Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

As Rabbis Face Facts, Bible Tales Are Wilting
N.Y. Times online ^ | March 9, 2002 | MICHAEL MASSING

Posted on 03/09/2002 6:05:30 AM PST by eddie willers

As Rabbis Face Facts, Bible Tales Are Wilting

By MICHAEL MASSING

Abraham, the Jewish patriarch, probably never existed. Nor did Moses. The entire Exodus story as recounted in the Bible probably never occurred. The same is true of the tumbling of the walls of Jericho. And David, far from being the fearless king who built Jerusalem into a mighty capital, was more likely a provincial leader whose reputation was later magnified to provide a rallying point for a fledgling nation.

Such startling propositions — the product of findings by archaeologists digging in Israel and its environs over the last 25 years — have gained wide acceptance among non- Orthodox rabbis. But there has been no attempt to disseminate these ideas or to discuss them with the laity — until now.

The United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism, which represents the 1.5 million Conservative Jews in the United States, has just issued a new Torah and commentary, the first for Conservatives in more than 60 years. Called "Etz Hayim" ("Tree of Life" in Hebrew), it offers an interpretation that incorporates the latest findings from archaeology, philology, anthropology and the study of ancient cultures. To the editors who worked on the book, it represents one of the boldest efforts ever to introduce into the religious mainstream a view of the Bible as a human rather than divine document.

"When I grew up in Brooklyn, congregants were not sophisticated about anything," said Rabbi Harold Kushner, the author of "When Bad Things Happen to Good People" and a co-editor of the new book. "Today, they are very sophisticated and well read about psychology, literature and history, but they are locked in a childish version of the Bible."

"Etz Hayim," compiled by David Lieber of the University of Judaism in Los Angeles, seeks to change that. It offers the standard Hebrew text, a parallel English translation (edited by Chaim Potok, best known as the author of "The Chosen"), a page-by-page exegesis, periodic commentaries on Jewish practice and, at the end, 41 essays by prominent rabbis and scholars on topics ranging from the Torah scroll and dietary laws to ecology and eschatology.

These essays, perused during uninspired sermons or Torah readings at Sabbath services, will no doubt surprise many congregants. For instance, an essay on Ancient Near Eastern Mythology," by Robert Wexler, president of the University of Judaism in Los Angeles, states that on the basis of modern scholarship, it seems unlikely that the story of Genesis originated in Palestine. More likely, Mr. Wexler says, it arose in Mesopotamia, the influence of which is most apparent in the story of the Flood, which probably grew out of the periodic overflowing of the Tigris and Euphrates rivers. The story of Noah, Mr. Wexler adds, was probably borrowed from the Mesopotamian epic Gilgamesh.

Equally striking for many readers will be the essay "Biblical Archaeology," by Lee I. Levine, a professor at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem. "There is no reference in Egyptian sources to Israel's sojourn in that country," he writes, "and the evidence that does exist is negligible and indirect." The few indirect pieces of evidence, like the use of Egyptian names, he adds, "are far from adequate to corroborate the historicity of the biblical account."

Similarly ambiguous, Mr. Levine writes, is the evidence of the conquest and settlement of Canaan, the ancient name for the area including Israel. Excavations showing that Jericho was unwalled and uninhabited, he says, "clearly seem to contradict the violent and complete conquest portrayed in the Book of Joshua." What's more, he says, there is an "almost total absence of archaeological evidence" backing up the Bible's grand descriptions of the Jerusalem of David and Solomon.

The notion that the Bible is not literally true "is more or less settled and understood among most Conservative rabbis," observed David Wolpe, a rabbi at Sinai Temple in Los Angeles and a contributor to "Etz Hayim." But some congregants, he said, "may not like the stark airing of it." Last Passover, in a sermon to 2,200 congregants at his synagogue, Rabbi Wolpe frankly said that "virtually every modern archaeologist" agrees "that the way the Bible describes the Exodus is not the way that it happened, if it happened at all." The rabbi offered what he called a "litany of disillusion" about the narrative, including contradictions, improbabilities, chronological lapses and the absence of corroborating evidence. In fact, he said, archaeologists digging in the Sinai have "found no trace of the tribes of Israel — not one shard of pottery."

The reaction to the rabbi's talk ranged from admiration at his courage to dismay at his timing to anger at his audacity. Reported in Jewish publications around the world, the sermon brought him a flood of letters accusing him of undermining the most fundamental teachings of Judaism. But he also received many messages of support. "I can't tell you how many rabbis called me, e- mailed me and wrote me, saying, `God bless you for saying what we all believe,' " Rabbi Wolpe said. He attributes the "explosion" set off by his sermon to "the reluctance of rabbis to say what they really believe."

