Introduction

Introduction or thousands of years, the Bible was studied exclusively by people of faith Fwho regarded it as a sacred text given by God. Considerable theoretical and practical importance was ascribed to this study and the literature it pro- duced. Over generations, a worldview developed that this study required the reader to be totally committed to a belief in the integrity and sanctity of the text, and its consequent immunity from human error. Sources that reflect critical thinking on the composition of the biblical corpus can already be found in classical rabbinic and medieval Jewish literature—for example, in the commentaries of Abraham Ibn Ezra and Rabbi Judah the Pious. However, these early articulations were not sufficient to challenge the basic traditional assumptions about biblical books, their origins, composition, and transmission. The appearance of critical biblical scholarship in the eighteenth century stunned religious readers of the Bible. For the first time, systematic use was made of scientific, analytical tools to study the Bible. Scholars presented methodological approaches and conclusions regarding the composition of the text that contradicted the naïve assumptions of preceding generations. Confronted with the cogency of biblical scholarship and cogni- zant of the challenges that this research entailed for them, those who believed in the divine origin of the Bible were forced to respond. Bewildered believers confronted these challenges in several ways. One approach was to ignore the conclusions of this research or to utterly reject them, while scorning the world of science and ridiculing academic scholarship in general. This extreme conservative reaction to the challenge of biblical criticism reinforced a wholescale negation of the Enlightenment in these quarters. Proponents of this rejectionist approach, who eventually came to be known as Haredi Jews, isolated themselves from the surrounding culture and lacked any interest or ability in discerning between its positive and negative aspects. On the other extreme was the belief that the Enlightenment demanded the abandonment of religion, or at least its radical reform. A third approach developed primarily in central Europe in the nineteenth century. Its proponents chose to study the conclusions of biblical research, to viii Introduction glean what could be accepted from a theological point of view, and to reject, with scholarly arguments, those positions that appeared to contradict Jewish faith, as they defined it. An outstanding example of this exegetical approach can be found in Rabbi David Zvi Hoffmann’s Torah commentary and other writings. While this approach attracted many followers, it received criticism from both sides: the Haredi world objected to all contact with the Jewish Enlightenment and science, and the academic world doubted the intellectual integrity of those who approached biblical exegesis with preconceived assumptions about the nature of revelation and divine inspiration that limited their freedom of inquiry. Today, this approach—namely, the qualified acceptance of the conclusions of scientific research coupled with the rejection of those conclusions that do not conform to faith-based assumptions—is increasingly pop- ular in the field of Bible education in modern religious circles. A fourth approach has gained ground among religious intellectuals and academics, but it has yet to make a significant impact on the religious public. This approach recognizes the legitimacy of the questions posed by biblical scholarship. It accepts the underlying rational assumptions that are necessary to answer these questions, without perceiving this acceptance as a challenge to belief in God, acceptance of the Bible’s sanctity, or commitment to obser- vance of the commandments according to halakhah. This approach does deal directly with biblical criticism, yet it allows the possibility of engaging in academic research without a priori restricting potential conclusions. Proponents of this approach attempt to clarify—theologically, conceptually, and philo- sophically—how to live a religious life based on belief in God and the obser- vance of the commandments, without basing that belief on factual knowledge that can be refuted by science—for instance, the historical authenticity of the various parts of the Bible, the integrity and unity of each of the biblical books, the date of composition of biblical literature, and the identity of its authors. A famous example of this approach is the solution proposed by Rabbi Mordechai Breuer to the question of the unity of the Torah and its date of composition. Rabbi Breuer argued that the theory known as the documentary hypothesis, as propounded by classical biblical scholarship from the middle of the eighteenth century until today, should be accepted. The documentary hypothesis maintains that the Torah is a compilation of several disparate documents woven together to create a new text. However, in contrast to the original hypothesis, which holds that these documents were created by various literary schools active in the Land of Israel in ancient times, each of which related the events and the commandments found in the Torah in its own way, Rabbi Introduction ix Breuer maintained that these disparate versions were all written by God, the author of the Torah, who relayed them to Moses after they had been combined. The foundation of critical, scientific thinking is impartiality: preconcep- tions, faith-based or otherwise, cannot be allowed to direct research to certain conclusions. Thus, an archeologist, for example, should approach his excava- tion without any prior assumptions about the secrets buried in the earth or the conclusions that could be derived from them. Seeking the truth and rejecting any distortion or falsification are also the foundations of the fear of God. A God- fearing archeologist, who recoils from falsehood and distortion and is guided only by truth, should feel obligated, precisely because of his or her faith and religious commitment, to accept the facts as they emerge from the excavations and research. On this point, scientific method and the principles of faith converge. A nonreligious archeologist who distorts his or her research for extraneous reasons, such as political beliefs or the desire to find favor in academic circles by adhering to accepted opinions, betrays the principles of academic research. Likewise, a religious archeologist who allows adherence to accepted religious beliefs, or the opinions of the religious public, to influence the conclusions that he or she draws from his or her research betrays religious commitments. It is therefore of upmost importance to develop religious approaches that free academic research from external coercion, and, at the same time, free the religious world from its fear of academic research. This development will con- tribute to the advancement of impartial research, as well as to the formulation of a clear, courageous, unbiased faith. Adherents of this faith will not fear the use of scientific methods, but will adopt them enthusiastically, recognizing that the search for truth is a religious obligation. This is true in all academic fields, including Jewish studies. However, the challenge presented by the study of the Bible and its interpretation is espe- cially great, as is the importance of developing new approaches that allow unbiased scholarly research of biblical literature and related fields. These approaches must entail, first and foremost, interpreting the text according to the contextual meaning (peshat); examining the processes of composition and transmission; studying the history and culture of the biblical world in order to examine the Bible in its own cultural context; understanding the beliefs and opinions expressed in the Bible; and analyzing the Bible’s literary style and genres. Approaching the Bible from these perspectives, without rejecting belief in God and the obligation to observe the commandments, is one of the most pressing challenges of our time. Critical biblical scholarship is well known, well respected, and very convincing; it is impossible to ignore or reject it. x Introduction This book originated in a research seminar that took place at Beit Morasha in Jerusalem in 2009–2010, attended by both Torah scholars and university-based biblical scholars. In lively group discussions that were held, questions were clarified and potential solutions were examined. The participants took turns presenting their personal outlooks and ideas, which were then critically, congenially, and constructively analyzed by the group. Professor Baruch Schwartz of the Hebrew University took an active part in directing the seminar and editing this book in its initial stages, and we would like to express our thanks for his important contributions. We also remember with admiration and affection, as well as with sadness at his untimely passing, our dear colleague, the late Professor Hanan Eshel. Hanan continued to participate in the discussion sessions until his final days, despite the pain and complications that he suffered from his illness. We learned a great deal from his wisdom and sensitivity during the seminar, but sadly did not merit his written contribution or his blessing upon the completion of the project. We would like to dedicate the fruits of our study to the memory of Hanan Eshel, a man of faith and truth. During the seminar, we realized that a compilation of source documents from traditional Jewish literature, including

Load more