Is exclusive Yahwehism even plausible prior to the Hasmonaeans?

Discussion about the Hebrew Bible, Septuagint, pseudepigrapha, Philo, Josephus, Talmud, Dead Sea Scrolls, archaeology, etc.
Post Reply
rgprice
Posts: 2062
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2018 11:57 pm

Is exclusive Yahwehism even plausible prior to the Hasmonaeans?

Post by rgprice »

The cult prescribed by the Torah is an extremely militant xenophobic and exclusive cult that is highly intolerant of other religions and of any authority other than Jewish priestly authority.

It is quite difficult to envision how such a cult would have arisen and existed under any sort of vassal administration, much less under conditions of more direct foreign rule.

It seems highly doubtful that the Babylonians or Persians would have allowed such a cult to exist, much less that the Persians would have supported the existence of such a cult. It is difficult to imagine how the Torah could have been compatible with Persian administration. The same goes for the Ptolemaic and Seleucid eras. Indeed the Maccabean Revolt shows exactly why such cults wouldn't have been tolerated.

But more, how would such a cult envision its own power without the means to actually realize it? In other words, would a priesthood develop such a cult and such a set of religious documents in an environment in which they would have been unable to fulfill the very laws they deemed divine? Why would a priesthood lay out a set of conditions they would have been unable to fulfill?

So we have to ask, at what point was the Jewish priesthood actually able to fulfill the "Laws of Moses"?

Would they have been able to meet the requirements of the Torah at any point prior to the Hasmonaean dynasty? Would they have actually produced a set of scriptures under Ptolemaic rule (and been invited to translate them) that would have directly put the Jewish priesthood and people into conflict with their Ptolemaic overlords? Would they have produced a set of scriptures that they would have been unable to fulfill? Or was adherence to the Torah possible under Ptolemaic rule?
User avatar
neilgodfrey
Posts: 6161
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 4:08 pm

Re: Is exclusive Yahwehism even plausible prior to the Hasmonaeans?

Post by neilgodfrey »

This is a question I've been turning over, too. Do we find "the answer" in the Hexateuch describing what has been done and left undone, with the implication that the surviving Canaanites are a thorn in the side of Israelites but one that has to be lived with. Joshua was obliged to reluctantly make peace with the surviving Gibeonites, for example (Josh 9).

After Samaria rebelled within a year or two of being conquered by Alexander the Great, Samaria was destroyed and new authority was given to the priests at Mount Gerizim. These were the priests, in Gmirkin's view, were the ones responsible for the Pentateuch (along with the priests of Judea). The Greeks of Alexander the Great gave authority to the priests of Yahweh:
After the destruction of the city of Samaria and the revocation of Samaritan self-rule, the priests became the ruling class of the Samaritan people that was now concentrated around the temple on Mt. Gerizim. The high priest was the head of the theocratic state. In the wake of the destruction of the city of Samaria by Alexander the Great, all the priestly religious functionaries left the city and moved to Mt. Gerizim.31 Hence, Mt. Gerizim became the religious, national, economic, and political center of the Samaritans during the Ptolemaic period. Following its rebellion and destruction, Samaria became a Macedonian city. At the same time, Mt. Gerizim and its temple continued to exist and flourished as the center of the Samaritans who believed in Yhwh. - Magen, p. 182, in Judah and the Judeans in the Fourth Century BCE
The Torah does not command the generation reading/hearing it to kill those whom they might identify as the Canaanites in the land.

But I think you are right in that the Torah does seem to give licence to a leadership who did desire to undertake purges and wars -- as did the Hasmoneans. But that purging and war program must have coincided with a breakdown of relations between Judea and the Samaritans.
rgprice
Posts: 2062
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2018 11:57 pm

Re: Is exclusive Yahwehism even plausible prior to the Hasmonaeans?

Post by rgprice »

So what you are proposing is that the Pentateuch was produced by Samaritans in the Mt Gerizim community during a period of autonomous rule there, correct?

This could make sense.

