If we drop the vowels in English Bibles, we could run into words with more than one possible meaning. For example "shp" can mean ship, shape, sheep, shop, etc.
Obviously the words preceding and following will determine what "shp" is supposed to be. That's not necessarily the same as correctly interpreting the theology of the text containing 'shp."
The theology is found not only in the words and sentences, but in the letters themselves. Every letter must be written in precisely the correct manner or the scroll will not be kosher and cannot be used in worship. These factors include the sizes and shapes of the letters, the "crowns" that appear on some of the letters, and even the spaces between the letters. The correct text, the mode of writing, and the interpretation of the text all have the same source--from G-d to Moses on Mt. Sinai. G-d gave Moses not only the Written Torah but the Oral as well, and the correct hermeneutic/exegetical method for "psaq"ing the text. In addition to this, the forty years in the Midbar (and I know you don't believe in them) were spent in the most arduous systematic study. Maimonides in one of his works (I think Mishneh Torah though it could be Moreh Nevukhim) explains the mode and method of this study.
Now of course I realize that all of this requires me to assume the truth and authenticity of the Rabbinic Tradition. If you are asking me why, after being in so merciless in my rationalistic rejection of the "new testament" I suddenly return to being a "fundie" with regard to these other things, I doubt I will ever be able to satisfy you. I could say that I have learned things about the history of the transmission of the text and of the secrets and mysteries hidden therein that (to my mind) confirm my assumptions, but that is still begging the question of where my "faith" comes from. I don't know where it comes from. I have never claimed to be able to convince an unbeliever of the truth of the Torah and all my arguments with chr*stians is based on the fact that they accept the Torah and acknowledge that it came first; therefore, given A (the Torah) B (chr*stianity) simply does not follow at all. But why do I believe in A in the first place? I can't tell you that.
The front of my Bible has always held a peculiar power over me. My defense of the early chapters of Genesis, which have somehow morphed into a "chr*stian" text that Jews "don't believe in anymore," follows from this same mysterious power. I can say in my defense that this Rabbinic Tradition is as close as we will ever come to the true meaning and that I adhere to it as the most trustworthy. But that still doesn't tell us where my "faith" comes from.
Why do any of us believe what we believe? My sister is a very conventional Southern Baptist, my mother is an "uneducated" (by the standards of the academic world) traditional cultural/folk fundamentalist who believes implicitly in the Bible and listens to the preachers but still thinks for herself when it comes to doctrine (though never with regard to G-d or the Bible themselves). And my later father is absolutely inexplicable--a man who grew up in the rural Bible Belt in the Twenties and Thirties who never let it touch him, who would say very little about his religious beliefs except that no one was really going to heaven (they weren't good enough) and who placed his faith in folk astrology (not the Hollywood type but the rural Southern variety) and superstitions (never burn a fingernail or hair, don't spin a chair on its leg, if you sit a rake or hoe on the front porch someone will die).
And then there is me. I can explain it no more than you can.
That's the answer I was looking for, ZC. Now it makes perfect sense, at least to me. Some things just can't be translated. In some cultures, the writing itself has a meaning.
But you did not explain how can Jewish writing have been preserved theologically and morphologically from Moses when both the alphabet and theology changed. I will explain in the following post.
The Hebrew alphabet of Moses' time and post-Babylonian period are two different lettering systems. The shapes, etc. are different. The theology of Judaism also changed. Most of the misfortunes that befell on the Jewish people up to the more or less 2nd century BC, were interpreted as God's righteous wrath and punishment for disobedient and unfaithful Israel.
In other words, Judaism did nto see a generic evil competing with God, just disobedience Israel and God's just punishing in order that Israel may return to observing the Shabbat and so on, which is exactly what the Jews did prior to the Maccabean revolt.
But then Israel is exposed to massive assimilation and hellenization and punishment precisely because they were observing the Shabbat and God's commandments! It is at this point, following the Maccabean revolt that apocalyptic Judaism is born, introducing dualism which older Judaism did not theologically recognize at all!
So, I don't see how we can speak of the same theology, whether expressed in letters or verbally when the Pharisaical, rabbinic messianic or apocalyptic Judaism is basically a 2nd century BC phenomenon which happens to have survived as the Talmudic Judaism up to this day. I just don't see seamless theological continuity you suggest all the way to Moses.