New Evidence on When Bible Was Written

Interested, just not knowledgable to address them fully.

>I see no way anything...

I presume this is because you dont actually know whats contained in the talmud. While modern science tools may not have existed, smart scientisits, mathmeticians, liguists, historians, etc... did and in fact, they discuss at length the authorship of the torah.

You wrote previously that the rabbis wanted a cohesive narrative. This is patently false. There is even a concept within torah study called "eilu ve'eilu" which means we can disagree, and still both be right. My point being that there is nothing cohesive or narratove based in the talmud other than a rigorous search for Absolute Truth.

Pretty much every word mentioned by someone in the talmud is followed by an aggressive quest to disprove it...and many things are even left unanswered...

Without taking a peek into the talmud, it is not intellectually honest to dismiss it...especially invoking modern science without even seeing if its consistent with that science or not.

A), i have read some of the talmud; i do not believe i have the collected texts in their entirety.

B), i meant to say it is in the interest of the rabbis to propagate the cohesive narrative of Moses authoring the pentateuch, NOT that the talmud itself has a cohesive narrative.

Perhaps there was some confusion about the word "torah"--I was refering to the pentateuch, ie the original five written texts, not the broader meaning including the rabbinical texts. To my knowledge, authorship of the latter is entirely a different topic of which I do NOT have much knowledge or interest--not because it is not interesting, but because it is orders of magnitude more complex and (personally) I just enjoy reading it and the authorship does not play into my enjoyment the way the authorship of the pentateuch lends it meaning. Can you understand how it would be different written by the patriarch of an entire ethnicity vs some unknown goat herders? The text means entirely different things under these interpretations, so the argument over authorship is worth the pursuit. Personally, i dont think it means any less in either interpretation; i think the pentateuch is invaluable regardless of your beliefs, ethnicity, or stance on JEPD. Genesis itself just might be the greatest text ever written in my humble opinion--I see new things every time I read it, and it is the closest we will ever get to understanding the the, erm, human experience of civilization itself.

Sorry for the confusion!

> the cohesive narrative of Moses authoring the pentateuch There is a disagreement in the Talmud about this point.

When you say you read talmud, have you ever studied it in a Yeshiva, while learning the commentary, or just read an english translation of part of it?

I think the point that seems to be lost in this discussion is the following. Picture a conversation on reddit like this... redditor1: my opinion is the truth. redditor2: source? redditor1: here is the link redditor2: but three years ago you said this competing theory. redditor3: those opinions are consistent because of differing circumstances... redditor4: what this other thing he said that is the same circumstances as the old post but supports the new one. redditor3: I guess i was wrong. I am stumped. redditor4: it makes sense because if you look at the sentence structure, they are really the same thing said in two different ways.

Now imagine a conversation like that trying to determine the veracity of every single word in the Torah, every single law and theory mentioned in the talmud and mishna, etc...

Studying the talmud is not some text some guy wrote down. It is an intense and deep analysis that considers math, physics, science,logic, language analysis, etc... all with the goal of finding the truth about the torah and mishna...not to support a theory about G-d giving over the Torah to Moses who than transcribed most of it.

What I am trying to say is that while I don't know the relevant discussions around the pentateuch authorship other than the link I shared earlier from Ohr.com ... These scholars who analyzed the text to determine if there were multiple authors, etc... really need to look at the explanations in the talmud for why one sentence is written one way and another is written another way...

It seems intellectually dishonest to me to analyze these things without consulting the talmudic experts who have studying the relevant sections...As there might be discussion and context that is very relevant.

Well my reading in Seminary was anywhere from 2,00-14,000 pages per class. There is NO WAY I could read the complete Talmud (What length is it? At LEAST 5,000 pages and it is difficult to get the order right with the writing)

Time - Well I would place it from what 200 BCE to 500 CE and that is way out of from the writing of the Torah.

Big Error - We treat writing from ANE with the eyes and genres of 21th century people. We try to fit them into our mold. There would be no concern what so ever about the authorship being true or not just like how Pseudepigrapha works were also very much accepted with the full knowledge that another author wrote that work. Clearly Enoch didn't write the Book of Enoch but that didn't keep people from reading it and accepting it. Heck The Book of Enoch is quoted in Jude.

Anyway, I merely intended it as a friendly jab. :)