As far as I see it, the fact that the "Laws of Moses" set of a pretty specific set of powers and regulations is quite telling. Surely whoever wrote Exodus and Leviticus as we have them, would surely only have done so at a point in time when it was actually possible to fulfill the Laws. Why would anyone write out a code of laws that would have been impossible to fulfill? They wouldn't of course.

So this poses a few potential times when the scriptures would have been codified in their current forms. One of course would be during the supposed age of the kings. But of course there are may reasons to reject this dating.

However many scholars seem to propose that the Pentateuch was produced during the time of Babylonian or Persian rule. This appears highly unlikely. Surely, even the most generous understanding of the Persian era does not allow us to believe that the Persians would have granted so much autonomy to the Jewish people. In order to live by the tenants of the Torah during Persians times it would have essentially required Jewish self-rule. The Torah lays out an entire legal system. Surely the Jews wouldn't have been allowed such a level of autonomy.

Numbers of course also describes a census. We can presume then that when the Torah was written, the writers of the Torah had designs to conduct a census. Again, these are not things that they could have done under the Babylonians or the Persians I would think. A census was a serious undertaking with significant administrative overhead, and also with significant implications. Surely the Persians wouldn't have allowed the Jewish priesthood or Jewish governors (if such even existed) to conduct a census. If anyone were going to be conducing a census it would have been the Persians themselves.

And of course there are the taxations and such that are laid out in the scriptures. The Torah essentially is the founding set of documents for a government. The Persians wouldn't have allowed such a thing to exist. It just seems like foolishness to even propose it. So why then would a priesthood assemble a set of documents that they would have had no possible way of fulfilling? There is no indication whatsoever that the Jews had any plans to or engaged in any efforts to rebel against the Persians and fight for self-rule. So this cannot be compared to the founding of the United States for example. But in the US, the Constitution was not drafted until AFTER the war against the British had been won and the states were autonomous. So even this, IMO, reinforces the idea that the Torah would only have been written during a period of autonomous rule.

Take for example Nehemiah 8:

1 And all the people gathered as one person at the public square which was in front of the Water Gate, and they asked Ezra the scribe to bring the Book of the Law of Moses which the Lord had given to Israel. 2 Then Ezra the priest brought the Law before the assembly of men, women, and all who could listen with understanding, on the first day of the seventh month. 3 And he read from it before the public square which was in front of the Water Gate, from early morning until midday, in the presence of men and women, those who could understand; and all the people were attentive to the Book of the Law. 4 Ezra the scribe stood at a wooden podium which they had made for the purpose. And beside him stood Mattithiah, Shema, Anaiah, Uriah, Hilkiah, and Maaseiah on his right; and Pedaiah, Mishael, Malchijah, Hashum, Hashbaddanah, Zechariah, and Meshullam on his left. 5 Then Ezra opened the book in the sight of all the people, for he was standing above all the people; and when he opened it, all the people stood up. 6 Then Ezra blessed the Lord, the great God. And all the people answered, “Amen, Amen!” with the raising of their hands; then they kneeled down and worshiped the Lord with their faces to the ground. 7 Also Jeshua, Bani, Sherebiah, Jamin, Akkub, Shabbethai, Hodiah, Maaseiah, Kelita, Azariah, Jozabad, Hanan, Pelaiah, and the Levites explained the Law to the people while the people remained in their place. 8 They read from the book, from the Law of God, translating to give the sense so that they understood the reading.

This does not seem at all plausible. When we look at what the "Laws of Moses" consists of, this would seem to have had Ezra reading out a set of laws that the priesthood and the people would have been entirely incapable of fulfilling or enforcing. Sure, we can pick a few here and there that could have been adhered to, but this is describing a reading out of what is essentially the constitution of a government and an entire legal code. All this could possibly have done would be to point out the fealty of the people to their Persian overlords and their inability to meet the standards of Yahweh. Why would anyone do that? Makes no sense.

So in my mind this makes the idea that the Pentateuch was "written", "compiled", "revised", "organized", whatever, in the Persian era just seem absurd, much less the Babylonian or Assyrian eras.

