origins of the Torah

[photosynthesis]

so... I was always told that God gave Moses the Torah on Mt. Sinai... but in my bible's commentary it says stuff about the possibility of the torah having other (no less divinely inspired) origins...

what do you all know about the origins of the torah?

[Laudate_Dominum]

There are different theories of authorship based on source criticism, or a literary analysis of the text to identify linguistic and stylistic patterns which have led scholars to view the pentateuch as a composite work. Probably the most well known theory regarding the authorship of the pentateuch is what is called JEDP theory (which isn't as popular as it once was from what I can tell). The letters in this acronym refer to the distinct sources posited (J=YHWH, E=Elohim, D=Deuteronomic, P=Priestly). Thus the pentateuch as we know it is essentially a redaction/compilation of written materials and oral traditions going back to Israel's earliest days.
While this kind of thinking is common in modern Biblical scholarship, I have heard of scholars who argue for mosaic authorship. I don't really know a whole lot about it, but I've heard that Dr. Hahn makes a case for mosaic authorship.

[phatcatholic]

here's a great place to start:

Torah
[url="http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14779c.htm"]http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14779c.htm[/url]

also see:

Torah
[url="http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=265&letter=T&search=Torah"]http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp...=T&search=Torah[/url]

pax christi,
phatcatholic

[photosynthesis]

but what about the oral torah and the written Torah?

and how does the oral torah relate to the sacred tradition of the Church?

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='photosynthesis' date='Dec 20 2005, 10:28 AM']but what about the oral torah and the written Torah?

and how does the oral torah relate to the sacred tradition of the Church?
[right][snapback]831705[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
I guess you could think of it the way that the Gospel account existed as an oral tradition before an evangelist wrote that tradition down.. but the traditions in the Torah span a large chunk of time and so its more complicated.

[phatcatholic]

does that answer ur question, photo?

[photosynthesis]

well, no

where do we get this concept of the Oral Torah?

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='photosynthesis' date='Dec 20 2005, 02:16 PM']well, no

where do we get this concept of the Oral Torah?
[right][snapback]831946[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
It's a complicated thing, but the sources are posited in order to explain the character of the text. Here is a simplistic example:
Genesis I contains a creation account that is distinct in many ways from Genesis II. In explaining the differences some would identify the distinct sources as P and J or something. Oral traditions pre-dating a written account just kind of goes without saying for a lot of the Biblical material.

It's not easy to see in a translation, but when studying the Hebrew manuscripts it is easier to discern dovetailing of texts and things of this sort. Whether or not you believe in these sorts of theories really depends on whether or not you've familiarized yourself with the evidence and reasons behind the theories.

[Laudate_Dominum]

This article from the Catholic Encyclopedia is very interesting:

[url="http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11646c.htm"]http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11646c.htm[/url]

It is extremely outdated but is nonetheless quite thought provoking.

If you want my personal opinion, there is a mountain of evidence suggestive of the composite nature of the Pentateuch and I can't swallow the idea of pure Mosaic authorship. Mosaic authorship was the common belief at the time of Christ and beyond, but prior to this time it was common to attribute parts of the Pentateuch to Moses, but not the entire thing. Perhaps one could think of Moses as a compiler or redactor of the Hebrew traditions at his time. I actually don't really know the arguments of people such as Dr. Hahn who apparently argue for Mosaic authorship. The Biblical scholarship I've read just takes for granted the composite nature, and multiple sources of the Pentateuch.
But dang, the same can be said of the Gospels. Luke even prefaces his gospel with a statement that he is redacting or compiling an account based on various sources. True, he doesn't specify whether they were oral or written, but the internal evidence suggests both to my mind.

I think the reason many people resist such an idea is because they have a misguided notion of revelation. An idea of a book that fell from the sky, rather than a sacred tradition that was passed on and at times put down in writing. I think the nature of the Scriptures is in itself evidence of the Catholic conception of revelation.

[photosynthesis]

so the Oral Torah could even be the means in which the written Torah was compiled? Interesting...

[photosynthesis]

so that would mean that Sacred Tradition existed ever since the very beginning