Hebrew the original language?

Not to take this discussion off the subject too much. But isn't Acts commonly thought to be the oldest book written in the Bible? Even predating the writing of Genesis and Job? ( I'm speaking of when it was written, not the period it is written about of course.)

 

Helen, I am glad to see that you do in fact believe Moses wrote at least 4 of the 5. Here is the grind: The law is always spoken of as a unit. Moses was understood to be the author by the Jews. When Jesus mentioned the writings of Moses, they would not have thought that he meant all except Genesis.

 

Wisdomseeker, perhaps I am just misunderstanding your post, but do you think ACTS was written prior to the O.T. Books?

 

Just a question:

How could a person be an eyewitness of Genesis 1?

 

The Greek "gramma" (writings) does not imply authorship, merely that he wrote it down. Someone who copied would have written "gramma"'s as well as someone who originally wrote them himself. Even the result of plagarism would be "gramma." This passage doesn't really help either side's case.

 

Helen, you do not know that. You are making quite the assumption saying that Moses was not the author.

As I have pointed out, Jesus spoke of the WRITINGS of Moses.

You would have to prove that Jesus was not talking about Genesis (which is impossible), that the Jews of the 1st Century would have thought otherwise (which is impossible), and provide Scriptural support for the document theory.

I don't think that any of those things can be done. I appears that your argument is based upon more of a linguistics approach.

Btw, a person did not have to be an eyewitness to write Genesis. Part of the truth of inspiration is that it is directly from God. That is the only thing that must be there. Being an eyewitness does not guarantee truth.

Also, Moses very well could have understood alot more that I think the article gives credit for. He was raised in all the wisdom of Pharoah. I would say that his library was among the world's best.

These are just some thoughts from my side.

Have a nice day.

 

Not to take this discussion off the subject too much. But isn't Acts commonly thought to be the oldest book written in the Bible? Even predating the writing of Genesis and Job? ( I'm speaking of when it was written, not the period it is written about of course.) </font>[/QUOTE]No, the canon of scripture for the old testament was closed 200 years before Christ. The books of the OT are far, far older than the first century NT texts.

Thank you,
Ron

 

excellent point.

orthodox jews do believe hebrew was the original language.

of course they also believe the exact words of the torah pre-existed creation in firey letters, people used to die when they sneezed, and god made the first set of tongs - so take it for what it's worth.

 

Actually, it was closed 400 years prior to Christ.

I am just guessing that you are speaking of Daniel being written in the second century BC, etc. Keep in mind that Christ said that Daniel was in fact the author of the book by the same name.

 

Technically, the canon was not closed until the Council of Jamnia in 90 AD. Personally, though, I believe that Ezra was the one who compiled the books together to make what we would consider the Old Testament. I think that Josephus, the great Jewish historian, said that somewhere.

 

My name is Mike Gascoigne and I am the author of the article on which this topic is based. It's good to see that it has caused so much discussion on this forum. This is just one of a series of articles, listed on the following page:

www.write-on.co.uk/history/index.htm

Some of these articles are about secular histories that affirm Biblical history, especially the first few chapters of Genesis. The accumulated material eventually resulted in the publication of my book "Forgotten History of the Western People: From the Earliest Origins".

Since the publication of my book, I have had useful feedback from some of my readers, and I have written some more articles, including the one on "Hebrew: The Language of Eden".

I would encourage you to look at the original article because (1) it preserves the original formatting and (2) it might be updated from time to time with new information.

There has already been one important update, because I found some Jewish people who say that, according to Jewish tradition, Hebrew is the language of Eden, and this is what the Jews have always believed. They call it "L'shon HaKodesh" which means "Holy Tongue", and there are many references to the special status of Hebrew in the Jewish literature. To give just one example, the Midrash Rabbah, Genesis XXXI:8 says that "Just as the Torah was given in Hebrew, so was the world created with Hebrew".

Anyone who wants to look at this further should study the Jewish literature (Talmud, Mishnah, Midrash Rabbah, etc.), which is easily available on CD-ROM.