It has to have been produced and made public at a time when it would actually have been possible to carry out its demands.
rgprice
Posts: 2062
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2018 11:57 pm

Re: Is exclusive Yahwehism even plausible prior to the Hasmonaeans?

Post by rgprice »

We can just use a very simple example. The fourth commandment requires that Jews do no work on the Sabbath. Would this have been possible under the Persian administration?

Likewise, many of the laws setup in Exodus-Deuteronomy carry a penalty of death. Would Jews have been capable of exercising these laws under Persian rule?

For example:
Exodus 21:
12 “He who strikes someone so that he dies shall certainly be put to death. 13 Yet if he did not lie in wait for him, but God caused him to fall into his hand, then I will appoint you a place to which he may flee. 14 If, however, someone is enraged against his neighbor, so as to kill him in a cunning way, you are to take him even from My altar, to be put to death.

15 “And one who strikes his father or his mother shall certainly be put to death.

16 “Now one who kidnaps someone, whether he sells him or he is found in his possession, shall certainly be put to death.

17 “And one who curses his father or his mother shall certainly be put to death.

I think it is very reasonable to conclude that the priesthood would only have compiled these laws at a time when it was possible for the priesthood to enforce them. And surely they would not have had authority to execute people like this under the Persian administration would they?

It seems that they would only have been capable of actually enforcing these laws during a period of autonomy, and thus, they would only have produced this document during a time of autonomy.

Even if one argues that the Pentateuch is merely the compilation and codification of pre-existing laws that were originally established during the Israelite kingdoms, why on earth would the Jewish priesthood bother compiling these laws at a time when they could do nothing with them? And again, to actually read them out to the people as Nehemiah 8 describes would only have served to demonstrate the inadequacy of the priesthood and the people, who were incapable of following the laws of their God, because they lived under the administration of a foreign power that would not have allowed them to follow their own laws.

So again, when we shift the focus from the stories to the actual legal demands of the Pentateuch, it requires the Pentateuch to have been authored during a period of autonomous self-rule, which excludes the period from the 8th century BCE up through 333 BCE at minimum. And it makes a lot of sense that the production of this constitution and set of laws would have been produced at the beginning of some new administration or at the beginning of a period of autonomy.
User avatar
neilgodfrey
Posts: 6161
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 4:08 pm

Re: Is exclusive Yahwehism even plausible prior to the Hasmonaeans?

Post by neilgodfrey »

rgprice wrote: Tue Feb 21, 2023 6:41 am So what you are proposing is that the Pentateuch was produced by Samaritans in the Mt Gerizim community during a period of autonomous rule there, correct?
Samaritans and Judeans together. Both appear, from what I am able to gather, to be led by the priests of the Yahweh cult at the time.
rgprice wrote: Tue Feb 21, 2023 6:41 am Numbers of course also describes a census. We can presume then that when the Torah was written, the writers of the Torah had designs to conduct a census. . . . Surely the Persians wouldn't have allowed the Jewish priesthood or Jewish governors (if such even existed) to conduct a census. If anyone were going to be conducing a census it would have been the Persians themselves.
Numbers describes a "historical" census. I don't think it commands one to be taken in in the time of the readers.
rgprice wrote: Tue Feb 21, 2023 6:41 amAnd of course there are the taxations and such that are laid out in the scriptures. The Torah essentially is the founding set of documents for a government. The Persians wouldn't have allowed such a thing to exist.
There is no taxation law in the Pentateuch, is there? From the little I know of Persian rule at the time, Persian authorities didn't seem to care much what their subjects did so long as they paid their tribute/taxes and demonstrated loyalty to the Persian king.

rgprice wrote: Tue Feb 21, 2023 6:41 am So even this, IMO, reinforces the idea that the Torah would only have been written during a period of autonomous rule.
I still have mountains to learn about this period, but was there any time here when Judea and Samaria were ever completely autonomous? After the Persians, it was the Greeks, wasn't it? And the Greeks destroyed Samaria after their rebellion and quest for autonomy. After Alexander, the Ptolemies ruled, then the Seleucids.

rgprice wrote: Tue Feb 21, 2023 6:41 amIt has to have been produced and made public at a time when it would actually have been possible to carry out its demands.
It was the Greeks who destroyed Samaria and put the priests of Yahweh in charge from Mount Gerizim, as far as I understand (others can correct me on this point.) Judea also appears to have been ruled by a high priest of the Yahweh cult. But the Greeks/Macedonians, and then the Ptolemies, were "in charge".

