The Origins of Judaism, Yonatan Adler

Discussion about the Hebrew Bible, Septuagint, pseudepigrapha, Philo, Josephus, Talmud, Dead Sea Scrolls, archaeology, etc.
User avatar
neilgodfrey
Posts: 6161
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 4:08 pm

Re: The Origins of Judaism, Yonatan Adler

Post by neilgodfrey »

andrewcriddle wrote: Sat Jun 03, 2023 4:15 am I suggested here that there is a potential ambiguity in the prohibition on scaleless water creatures and that it is possible that the interpretation changed in Hellenistic times.

Andrew Criddle
Does not this still leave us with the data for the Judeans/Israelites being comparable to the data for the neighbouring gentile cities -- very little difference between them?
andrewcriddle
Posts: 2817
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 12:36 am

Re: The Origins of Judaism, Yonatan Adler

Post by andrewcriddle »

neilgodfrey wrote: Mon Jun 05, 2023 2:37 am
andrewcriddle wrote: Sat Jun 03, 2023 4:15 am I suggested here that there is a potential ambiguity in the prohibition on scaleless water creatures and that it is possible that the interpretation changed in Hellenistic times.

Andrew Criddle
Does not this still leave us with the data for the Judeans/Israelites being comparable to the data for the neighbouring gentile cities -- very little difference between them?
I agree on the whole that the life style of the ordinary Jewish householder increasingly diverged from his non-Jewish neighbours during the Hasmonean period. However, at least some of this divergence, seems more likely to be changes in interpretation and application of the Torah than actual changes in the text of the Torah. If so, then these changes in practice may tell us little about the actual history of the text of the Torah.

Unless one is arguing that the Torah as we know it did not develop till the end of the 3rd century BCE then there was a substantial time gap between the origin of the Torah and the Hasmonean changes in Jewish practice.

Andrew Criddle


NB I originally wrote till the end of the 2nd century BCE that was a mistake, I've now corrected it.
Last edited by andrewcriddle on Thu Jun 08, 2023 8:11 am, edited 1 time in total.
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: The Origins of Judaism, Yonatan Adler

Post by Secret Alias »

Bravo. Well said Andrew as usual.
StephenGoranson
Posts: 2312
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2015 2:10 am

Re: The Origins of Judaism, Yonatan Adler

Post by StephenGoranson »

A possible example of a changing diachronic interpretation--correct this if mistaken--is, according to some interpreters, the application of some ritual purity practices from priests also onto others.
User avatar
neilgodfrey
Posts: 6161
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 4:08 pm

Re: The Origins of Judaism, Yonatan Adler

Post by neilgodfrey »

andrewcriddle wrote: Thu Jun 08, 2023 7:37 am
neilgodfrey wrote: Mon Jun 05, 2023 2:37 am
andrewcriddle wrote: Sat Jun 03, 2023 4:15 am I suggested here that there is a potential ambiguity in the prohibition on scaleless water creatures and that it is possible that the interpretation changed in Hellenistic times.

Andrew Criddle
Does not this still leave us with the data for the Judeans/Israelites being comparable to the data for the neighbouring gentile cities -- very little difference between them?
I agree on the whole that the life style of the ordinary Jewish householder increasingly diverged from his non-Jewish neighbours during the Hasmonean period. However, at least some of this divergence, seems more likely to be changes in interpretation and application of the Torah than actual changes in the text of the Torah. If so, then these changes in practice may tell us little about the actual history of the text of the Torah.

Unless one is arguing that the Torah as we know it did not develop till the end of the 3rd century BCE then there was a substantial time gap between the origin of the Torah and the Hasmonean changes in Jewish practice.

Andrew Criddle


NB I originally wrote till the end of the 2nd century BCE that was a mistake, I've now corrected it.
This kind of argument is entirely confined to the realm of speculation about what might or might not have been written. If the archaeological evidence in the pre-Hellenistic era does not permit us to say that laws we read about in the Torah were practiced, then how can we draw conclusions about what was written in the Torah at that time?

We simply can't. Any views about what was written in the Torah in the absence of any independent confirming evidence are surely entirely hypothetical. Even if they are derived from the Documentary Hypothesis, they are hypothetical and without confirmation in the "hard" evidence.

But when we see in that "hard" evidence that certain laws in the Torah were being practiced -- in the Hasmonean period -- then it follows that it is reasonable to think that the Torah came into existence between the end of the Persian era/beginning of the Hellenistic era and the Hasmonean period. That is simple logic.

Now that does not "prove" that the Torah did not exist in the confines of a scribal elite at a much earlier time and was without any impact on the wider society. We can always imagine that to be the case and even build up hypothetical models to argue for that being the case.