Before the introduction of "Etz Hayim," the Conservative movement relied on the Torah commentary of Joseph Hertz, the chief rabbi of the British Commonwealth. By 1936, when it was issued, the Hebrew Bible had come under intense scrutiny from scholars like Julius Wellhausen of Germany, who raised many questions about the text's authorship and accuracy. Hertz, working in an era of rampant anti-Semitism and of Christian efforts to demonstrate the inferiority of the "Old" Testament to the "New," dismissed all doubts about the integrity of the text.

Maintaining that no people would have invented for themselves so "disgraceful" a past as that of being slaves in a foreign land, he wrote that "of all Oriental chronicles, it is only the Biblical annals that deserve the name of history."

The Hertz approach had little competition until 1981, when the Union of American Hebrew Congregations, the official arm of Reform Judaism, published its own Torah commentary. Edited by Rabbi Gunther Plaut, it took note of the growing body of archaeological and textual evidence that called the accuracy of the biblical account into question. The "tales" of Genesis, it flatly stated, were a mix of "myth, legend, distant memory and search for origins, bound together by the strands of a central theological concept." But Exodus, it insisted, belonged in "the realm of history." While there are scholars who consider the Exodus story to be "folk tales," the commentary observed, "this is a minority view."

Twenty years later, the weight of scholarly evidence questioning the Exodus narrative had become so great that the minority view had become the majority one.

Not among Orthodox Jews, however. They continue to regard the Torah as the divine and immutable word of God. Their most widely used Torah commentary, known as the Stone Edition (1993), declares in its introduction "that every letter and word of the Torah was given to Moses by God."

Lawrence Schiffman, a professor at New York University and an Orthodox Jew, said that "Etz Hayim" goes so far in accepting modern scholarship that, without realizing it, it ends up being in "nihilistic opposition" to what Conservative Jews stand for. He noted, however, that most of the questions about the Bible's accuracy had been tucked away discreetly in the back. "The average synagogue-goer is never going to look there," he said.

Even some Conservative rabbis feel uncomfortable with the depth of the doubting. "I think the basic historicity of the text is valid and verifiable," said Susan Grossman, the rabbi of Beth Shalom Congregation in Columbia, Md., and a co-editor of "Etz Hayim." As for the mounting archaeological evidence suggesting the contrary, Rabbi Grossman said: "There's no evidence that it didn't happen. Most of the `evidence' is evidence from silence."

"The real issue for me is the eternal truths that are in the text," she added. "How do we apply this hallowed text to the 21st century?" One way, she said, is to make it more relevant to women. Rabbi Grossman is one of many women who worked on "Etz Hayim," in an effort to temper the Bible's heavily patriarchal orientation and make the text more palatable to modern readers. For example, the passage in Genesis that describes how the aged Sarah laughed upon hearing God say that she would bear a son is traditionally interpreted as a laugh of incredulity. In its commentary, however, "Etz Hayim" suggests that her laughter "may not be a response to the far- fetched notion of pregnancy at an advanced age, but the laughter of delight at the prospect of two elderly people resuming marital intimacy."

In a project of such complexity, there were inevitably many points of disagreement. But Rabbi Kushner says the only one that eluded resolution concerned Leviticus 18:22: "Do not lie with a male as one lies with a woman; it is an abhorrence." "We couldn't come to a formulation that we could all be comfortable with," the rabbi said. "Some people felt that homosexuality is wrong. We weren't prepared to embrace that as the Conservative position. But at the same time we couldn't say this is a mentality that has been disproved by contemporary biology, for not everyone was prepared to go along with that." Ultimately, the editors settled on an anodyne compromise, noting that the Torah's prohibitions on homosexual relations "have engendered considerable debate" and that Conservative synagogues should "welcome gay and lesbian congregants in all congregational activities."

Since the fall, when "Etz Hayim" was issued, more than 100,000 copies have been sold. Eventually, it is expected to become the standard Bible in the nation's 760 Conservative synagogues.

Mark S. Smith, a professor of Bible and Near Eastern Studies at New York University, noted that the Hertz commentary had lasted 65 years. "That's incredible," he said. "If `Etz Hayim' isn't around for 50 years or more, I'd be surprised."

Its longevity, however, may depend on the pace of archaeological discovery.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Israel; News/Current Events; US: New York
KEYWORDS: biblicalarchaeology; exodus; godsgravesglyphs; israel; newyork; newyorkcity; newyorkslimes; newyorktimes; rabbidavidwolpe; theexodus
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 141-144 next last
To: eddie willers
As Rabbis Face Facts, Bible Tales Are Wilting

With this title they don't even try to disguise their axe to grind.