If the Pentateuch was composed under Ptolemaic rule, it did not imply autonomy from Ptolemaic rule. I expect the Judeans and Samaritans still owed taxes and loyalty to the Ptolemies.
User avatar
neilgodfrey
Posts: 6161
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 4:08 pm

Re: Is exclusive Yahwehism even plausible prior to the Hasmonaeans?

Post by neilgodfrey »

rgprice wrote: Tue Feb 21, 2023 8:54 am And surely they would not have had authority to execute people like this under the Persian administration would they?
We would expect an negative answer under Roman rule, but Persia was not Rome. I think finding the answer requires a bit of research.
rgprice
Posts: 2062
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2018 11:57 pm

Re: Is exclusive Yahwehism even plausible prior to the Hasmonaeans?

Post by rgprice »

Numbers describes a "historical" census. I don't think it commands one to be taken in in the time of the readers.
Of course everything is set in the past, but what is the purpose? All of this is laid out and a model for government. The past is used to set precedent for the present.
There is no taxation law in the Pentateuch, is there? From the little I know of Persian rule at the time, Persian authorities didn't seem to care much what their subjects did so long as they paid their tribute/taxes and demonstrated loyalty to the Persian king.
Leviticus 27 lays out a number of assessments and tithes, which I interpret to be like taxes. Maybe that's wrong, but still, there are guidelines set for monetary "assessments" and tithes, regarding who will pay what. Then of course there are many fines that are prescribed.

The point is, many laws and administrative guidelines are laid out in the Pentateuch. The recording of these laws and administrative prescriptions would seem to make no sense if they could not actually be put into practice. So when were Jews capable of actually fulfilling the demands of the Pentateuch? Surely they weren't capable of living by the "Laws of Moses" while under the rule of other administrations. How would these laws have been enforced? How would these assessments have been made?

If we follow Ezra-Nehemiah. Would it really have been the case that the appointing of Nehemiah as governor would have allowed the implementation of a separate legal system?

Take for example, "Exodus 21:17 And one who curses his father or his mother shall certainly be put to death."

So let's say that Ezra reads this out to the people in the fourth century BCE living in Jerusalem, which is part of a Persian empire. Even if a Jew were governor of Judah, would it have been legal execute someone because they cursed their parents? Or whatever regulation we want to pick out.

And if it were not possible to enforce the legal code, then why bother reading it out? So the reading of the legal code here implies that it was possible to enforce the legal code.

Did Nehemiah have the ability to enforce a "Jewish" legal code in Judah? Or would not the governor of Judah, no matter who they were, have had to adhere to a Persian legal code?

So the question then is, why bother writing out a legal code if you cannot implement the legal code? So unless the Jews were capable of actually implementing their legal code under the Persians, or any other administration, then it would seem highly unlikely that it would have been authored at that time.

Thus, it seems to me that the writing of the legal code (and the stories that go along with it) would only have happened at a time when it was possible to actually enforce it. So when were the periods in history when the Jews were capable of implementing the legal code laid out in the Pentateuch?
rgprice
Posts: 2062
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2018 11:57 pm

Re: Is exclusive Yahwehism even plausible prior to the Hasmonaeans?

Post by rgprice »

Having read through most of Persia and Torah : The Theory of Imperial Authorization of the Pentateuch, I'm more comfortable with the idea that some sort of "book of law" was established by Jews during the Persian period. I do question whether it was really referred to as a the "Book of the Law of Moses". But despite several assertions that the whole Pentateuch existed by the end of the Persian period, I don't really see any evidence of such.

Of course the actions of Nehemiah are themselves quite xenophobic. Is it really the case that the Persians would have backed such xenophobia? I think its quite difficult to imagine that the exclusive worship of YHWH would have been conducive to harmony within the Persian empire. According to Ezra and Nehemiah, Nehemiah had authority to enforce Jewish law upon all people living in Judah, even though many people would not have been "Jews" or of "Israelite" ancestry.