Mike

 

Gunther,

As Scott Emerson has pointed out, the Greek text does not necessarily imply authorship. The first five books of the Bible, known as the Pentateuch, or the Torah (Law) were all put together by Moses, either as the compiler or the author. He was the compiler of Genesis, and the author of most of the material in the remaining four books. The verse from John's Gospel that you have quoted refers to any occasion in these books where Moses referred to the coming Messiah. There are two occasions that come to mind.

Genesis 3:15. "And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel."
In this case, Moses was the compiler, because this prophecy was given long before his time.

Deut. 18:15 "The LORD thy God will raise up unto thee a Prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken".
In this case, Moses wrote it himself, as the original author.

In both cases, Moses was inspired by the Holy Spirit. The work of compilation, to which he might have sometimes added his own comments, was just as much a work of divine inspiration as the original authorship.

The following passage comes from page 26 of "The Genesis Record" by Henry Morris.

"It is also significant that, although the Book of Genesis is quoted from or alluded to at least two hundred times in the New Testament... in none of these references is it ever stated that Moses was the actual author. This is especially significant in view of the fact that Moses
is mentioned by name at least eighty times in the New testament, approximately twenty-five of which refer to specific passages attributed to Moses in the other books of the Pentateuch."

I have to credit Ruth Beeching, the author of "Adam and His Kin" for drawing my attention to this passage from "The Genesis Record". I am currently reading through it, and I have to say that it's one of the best and most comprehensive commentaries on Genesis that I have seen, and it's written from a scientific creationist viewpoint.

Mike

 

Scott,

That's the whole point of the first colophon. It says "These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth..." (Gen. 2:4). That means God wrote it and gave it to Adam.

Mike

 

It does not mean that. If you are reading through the book of Genesis, you would never take that to mean that God wrote something and gave it to Adam.

Scripture is silent on the issue of anyone but Moses writing Genesis. What authority and/or basis do you have to say that Moses did NOT write Genesis?

 

It does not mean that. If you are reading through the book of Genesis, you would never take that to mean that God wrote something and gave it to Adam.

Scripture is silent on the issue of anyone but Moses writing Genesis. What authority and/or basis do you have to say that Moses did NOT write Genesis? </font>[/QUOTE]Gunther,

This single colophon, by itself, could not be taken to mean that God wrote the first section of Genesis and passed it on to Adam. However, we have a series of colophons all the way through Genesis, in the style of the Babylonian clay tablets. It is evident therefore, that each successive author recorded the history of his own time and signed it off, then passed it on to his successor to be continued. We have a problem with the first section, because nobody was present to witness the first five days of creation, so God must have provided the history in some way and given it to Adam. Perhaps God wrote it on clay tablets, or perhaps He dictated it to Adam and he wrote it down. But if Adam wrote it down, he would have to write his own colophon with a statement that it was dictated. I would go with the theory that God wrote it down and wrote the colophon Himself, because this would establish the tradition of each successive author writing his section of the history and signing it off.

In answer to your second question, I have no authoritative proof that Moses did not write Genesis. I also have no authoritative proof that Joshua, Caleb, or King David did not write Genesis. I can't find any verse in the Bible giving the name of a person who did not write Genesis. Also I have no authoritative proof that Moses did write Genesis. In that case, we are in a position of neutrality, and I would go for the clay tablet theory because it's the one that makes the most sense.

Mike

 

Sorry, I meant Ruth Beechick, not Beeching. I must have been thinking of the guy who carved up the railways in Britain.

Mike

 

Helen,

Yes, you are right, the brothers of Joseph must have been in Egypt when they wrote their book, and they placed it in Pharaoh's archives together with the other books. I have updated the numbered paragraph 9 of my article:

http://www.write-on.co.uk/history/edenics.htm

In that case, it was part of God's design that Moses should be brought up in Pharaoh's house, so that he would have access to these archives.

Mike