61 posted on 03/09/2002 3:06:18 PM PST by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: eddie willers
Where are the modern day Moses and Aaron who will bring plagues on the NYT?
62 posted on 03/09/2002 3:10:55 PM PST by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RobbyS
Except that modern biology has done no such thing. These Jews wish to be politically correct so strongly that they accept every shed of gay propoganda as truth.

True.

-

There is no gay gene...

True.

-

... the cause of homosexuality remains a mystery, especially as so many of them are bisexual.

First half is false, second half may be true. There is no mystery .

Human perversions of anatomical function(s) and the biological reproductive process is nothing mysterious.

Natural reproduction is mysterious, especially if you ever have children. Look into their eyes, watch them grow. Life itself is truly a miracle, the human perversions of it are not...

63 posted on 03/09/2002 3:49:38 PM PST by Sir Francis Dashwood
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: eddie willers
Oh look, yet another will to power attack on the crumbling foundations of Judeao-Christian society. And from New York, no less. What a suprise.
64 posted on 03/09/2002 3:56:54 PM PST by Pistias
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: abwehr
Call it the 'deconstruction' of the bible but there is no doubt a lot of historical embellishment in all human history. One can well imagine that, had the American war of independance begun in 1776 B.C. instead of A.D. the story would have transmogrified considerably as it passed from generation to generation in a less than scientific era. George Washington might have been credited with 'walking' across the Delaware and his cherry tree chopping and silver dollar tossing be accepted as absolute truth rather than fanciful tales designed as parables of virtue. Jefferson, Madison and the rest could have easily come to be viewed as Saints, they have almost achieved that status in our own time, Sally Hemmings notwithstanding.

The problem with that theory is the bible clearly specifies each man's faults (except for Jesus of course, having been the perfect scarifice). David quasi-murdered Uriah, Solomon fell from grace due to his concubine's beliefs, Adam and Eve partook of falsity, Noah's drunken state on the day of Ham's sin, etc.

65 posted on 03/09/2002 4:08:09 PM PST by #3Fan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Dumb_Ox
> ...when the Egyptians or their histories speak evil of the Jews,

This article, translated from the original is a classic case of the translator repeatedly changing a meaning which reinforces an error. There were no Jews in Egypt during the time apparently being referenced (prior to the Exodus) there were only Israelites. While all Jews were Israelites, most Israelites were not Jews.

The Israelites were gone from Egypt many centuries before the Kingdoms split and the NORTHERN Kingdom was taken into captivity by the Assyrians. The Jews came from the Southern Kingdom. It makes you wonder what else is being mistranslated and referenced as history.

66 posted on 03/09/2002 4:13:38 PM PST by LostTribe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: DugwayDuke
>...Or Jews as God's Choosen People.

Actually, the Israelites as a whole received that promise, not just the Jews. Click on my Profile to see the difference.

67 posted on 03/09/2002 4:16:35 PM PST by LostTribe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: week 71
>Archeologists also contended there was no written language at the time the Torah was was alledged to be written... then they found Hamarabi's code. They also said there was no name Abraham during the time of Abaham's life... then they found and inscription on stone with the name Abram pre-dating the Biblical Abraham. They used to say there was no city of Ur until they found evidence and changed their mind. They said all the Gospels were written in the second or third century, until they found manuscripts dating from the first century. I'm certain the myth of no Jericho will be debunked with time.

Right on target! Deserves to be posted again.

68 posted on 03/09/2002 4:24:40 PM PST by LostTribe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: eddie willers
I'm not religious at all so maybe I don't have any standing in this question. Honestly I am only a bit amused by people who claim the the Bible is without error since internal inconsistencies are so plentiful but, as indicated my opinion may not matter. It does seem to me that as a standard of ethical education the Bible has done a fine job. The ten commandments and the additional two that Jesus offered certainly seem to me to be an excellent foundation for an ethical society

Suggeting that the Bible is somehow less valuable because its tales are only myth is to miss the point of an ethical grounding.

69 posted on 03/09/2002 4:30:11 PM PST by muir_redwoods
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: eddie willers
It was this name that stopped me and convinced me to post this article. I read "When Bad Things Happen to Good People" at a low point in my life and found it comforting. Theodicy is the major reason for my agnosticism and I fail to see why questioning mystical origins is indicative of an agenda.

I read it, also. His grief caused him to become basically an agnostic. He didn't solve the issue at all or add anything to it, he merely tried to put agnosticism in a more favorable light.

70 posted on 03/09/2002 4:38:11 PM PST by webstersII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: eddie willers
"More likely, Mr. Wexler says, it arose in Mesopotamia, the influence of which is most apparent in the story of the Flood, which probably grew out of the periodic overflowing of the Tigris and Euphrates rivers. The story of Noah, Mr. Wexler adds, was probably borrowed from the Mesopotamian epic Gilgamesh. "

How can anyone argue with the explanation of the facts Mr. Wexler gives us here?
I don't know about the rest of you but it's going to be hard for me to refute these truths, probably.