So how possibly would this have worked? There would have been Egyptians, Assyrians, Persians, etc. living in Yehud. Surely no person of Persian heritage living in the territory would have been forced to worship YHWH. And what about this issue of mixed marriages:

Neh 13:
1 On that day they read from the book of Moses in the hearing of the people, and in it was found written that no Ammonite or Moabite should ever enter the assembly of God, 2 because they did not meet the Israelites with bread and water but hired Balaam against them to curse them—yet our God turned the curse into a blessing. 3 When the people heard the law, they separated from Israel all those of foreign descent.

...

23 In those days also I saw Jews who had married women of Ashdod, Ammon, and Moab, 24 and half of their children spoke the language of Ashdod, and they could not speak the language of Judah but spoke the language of various peoples. 25 And I contended with them and cursed them and beat some of the men and pulled out their hair, and I made them take an oath in the name of God, saying, “You shall not give your daughters to their sons or take their daughters for your sons or for yourselves. 26 Did not King Solomon of Israel sin on account of such women? Among the many nations there was no king like him, and he was beloved by his God, and God made him king over all Israel; nevertheless, foreign women made even him to sin. 27 Shall we then listen to you and do all this great evil and act treacherously against our God by marrying foreign women?”

28 And one of the sons of Jehoiada, son of the high priest Eliashib, was the son-in-law of Sanballat the Horonite; I chased him away from me. 29 Remember them, O my God, because they have defiled the priesthood, the covenant of the priests and the Levites.

30 Thus I cleansed them from everything foreign, and I established the duties of the priests and Levites, each in his work, 31 and I provided for the wood offering, at appointed times, and for the first fruits. Remember me, O my God, for good.

The various scholars of Persia and Torah seem not to bat an eye at this, yet to me is seems quite remarkable. Why would the Persian administration go along with this? It seems destined to create conflict. And note how this is linked to the story of King Solomon. This looks to me like reading later stories back into earlier history.

I have a hard time believing that Persian authorities would have sat by while this governor was causing massive social unrest, When you start breaking up families and claiming that people can no longer associate with each other, that's a huge problem. I can't imagine today in America re-instituting segregation. It would lead literally to civil war.

And this passage actually refers to two Deuteronomistic stories, that of Balaam and Solomon. So it reads either like the Pentateuch had recently been introduced and now people were "realizing" all of the ways that their lifestyle violated the lessons of their ancestors according to the stories of the Pentateuch, OR that this account is imposing the stories of the Pentateuch back onto the past and creating a narrative about the more recent past that brings the recent past into line with the Pentateuch.

But again, I question whether such stories would have been developed during the Persian period when they would have inevitably led to conflcit.
User avatar
neilgodfrey
Posts: 6161
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 4:08 pm

Re: Is exclusive Yahwehism even plausible prior to the Hasmonaeans?

Post by neilgodfrey »

Some of the questions you raise here are addressed in the books I listed in the other thread requesting sources about Judeans in the Persian era -- esp re "legal fictions".

A must read is Adler's recent work demonstrating when laws were practised/enforced -- viewtopic.php?f=6&t=10085

Nehemiah is arguably a work of fiction. It is treated as a historical source because, I suspect, there is nothing else that covers that period and scholars invested in a Persian era Pentateuch need it to fill in some of the blank page that they are faced with here.

See the archaeologist Finkelstein's presentation slide for what we know about this era at viewtopic.php?p=148968#p148968
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Is exclusive Yahwehism even plausible prior to the Hasmonaeans?

Post by Secret Alias »

Philo did not accept exclusive Yahwehism. He was a leading representative of the Jewish community at Alexandria and it is unlikely that he would have written commentaries based on an idiosyncratic hermeneutic. It would have compromised his position in the community (like any celebrity he represents his community). Similar traits are found in Samaritan exegesis. "Exclusive Yahwehism" likely only developed later in Judaism.
Post Reply