Linguistic Evidence for Mosaic Authorship 5

Linguistic Evidence for Mosaic Authorship 5

CORNERSTONE UNIVERSITY

LINGUISTIC EVIDENCE FOR MOSAIC AUTHORSHIP OF THE TORAH:

THE INFLUENCE OF THE EGYPTIAN LANGUAGE UPON THE HEBREW TEXT

WRITTEN FOR

REL223: BIBLICAL CRITICISM

PROFESSOR ANDREW SMITH

BY

BRIAN TICE / BOX 3594

8 DECEMBER 2006

A feature of written language which aids greatly in determining the authorship of literary works is the perhaps unconscious propensity of authors to flavor their texts with cues as to their background and life experience. The Bible[1] and its authors stand as no exception to this phenomenon. Just as the Greek of Matthew and Mark borrow words and phrases from Aramaic, and the Aramaic of Daniel borrows from Persian; even the ancient Hebrew of the Torah could not escape the phenomenon. The fact that the Torah contains loanwords from ancient Egyptian stands as strong evidence supporting the work’s traditional claim of Mosaic authorship.

The language of the Bible is an eclectic one, consisting not only of its three main languages – Hebrew, koinhv Greek, and Aramaic – but also of several languages representing cultures with which Israel has interacted during her long history. Many of those cultures introduced aspects of their respective languages into the vernacular of the Judeo-Messianic canon’s authors, and thus into the text of Scripture. These linguistic influences may take the form of idiomatic expressions or even loanwords, carried directly over into the Biblical language, untranslated and uninflected.

Linguistic-critical study of the biblical texts examines the text for language-based cues as to elements (including date of composition, identity of the author(s), and cultural influences upon the author of the text) which may aid in interpretation of the original intended message or purpose of the document in question. Such study must, therefore, not be limited to the primary languages of the Bible, but should be tailored to include any other languages which contribute to the work, as well. In the case of the Torah, this means investigating the numerous occurrences of Egyptian loanwords.

In the earliest days of the Judeo-Messianic faith, it had been accepted as an undisputed truth that Moses was the author of the Torah. While some scholars, notably Rabbi Simeon, believed that even the last 8 verses of Deuteronomy, which relate the account of Moses’ death and funeral, were written by Moses under Divine direction; the Babylonian Talmud credits that portion to another author – Joshua, but retains the claim of Mosaic authorship upon the rest of the Torah.[2] Archer says in regard to this tradition that the post-mosaic appendix “furnishes only that type of obituary which is often appended to the final work of great men of letters.”[3]

The body of Scriptural evidence supporting Mosaic authorship of the Torah is immense. Internal to the Torah itself are numerous verses indicating that Moses wrote down the words given him by Adonai (cf. Ex. 17:14; 24:4; 34:27; Num. 33:2; Deut. 31:9; 31:24, et al). The Haftarah likewise attributes the Torah to Moses in several instances, not least of which is Joshua 8:32, whose authorship is undisputed as being the work of Joshua and written in pre-Davidic times. The Haftarah clearly indicates, moreover, that the Torah was extant in written form (not oral) in a plethora of verses including Joshua 1:8, 8:31 and 34, and 23:6; I Kings 2:3; II Kings 14:6, Ezra 6:18; Nehemiah 8:1 and 14; and Daniel 9:13. Mosaic authorship is also declared by New Testament writers Matthew (19:7-8), Mark (12:19), Luke (Lk 2:22, Acts 26:22), John the Immerser (Jn. 8:5; Rev. 15:3), Paul (Rom. 10:5, I Cor. 9:9), and the writer of Hebrews (9:19). Most important to Christian scholars is the fact that Jesus (G-d Himself) seems to have understood the Torah to be the work of Moses, based on Mark 7:10, Luke 5:14, et al, and is most emphatic about that point in John 5:45-47.

Several sources outside the Bible stand alongside it in insisting upon Moses as the Torah’s author. Besides the Babylonian Talmud (discussed earlier), these extra-Biblical sources also include Josephus, who wrote, “For we have not an innumerable multitude of books among us… but only 22 books, which are justly believed to be divine; and of them, five belong to Moses, which contain his laws.”[4] All this evidence not withstanding, however, the issue of Mosaic authorship of the Torah has come under fire in recent generations.

Critics of the position of Mosaic authorship of the Torah argue their case primarily upon their claim of a “late date” of authorship. The “Documentary Hypothesis” (JEDP) insists that some portions were penned in the time of Ezekiel and the Babylonian exile (after 586 BCE/Creation Year 3184), and other portions are given a date of not more than two hundred to three hundred years earlier, indicating a time well after the Exodus and far removed from any Egyptian influence over the Israelite people.[5] While the counter-argument can be effectively made any of from several textual-critical disciplines, one of the most compelling cases comes from the discipline of linguistic criticism.

The late dates often attributed to the Torah or portions thereof are assigned to the text based upon the presupposition that elements of the Genesis account which are echoed in Babylonian pre-history narratives must necessarily have been original to the Babylonians rather than to the Hebrews, and were thus adopted by the Hebrews during the time in which they were held in captivity under Babylonia. This view gained popularity most notably through the contributions of Wilhelm Spiegelberg, an Egyptologist not at all competent in the Hebrew language, and a Biblical scholar in his employ who knew not a single word of Egyptian – a clear case of the blind leading the blind![6] The absence of Akkadian (Babylonian) loanwords and overwhelming presence of Egyptian loanwords in the Torah text casts considerable doubt upon the Babylonian influence premise, rendering it implausible at best.[7]

JEDP-proponents also argue that there is too much variety of vocabulary in the Torah to credit the work to a single author. The fact that two different words are used to denote the window in the ark (Gen. 7:11, 8:2, and 8:6) is sometimes cited as evidence of that claim. As noted by W. J. Martin, however, this type of variety is quite common both among contemporary and ancient writers. Consider that “the Iliad uses 1500 words none of which occurs in the Odyssey” and “in the works of Shakespeare, the word ‘pious’ is found only in Hamlet and subsequent plays.” [8] A considerably stronger case can be made from the number of words that appear almost exclusively in the Torah and direct quotations therefrom.

Another chief argument of JEDP-proponents is that during Moses’ time, there was not yet a written form of the Hebrew language. Assyriologist A. H. Sayce confirms, however, from both Egyptological and Assyriological findings, that “centuries before Abraham was born, Egypt and Babylonia were alike full of schools and libraries, of teachers and pupils, of poets and prose-writers, and of the literary works which they had composed.”[9] His assertion is echoed by W. F. Albright, who insists that “writing was well known in Palestine and Syria throughout the Patriarchal Age (Middle Bronze, 2100-1500 BCE),” citing five different forms of writing then in use in Egypt, Akkadia, Phoenicia, Sinai, and Ugarit.[10]

The Hebrew language, over the course of the past 3000-4000 years, has adopted unto itself words from the languages of other cultures with whom the Hebrews have had close contact or relations. Yahuda suggests that in following the changes seen in the Hebrew language over time, the geographical history of those who spoke it can be ascertained. Though claims have been made that similarities between Hebrew and Babylonian religions are owing to Israel borrowing Babylonian traditions, the influence of Assyro-Babylonian on the Torah is much less than that of the Egyptian language, explainable only by a common Hebrew-Egyptian environment near to the time of the documents creation.[11]

Egyptian influence can even be seen in the name of the individual identified in the text itself as the author of the Torah. “Moses” is most likely Egyptian rather than Hebrew, suggesting that it is the particle mose or mes found at the end of many theophorical names of Pharaohs and their heirs. The suffix carries the meaning “born of….” Yahuda writes, “It is assumed that the name was originally preceded by the name of a god,” as in Rameses (born of Ra) or Thutmose (born of Thoth). Even the Hebrew version of the name, “Moshe,” is most likely Egyptian in form, combining the two words mu (seed of) and sheh (the water). The Nile River was commonly referred to in Egypt as simply “the water” during Moses’ time.[12]

Moses is recognized in the Torah account as having been raised in Pharaoh’s court as the adopted son of Pharaoh’s daughter. Hoffmeier notes that “the raising of foreigner children in the court nursery (a la Moses) is well attested in the 18th Dynasty.”[13] It may also be considered fairly certain that young Moses would have been educated at the high level typically bestowed upon Egyptian royalty – trained in the language and traditions of Egyptian culture, as well as in those of his own Jewish culture.

Hoffmeier also observes, “The birth narratives about Moses are full of words of Egyptian origin....”[14] The text of Exodus 2:3 reads thus, with Egyptian words in italics: “When she could no longer hide him, she took a papyrus basket (h'bET, the same word used elsewhere as ‘ark’),[15] coated it with clay and tar, put the child in it and placed it among the reeds on the riverbank (rOa.y).” Yahuda counts at least eighteen Egyptian loanwords in the full account of Moses’ infancy.[16] Egyptian words are used far more heavily in the Torah than elsewhere in the Tanakh, i.e. shesh (bleached stuff) – used 34 times in Torah, but only 6 times in the Haftarah (Neviim and Kethuvim portions of the Tanakh).[17]

It is also noteworthy that the Torah refers to the ruler of Egypt not by his proper name, but simply as “Pharaoh.” This was customary in Egypt for only a short time, including the time of the Exodus (by either dating model), but had ceased to be practiced after the fall of the 20th Dynasty, about 1100 BCE (Creation Year 2660) – five hundred to six hundred years prior to the date JEDP-subscribers hold for the writing of the Torah.[18] This serves as a linguistic cue, as well, indicating that at least the scroll of Exodus was written during the timeframe in which Pharaoh’s given name was not spoken by his subjects. Though this may not qualify as “use of a loanword” in the strictest sense, it is illustrative of a foreign custom reflected in the text – a sort of loan-linguistic protocol, indicating Egyptian influence upon the text’s author.

In the Torah account of Joseph interpreting the dreams of Pharaoh, the expression that Moses uses to record one of the key elements of the oneiromantic interpretation is reneput-hekeret, Egyptian for “years of famine” (Gen 41:54). This entire pericope, in the Hebrew, uses the word “hear” to mean “understand,” which reflects the fact that in Egyptian, both meanings attach to the same word. In Hebrew, such is not the case, “hear” ([;;mvf) corresponding instead to “obey.” Currid notes that Potiphar is called a syrisf (saris), a word used forty times in the Hebrew canon. While all scholars agree that it is an Egyptian word rather than a Hebrew one, there is widespread disagreement as to its meaning.[19]

The name given to Joseph by Pharaoh in the account, too, is Egyptian: Zaphnath-paaneah (Gen 41:45), which translates to “feeder of Egypt”. The use of the Hebrew mashbir (feeder, nourisher) in Genesis 42:6 echoes the Egyptian name given in the previous chapter. Names borne by others in the account also reflect Egyptian linguistic origins. Joseph Free observes, “The types of Egyptian names found in the Joseph story, such as Potiphera and Asenath (Joseph’s Egyptian wife), are not unknown in the ‘early periods’ of Egyptian history.”[20]

Other Egyptian idioms occur throughout the text of the Torah, such as in Exodus 4:16 where the Egyptian idiom “for you, he will be a mouth; and for him, you will be a god” is used. The idiom refers to the mouth (ra) of the Pharaoh, his spokesperson – a position so gravely important in Egypt that it could only be held by members of the highest echelon of society.[21] This is again referenced in Exodus 7:1 with the passage, “I have put you in a place of god (the Hebrew elohim standing in for the Egyptian ntr) over Pharaoh, and Aaron will be your mouthpiece.” What is lacking from the Torah are such occurrences of Babylonian idioms. Many of what critics had claimed as Babylonian influenced words and idioms have been since found to bear closer ties to other languages to which the Hebrews were exposed pre-exile.[22]

Another loanword is introduced in Exodus 7, as well, but this time the word carries on into the rest of the canon. Currid asserts, “The Hebrew term motrxa (v. 11) was certainly borrowed from the Egyptian chry-hbt.”[23] This loanword, pronounced chartóm, which is usually translated “magician,” is the same word used of the Zoroastrian Magi in the Aramaic of Daniel 2-5. The word “forefathers” is also an Egyptism, and is used 125 times in the text of the Torah, including a reference to Pharaoh’s forefathers in Exodus 10:6.[24] Even the Hebrew name for Egypt reflects influence from the Egyptian language. Mitzrayim is a dual form,[25] meaning “two lands” in reference to upper Egypt and lower Egypt. It is presumably derived from the 14th Century BCE (Creation Years 2360-2459) Egyptian common name for the land, Misri, as seen in period documents such as the Tell-el-Amarna tablets. The official name of the land was Tawi, meaning “twin land.”[26]