Karma reasons for concrete message




    Posts: 12000
  • Darwins +618/-23

Anyone know why my footnote shows up here ^^^^ instead of at the bottom of the post? Is it because it’s so long?

I've noticed that too.  It seems to happen if you have a nested quote anywhere in your post after the footnote.

Where do you recommend I find such information?
Google is a beautiful thing. :) You can search on ancient libraries.

You are a real help.  I thought you had some specific tidbit in mind that lead you to believe the hebrews were big on accurate history as opposed to history that made them appear more grandiose.

Wikipedia has a page that takes you to some of their other pages about the libraries. You’ll see that large libraries have been found dating back long before 1200 BC.

I assumed some civilizations had libraries, just not the iron age jooz.  They were barely a civilization, afterall.  The ONLY thing they gave to modern culture is monotheism. No math.  No science.  No architecture. No art.  If you want to count the bible as literature, okay, fine, but understand that is a function of the popularity of their religion.  The greeks added nearly as much in the field of literature and their religion has been defunct for nigh 2000 years.  So if reformed judaism (aka xianity) had not caught on, no one would be reading the torah and regarding it as great lit other than jews.

...since Moses grew up in the Pharoah’s home he would certainly have been able to read and write and there’s no reason to think that he couldn’t compose the Pentateuch.

Had there been a moses and had events occurred as written in the OT, then sure, he probably would have been literate.  But that puts the cart before the horse in a lot of ways, doesn't it? 

Hey, you want to read something funny?  I looked up torah in wiki.  Here is an interesting point I found:
According to classical rabbinic texts this parallel set of material was originally transmitted to Moses at Sinai, and then from Moses to Israel. At that time it was forbidden to write and publish the oral law, as any writing would be incomplete and subject to misinterpretation and abuse.

However, after exile, dispersion and persecution, this tradition was lifted when it became apparent that in writing was the only way to ensure that the Oral Law could be preserved. After many years of effort by a great number of tannaim, the oral tradition was written down around 200 CE...

bold mine.  Two points.  First, they thought it was less reliable to write it down.  The primitive rubes!  They had no idea just how faulty human memory is.  Then, when they got around to writing it down, it was 200 years after jesus H.  Oh man.

As often happens when I peruse wiki, that lead me to an article titled "Moasic authorship".  The first paragraph:
Mosaic authorship is the traditional attribution of the first five books (Torah or Pentateuch) of the Old Testament to Moses. The tradition is first definitively stated in the Babylonian Talmud, an encyclopedia of traditional Jewish learning compiled around the middle of the 1st millennium CE.  The Torah, however, does not name its author, and the tradition seems to be founded largely on the fact that it does contain five, somewhat vague, references to Moses writing various things. Other elements which went to form the tradition include the practice among later writers of referring to the "laws of Moses", (although it is not clear just what this meant), and the general sense that authoritative writings should be attached to the names of authoritative figures.

bold mine.  So this whole business about Moses writing the Torah is ambiguous and a relatively late invention.  What is a good catholic like you arguing over jewish traditions for?  If you read on, you see that a lot of the "traditions" around this question were entirely created by the fantasies of rabbis in the Common Era.  And it seems like some of them found it to be a dubious claim as well:

In the Middle Ages, Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra (ca. 1092 - 1167 CE) and others observed that some phrases in the Torah present information that people should only have known after the time of Moses.
In the 15th century, Rabbi Yosef Bonfils, while discussing the comments of Ibn Ezra, noted: "Thus it would seem that Moses did not write this word here, but Joshua or some other prophet wrote it. Since we believe in the prophetic tradition, what possible difference can it make whether Moses wrote this or some other prophet did, since the words of all of them are true and prophetic?"

Changed Change Reason Date
SimpleCaveman Thanks for the insight on the footnote. April 06, 2012, 06:46:17 PM