I think we should also be careful to not go further than the actual evidence indicates. Is there really evidence for a "gradual" or "increasing divergence"? Or does not the evidence rather suggest a direct change in practice?

What do you mean by "substantial time gap"? What evidence is there for your understanding?
andrewcriddle
Posts: 2817
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 12:36 am

Re: The Origins of Judaism, Yonatan Adler

Post by andrewcriddle »

neilgodfrey wrote: Thu Jun 08, 2023 4:22 pm
This kind of argument is entirely confined to the realm of speculation about what might or might not have been written. If the archaeological evidence in the pre-Hellenistic era does not permit us to say that laws we read about in the Torah were practiced, then how can we draw conclusions about what was written in the Torah at that time?

We simply can't. Any views about what was written in the Torah in the absence of any independent confirming evidence are surely entirely hypothetical. Even if they are derived from the Documentary Hypothesis, they are hypothetical and without confirmation in the "hard" evidence.

But when we see in that "hard" evidence that certain laws in the Torah were being practiced -- in the Hasmonean period -- then it follows that it is reasonable to think that the Torah came into existence between the end of the Persian era/beginning of the Hellenistic era and the Hasmonean period. That is simple logic.
There is other potential evidence as well as the archaeological. For example one could argue that the Pentateuch is written in a much ealier Hebrew than say the typical texts from Qumran or Ecclesiasticus. I am not going to pursue this line of argument, there appears to be no consensus among modern scholars about how valid it is, and I lack the Hebrew to make worthwhile comments of my own. However in principle it is as hard evidence as the archaeological, whose unambiguous nature I feel you exaggerate.
neilgodfrey wrote: Thu Jun 08, 2023 4:22 pm Now that does not "prove" that the Torah did not exist in the confines of a scribal elite at a much earlier time and was without any impact on the wider society. We can always imagine that to be the case and even build up hypothetical models to argue for that being the case.

I think we should also be careful to not go further than the actual evidence indicates. Is there really evidence for a "gradual" or "increasing divergence"? Or does not the evidence rather suggest a direct change in practice?

What do you mean by "substantial time gap"? What evidence is there for your understanding?
IF for example, as in Gmirkin's model, the Pentateuch was composed in the early 3rd century BCE but only began to be rigorously practiced in the Hasmonean period, then there would be a substantial time gap between composition and implementation.

Andrew Criddle
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: The Origins of Judaism, Yonatan Adler

Post by Secret Alias »

I can say from first hand experience that Samaritans are "native Hebrew speakers" as well as Aramaic and Arabic and they not only see or better yet hear the Hebrew in a nuanced way. They detect the differences between the Psalms and Deuteronomy and Deuteronomy and the Pentateuch. To do so for them would - in the case of the last example - be counterproductive as they think Moses wrote all five books. But at least two Samaritans have noted to me the texts were clearly written by two different authors and there are gradients in the Hebrew of Biblical texts.
User avatar
neilgodfrey
Posts: 6161
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 4:08 pm

Re: The Origins of Judaism, Yonatan Adler

Post by neilgodfrey »

andrewcriddle wrote: Sat Jun 10, 2023 4:03 am However in principle it is as hard evidence as the archaeological, whose unambiguous nature I feel you exaggerate.
If there is no evidence for X then is it an exaggeration to say that anything we posit about life, rules, beliefs must be speculative or hypothetical?

I do not say that hypothetical arguments are invalid on principle. Certainly not. But their hypothetical nature must be kept in mind and they must not be confused with facts.

Is that where you see my view as an "exaggeration"? To me, it serves as a reminder that a hypothetical construct is always open to criticisms and replacements in a way that carved stones in the ground -- or absent from the ground -- are not.

--------
Added later ....

I don't think it is an exaggeration to say that the Gmirkin hypothesis explains the absence of archaeological evidence for any diachronic model that places the Pentateuch in the Persian era and earlier. One can still disagree with the Gmirkin model on other grounds.
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: The Origins of Judaism, Yonatan Adler

Post by Secret Alias »

But there is what the owners of the text, the Jews and Samaritans, themselves hold to be true about their text. In most cases, we don't need to pay attention to these self-serving claims. There are traditions about who wrote the Pentateuch in pagan, Christian and related source. We ignore them in search of better evidence. But there are no better pieces of evidence. If we are trying to penetrate the darkness of history then all we have to go by are the testimonies of antiquity. What does "tradition" point to? Ezra.
User avatar
neilgodfrey
Posts: 6161
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 4:08 pm

Re: The Origins of Judaism, Yonatan Adler

Post by neilgodfrey »

You raise the questions about historical methods and how historians work -- across the board for all questions that they investigate. Others have attempted to discuss these questions with you before. But we have a natural inbuilt resistance to new ideas and any challenge to our formed views.
Post Reply