach to Biblical Criticism
Facts are facts. Be as certain as possible that what is stated as a fact is
provable but never be afraid of facts. Facts are your best friends as you pursue
truth.
Systems that attempt to explain all facts in a type of universal setting are
inherently unreliable but are nonetheless useful so long as that system allows
for open and honest revision as more facts become available. There is no such
thing as “settled science”. Science is always subject to revision upon new
observations. That is the heart of the scientific method.
Since the observer will always be part of what is being observed, universal
explanations of truth will always be subject to change. Skepticism about claims
where words such as “likely” and “possibly” are used is always justified
Faith attempts to deal with truths which transcend the boundaries of reason. At
the same time the revelations that lead to faith must keep in mind that its
message is meant for human beings who have reason
Scripture, both the Hebrew Scriptures and the Christian Scriptures, is a story of
faith. It takes place in the context of human history but is not meant to be taken
as history. It tells a greater story. It deals with greater truths
5.26
Other Torahs
While we are discussing the Torah, we should keep in mind that there are
several versions of the Torah
The Septuagint
As we have already seen, the Torah used by the Roman Catholic and Eastern
Orthodox churches, the Torah of the Septuagint, has a number of differences
from the Hebrew Torah. There are additional books in this library. None of the
books that the libraries have in common show any significant difference.
Protestants generally do not use the Septuagint in their Old Testament
The Samaritan Torah
The Samaritans claim to be descendants of Joseph through Ephraim and
Mannaseh. While most of the inhabitants of the Northern Kingdom were led
away by the Assyrian King Sargon II, some remained behind and continued to
worship YHWH. Samaritans have their own version of the Torah originally
written using a paleo-Hebrew alphabet. There have since been a number of
translations of this Torah including a Targum written in Aramaic.
Like the Septuagint, most of the differences in content between the Samaritan
Torah and the Hebrew Torah are insignificant but there are some interesting
variations. The most important of these is found in Deut. 27:4, “When you cross
the Jordan, on Mount Ebal you shall set up these stones concerning which I
command you today, ... and you shall build there an altar to the LORD, your God”.
The Samaritan Torah has Mount Gerizim instead of Mount Ebal. The few
Samaritans that remain today in Israel still worship on Mount Gerizim. The
Dead Sea Scrolls seem to support the Samaritan text
5.27
The Samaritan Torah (Paleo-Hebrew)
5.28
The Moabite Stone (Paleo-Hebrew)
The Moabite Stone (officially the Mesha Stele) is an inscribed stone (stele) set up
by King Mesha of Moab (near modern Jordan). Mesha tells the story of Moab’s
subjugation by Israel due to the anger of Moab’s god, Kemosh. The stone is
written using the Phoenician alphabet, the same alphabet that was the basis of
Hebrew writing before the 8th century BCE
5.29
Paleo-Hebrew Alphabet Comparison
5.30
Jesus Meets the Samaritan Woman at the Well
Well, it was our fathers’ way to worship on this
mountain, although you tell us that the place where
men ought to worship is in Jerusalem. (John 4:20)
As Jesus traveled south from his home in Galilee to
Jerusalem, he had to pass through Samaria.
Samaria is the name given to what was the Northern
Kingdom of Israel. When the Assyrians conquered
that kingdom and drove many of the ten tribes of
Jacob that lived there out of the land, that gave rise
to the notion of the “Lost Tribes of Israel”
Not all of the tribes left. Many of the tribe of Joseph
(Ephraim and Manasseh), the tribes closest to
Judah, remained. When Josiah, King of Judah,
declared that all Jewish worship would be centered
in the Temple of Jerusalem, as Samaritans (i.e. not
subjects of King Josiah), those Israelites who
remained continued to maintain their local shrines,
their ancient alphabet and Mount Gerizim as their
principal place of worship and sacrifice
5.31