71 posted on 03/09/2002 4:47:23 PM PST by Joshua
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: eddie willers
And David, far from being the fearless king who built Jerusalem into a mighty capital,
was more likely a provincial leader whose reputation was later magnified to provide
a rallying point for a fledgling nation.


I suppose that King David's indirect murder of one of his soldiers...so that he could
have sex with the man's wife, his abysmal record as a parent, and (IIRC) being denied
the honor of completing the temple in Jerusalem was also a way of embellishing his history.
"Yeah...right...that's the ticket."

(I may have be a bit off in the facts there as I'm not a Biblical scholar. I invite
correction by the more knowledgeable.)

What is it with these PhDs? If the characters in the Bible had actually commissioned the
work, they sure got cheated. Because, despite many heroic qualities...many
have some really big character faults.

Oops, there I go. Being judgemental. Guess that disqualifies me from commenting
on this topic.
72 posted on 03/09/2002 4:57:28 PM PST by VOA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LostTribe
It makes you wonder what else is being mistranslated and referenced as history.

It makes me wonder what kind of pedant continually pounds on his favorite pedantry.

73 posted on 03/09/2002 5:00:06 PM PST by Dumb_Ox
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: eddie willers
You would think that with all the earthly power the God haters have they would have won this argument already. More evidence that they are wrong. The question is : why do they hate the idea of God so much? --MM
74 posted on 03/09/2002 5:02:52 PM PST by mustapha mond
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: eddie willers
"Today, they are very sophisticated and well read about psychology, literature and history,
but they are locked in a childish version of the Bible."


Dear Rabbi Kushner,
I guess you must be thankful that one A. Hitler and his merry band weren't
slavish followers of that "childish version" of the Bible.
I'm sure you would appreciate their sophisticated view on those old fables.

I'm beginning to think that a fair proportion of well-educated religious leaders
have lost their common sense.
If not their minds.
75 posted on 03/09/2002 5:04:47 PM PST by VOA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: muir_redwoods
We seem to be of a like mind.
76 posted on 03/09/2002 5:20:27 PM PST by eddie willers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: eddie willers
This is reminiscent of the NY Times and New Statesman articles posted here in recent months about research into the Koran, which were better received. There is also a more polemical article about biblical archaealogy in the March Harper's monthly.

All the canons of historical truth and methods of research that we have now weren't in place millenia ago when the Bible and Koran were written, so it's not surprising that those texts may not conform entirely to modern scientific or scholarly standards of what is proven or true. It's probably a mistake to think that any religion is more vulnerable than others to such criticism.

Just as the practice of most modern American religions have more in common with each other than with what such faiths were centuries or millennia ago, so ancient Near East religions probably had more in common with each other than we once realized. There were more connections and cross-currents and shared influences than subsequent generations would admit.

This certainly isn't the end of religion. The search for meaning and answers to the ultimate questions goes on, and any archaelogical evidence for anything in the Bible will be taken as evidence for the whole. But it may mean a shift in how we think about religion. There may be a good side to this, as we come to temper some of the claims we make for religion. There will also be a bad side. The great crimes of the last century have been attributed to the decline of religion. If people cease to be bound by religious constraints, will they commit similar crimes?

The hundred and fifty year old cliche about the great Kulturkampf between modernism and the dark forces of fundamentalism that was given new life by 911 may turn out not to be true. The challenge of the 21st century may be finding something true to believe in, not in overcoming belief. So will we perish from lack of faith or will monsters be unleashed by the perversion or decline of religion?

77 posted on 03/09/2002 5:21:40 PM PST by x
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: webstersII
His grief caused him to become basically an agnostic.

I didn't see it that way.
IIRC, he never questioned God's existence....just the extent of His power.

78 posted on 03/09/2002 5:24:33 PM PST by eddie willers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: razorback-bert
Ever hear Bryant Wood speak on the subject? He destroys the "conventional wisdom" of some archaeologists based upon Kathleen Kenyon's work that the ruins at Jericho do not support the Biblical story. In fact, they fit it to a tee.
79 posted on 03/09/2002 5:28:04 PM PST by DittoJed2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: eddie willers;Yehuda
Yehuda, maybe you can help me. I won't be buying the book, and I doubt it will even make the NYT best seller list.

But, fiction I could understand. A Torah and commentary? What is the commentary, it didn't happen that way?

80 posted on 03/09/2002 5:31:06 PM PST by SJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 141-144 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson