Ratzinger: Creation written during Babylonian captivity?

  • Thread starter Thread starter James924
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

James924

Guest
I was always under the impression that Moses wrote all of the pentatuch but Cardinal Ratzinger (Pope Benedict XVI) wrote in his “In the Beginning” that the six day account took it’s present form during the Babylonian captivity.

So the six day account wasn’t written by Moses?

Is this known for sure?

Thanks
 
Do you know what page in In the Beginning that’s from? I think I have that.
 
Depends on if you believe Biblical scholarship. There are (for the most part) accurate ways to p(name removed by moderator)oint the date of a text’s composition based on its vocabulary and the oldest available manuscripts; from that, it’s generally thought that the oldest part of the Pentateuch/Torah was written in about 600 B.C. in Judah, which is well after the lifespan of Moses.

If you choose to believe Jewish traditions over the above, then it’s still held by the very orthodox that Moses composed the entire Torah during his lifespan.
 
I was always under the impression that Moses wrote all of the pentatuch but Cardinal Ratzinger (Pope Benedict XVI) wrote in his “In the Beginning” that the six day account took it’s present form during the Babylonian captivity.

So the six day account wasn’t written by Moses?

Is this known for sure?

Thanks
We do not know what Moses wrote because his writings are no longer extant. We do know that in a population where few can read or write, stories are memorized and retold generation to generation. In captivity, the Israelites, fearing a syncretization of their beliefs, began to reduce their stories to writings.

We identify these nameless writers only by groups as the Yahwists, Elohists, Deuteronomist, and Preistly Editors based on style, vocabulary and their predominate messages. Strictly speaking, church teaching claims “inspiration” only for the final edition of the work in which these four sources appear (Dogmatic Constitution 11).

Exegetes believe the Yahwist epic was compiled during the reign of Solomon or shortly thereafter (950-900 BC) and fixed in writing during the Babylonian Exile (586-539 BC). Scholars place the Elohists epic composition around 800 BC during the Divided Monarchies. Many years later, around 400 BC, scholars believe the priests and scribes brought these epics together in literary form that they call the Priestly tradition.
 
Do you know what page in In the Beginning that’s from? I think I have that.
The exerpt I’m reading says pages 1-15. The Babylon issue is discussed starting in the last paragraph afterthe subheading “Unity of the Bible” and conitnues into the section titled “True God vs false god.”
 
I was always under the impression that Moses wrote all of the pentatuch but Cardinal Ratzinger (Pope Benedict XVI) wrote in his “In the Beginning” that the six day account took it’s present form during the Babylonian captivity.

So the six day account wasn’t written by Moses?

Is this known for sure?

Thanks
Note that the key part of this text (in red) does not discount that the related stories are not from a more ancient source, in fact this is implied and discussed in the referenced book.
 
Seems like we’re always getting into disagreements, buffalo! I don’t have time at the moment to read this entire article, but I have some serious objections to the introduction. My comments in red:
For those biblical scholars who have had the unfortunate experience of having the JEPD theory of the Documentary Hypothesis jammed down their throats the past forty years in Catholic biblical scholarship, and as long since the time of Julius Wellhausen in the late 1800s, this will be a real treat.
The Documentary Hypothesis as presented by Wellhausen is archaic. Nobody adheres to it in its original form because it’s well over a hundred years old. Keep this in mind because I anticipate several strawmen arguments in this article; similar to how somebody will cite a scientific journal to refute Darwin’s “the Origin of Species,” and then act as if the theory of evolution has been discredited, as if anybody still follows the theory as it were presented in the 19th century.
This article will show what an absolute sham Catholic biblical scholarship has been since the 1960s; how innocent Catholics have been deceived by these pseudo-scholars; and why Catholic students all over the world have lost the faith.
I am a university student myself. I don’t recall anybody studying modern works on the Bible, then standing up and proclaiming, “oh, I guess the Catholic Church is a lie.” Just my personal experience. Nevertheless, this is a bit of a poisoning-the-well fallacy, is it not? Before any arguments or evidence has been presented, the author of this article has proclaimed the opposition to be “pseudo-scholars” and their work a “sham.”
For those who are not biblical scholars, “JEPD” refers to the theory of modern liberal scholars positing that the the Pentateuch (the first five books of the Old Testament) were not written or complied by Moses (as the Bible claims) but by a series of unknown authors separated by many hundreds of years.
Here’s my first substantive objection. First of all, the Documentary Hypothesis does not deposit that Moses did not write the Torah. It merely deposits that the Torah, in the form that is possessed this day, is a compilation of several different sources. If they were all originally written by Moses and it was the will of God that they be separated and re-united, then this doesn’t preclude Mosaic authorship, does it?
For example, the Documentary Hypothesis claims that Genesis 2 was written long before Genesis 1, the latter being written between 587-517 BC just before the Jews returned from captivity in Babylon. In the scheme of the J-E-P-D hypothesis, Genesis 1 was a “P” (Priestly) document. Why? Because, we are told, the Jews needed a refresher course on their divine heritage and there was no better place to start than with a wonderful creation story in order to get everyone excited about their return trip to Jerusalem. In other words, the “priest” or his trusty scribe who wrote Genesis 1 was basically making up a fairy tale for the delight of those returning captives.
I was good for this paragraph until the author decided to interject his interpretation that the theory turns the Book of Genesis into a fairy tale. If you do not believe the Catholic faith, sir, then that is your personal opinion. But this conclusion cannot be drawn from the facts at hand!
All this hypothesizing comes under the name of “Catholic biblical scholarship,” but it is nothing more than an attempt to discredit the Bible.
Fascinating; I know several very pious and orthodox gentlemen that have no objections to modern Biblical scholarship. Certainly there are atheists in this business that have the expressed intent of discrediting Judeo-Christianity, but it is apparent that they can only do so by operating outside of the possessed evidence. At this point, there are no known contradictions between what is known about the Old Testament through Biblical criticism* and what is taught by the Holy Catholic Church.
*Remember that in this context, “criticism” does not have a negative connotation. It merely means analysis.
If the Bible is a product of men, then it is prone to mistakes, and that is why these same “biblical scholars” teach that the Bible cannot be trusted when it gives historical information, or if a certain book claims to be written by a certain author.
Some men teach this, certainly. I don’t see what relevance this has to scholarship per se.
If you’ve had enough of this intellectual garbage, you will find the following paper to be very refreshing. If it were possible, his paper should be at the head of every Bible issued today, to make up for the fabrications perpetrated on the public by the fantasies of Julius Wellhausen and company for the past hundred and fifty years.
See my first comments in red.
Furthermore, I skimmed to the end of the article and found out that every source cited by this author is at least 50 years old. This demonstrates that the position he’s refuting is that of the opposition from the 1950s. Given how much the field of Biblical criticism has advanced since then, I anticipate that this entire article will be a bit of a strawman.

God bless.
 
I don’t see anything strange in this. Lots of peoples had very lengthy oral traditions before they were ever committed to paper. The Iliad, for example, long predated its ever being written down. It’s hard for us now to fathom people memorizing lengthy things like that, because nobody now really needs to do it. But the ancients evidently did. Probably we could too, if we needed to.
 
Genesis presents not the religious vision of the patriarchs (whose deeds it recounts) but the religious visions of the era of its final composition. Taking the accidents of time and place away, the creation story in Genesis tells us about the nature of time, reaching its climax in the Sabbath. The text tells us about the nature of the world, reaching its perfection in God’s pleasure with what God had created, God’s blessing and sanctifying creation. It also tells us about the character of humankind, man and women, perfect in God’s image, like God, but tragically flawed. Remembering that the substance of the text tells us about a timeless God, we may treat as peripheral incidentals that are peculiar to the time of composition if doing so unveils the central themes: the enduring attributes of God and His plan for humanity.

When the sacred writers put the story together in ca. 450 BC, the issues were clear: How was the world made such that Israel served God in a Temple that was destroyed and now rebuilt, in a land that was lost and now regained, in a holy way of life that was set down in Sinai, violated but then recovered and renewed?

The central theme for the Israelites in this story is the Exodus. Prior to the Exodus experience, the Hebrews as community lacked an organizing principle. If people are to be bound together, they do so not only by blood and soil, but also by shared experience. The Israelite community begins with Exodus, an experience that creates hope and establishes direction and purpose.

In Exodus, God acted in Israel’s behalf and laid upon them lasting obligations to God and fellow human beings. Exodus provides the model for how the people of God should seek justice in society as the only appropriate response to the liberation they had experienced.
 
Seems like we’re always getting into disagreements, buffalo! I don’t have time at the moment to read this entire article, but I have some serious objections to the introduction. My comments in red:

Furthermore, I skimmed to the end of the article and found out that every source cited by this author is at least 50 years old. This demonstrates that the position he’s refuting is that of the opposition from the 1950s. Given how much the field of Biblical criticism has advanced since then, I anticipate that this entire article will be a bit of a strawman.

God bless.
Anticipate away. But read it anyway.😉
 
I don’t see anything strange in this. Lots of peoples had very lengthy oral traditions before they were ever committed to paper. The Iliad, for example, long predated its ever being written down. It’s hard for us now to fathom people memorizing lengthy things like that, because nobody now really needs to do it. But the ancients evidently did. Probably we could too, if we needed to.
The Toledoths article posits that the accounts were written on tablets and Moses was in possession of them when he compiled the Pentateuch.

**The Tablet Theory of Genesis Authorship

http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:FFM_08xFR1OhlM:http://www.ancientdays.net/images/mosgen1.jpg Clay Tablet with Colophon

**
  • Tablet 1: Genesis 1:1 - 2:4. The origins of the cosmos Author: (God Himself (?)
  • Tablet 2: Genesis 2:5 - 5:2. The origins of mankind (Adam)
  • Tablet 3: Genesis 5:3 - 6:9a. The histories of Noah(Noah)
  • Tablet 4: Genesis 6:9b - 10:1. The histories of the sons of Noah (Shem, Ham & Japheth )
  • Tablet 5: Genesis 10:2 - 11:10a. The histories of Shem (Shem)
  • Tablet 6: Genesis 11:10b - 11:27a. The histories of Terah (Terah)
  • Tablet 7: Genesis 11:27b - 25:12. The histories of Ishmael (Isaac)
  • Tablet 8: Genesis 25:13 - 25:19a. The histories of Isaac (Ishmael, through Isaac)
  • Tablet 9: Genesis 25:19b - 36:1. The histories of Esau (Jacob)
  • Tablet 10: Genesis 36:2 - 36:9. The histories of Esau (Esau, through Jacob)
  • Tablet 11: Genesis 36:10 - 37:2. The histories of Jacob(Jacob’s 12 sons)
 
Note that the key part of this text (in red) does not discount that the related stories are not from a more ancient source, in fact this is implied and discussed in the referenced book.
That’s exactly what I was going to say. Saying that the text “took it’s present form” is not the same thing as saying it was written for the first time during the Babylonian captivity.

As far as I know, the Mosaic authorship (or lack thereof) of the Pentateuch is not a matter of doctrine. Many scholars today subscribe to the whole JEDP theory, but even that doesn’t necessarily negate that the Pentatuech has its origin with Moses. As others have said, things were passed down orally for a long time before they were written down.

I’ve heard that several of the saints, such as St. Jerome, actually had the entire Bible memorized!
 
I also say thanks for posting that website! The article was really helpful.
 
If I may simply refute the claim that Moses authored the Torah himself in its entirety, ask yourself how he could have recorded his death, burial, and other post-mortem events (Deuteronomy 34).
 
I was always under the impression that Moses wrote all of the pentatuch but Cardinal Ratzinger (Pope Benedict XVI) wrote in his “In the Beginning” that the six day account took it’s present form during the Babylonian captivity.

So the six day account wasn’t written by Moses?

Is this known for sure?

Thanks
If it comes to that, I’ve often wondered who wrote the prophetic books. Did Jeremiah write Jeremiah? Did Daniel write Daniel? I find it a lot easier to believe later generations wrote these books, after reflecting on their misfortune and the warnings they or their ancestors had received from these prophets.

There may have been exceptions I suppose. Isaiah was a court official who may have well been able to write. Likewise Daniel. But there were others like Amos who was a ‘nipper’ of fruit trees as per the following item lifted off the web -

"Amos engaged in menial seasonal work as a nipper of sycamore figs, a variety considered food only for the poor.

The practice of pinching,puncturing, or nipping the figs was to hasten the ripening and increase the size and sweetness of the fruit.

See Amos 7:14"

Did Amos write Amos?
 
When undergoing The Ministerial Formation Program at The Diocese of St. Augustine in St. John Florida, under the authority and blessing of Bishop Victor Galeone, Sister Paschal shared information about this.

Her indication to us was that she did not relish dealing with the subject. What is comes down to is that the 6 day creation story in Genesis was written by Hebrew Patriarchs while captive in Babylon.

The story was written as a means of contrasting The God of Abraham against the god worshipped by the Babylonians at the time. This is because the Babylonians also had a god and a creation story.

So, where their god created the human race to be slaves, our God created the human race to love God freely, etc.

This is certainly one very powerful reason why, unlike our Protestant brothers, bless their souls, Roman Catholic’s do not find ourselves confounded by the big bang, carbon dating, dionsaurs, etc., etc.

As always - God does not defy Himself, but rather, humanity encounters a user error then assumes that it has something to do with passages in scripture.

We must educate ourselves and allow ourselve to be truly informed by God’s voice and authority on earth, The Roman Catholic Church.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top