Did Moses write the Torah?

[otseng]

There are two main views regarding the authorship of the Torah (Pentateuch). The traditional view holds that Moses wrote it during the Exodus from Egypt, around the 15th or 13th century BC, depending on the early or late date of the Exodus. The scholarly view proposes that the Torah was compiled during the post-exilic period in Persia, between approximately 539 and 333 BC.

Debate topic: Did Moses write the Torah?

[POI]

There are two main views regarding the authorship of the Torah (Pentateuch). The traditional view holds that Moses wrote it during the Exodus from Egypt, around the 15th or 13th century BC, depending on the early or late date of the Exodus. The scholarly view proposes that the Torah was compiled during the post-exilic period in Persia, between approximately 539 and 333 BC.

Debate topic: Did Moses write the Torah?

I would first like to know your position, as it is yet another one of those debated topics.... Is your position that...

a) Moses wrote all of the Torah?
b) Moses wrote some of the Torah?
c) other?

[POI]

There are two main views regarding the authorship of the Torah (Pentateuch). The traditional view holds that Moses wrote it during the Exodus from Egypt, around the 15th or 13th century BC, depending on the early or late date of the Exodus. The scholarly view proposes that the Torah was compiled during the post-exilic period in Persia, between approximately 539 and 333 BC.

Debate topic: Did Moses write the Torah?

Second response, in which I'm open to adjust, but it's almost pointless anyways.... I'll explain below.

Did Moses actually exist? Dunno? Maybe so, maybe not?

Did Moses write the Torah? Dunno? Assuming he really existed, maybe he only wrote some of it and not all of it? But even IF we were to confirm Moses existed, and wrote some/all of it, should a sensible person believe all of what was written within the Pentateuch - (including the supernatural claims)?

At the end of the day, if I were to hold the position that Moses existed, and wrote some/all of the Pentateuch, it would not move my "belief needle" at all, as I simply do not buy any of the supernatural claims within any of the storylines. Call me unsensible if you wish Just because the story can identify with actual events in part, or even in full, does not then bolster any more veracity in the supernatural claims as well.

*************************

And for what it's worth, now that we have the power of AI, here is more fuel to the fire.:

AI Overview:

There is no definitive historical or archaeological evidence outside of the biblical text to confirm the existence of Moses or the Exodus story. Many scholars believe the biblical narrative, including the story of Moses and the Exodus, is a myth or legend, potentially drawing on older Near Eastern myths and adapted to the cultural and religious context of the Israelites.

Here's why some scholars doubt the historicity of Moses:

Lack of Extra-Biblical Evidence: While the Bible describes Moses leading the Israelites out of Egypt, there are no contemporary Egyptian records or archaeological findings that corroborate this event.

Dating Issues: The Exodus story is typically dated to the 13th century BCE, a period with relatively well-documented Egyptian history, yet there is no mention of a large-scale Israelite exodus or related events.

Mythological Parallels: The Moses story shares similarities with other ancient Near Eastern myths and legends, leading some to suggest it is a cultural myth rather than a factual account, according to a World History Encyclopedia article.

The Name "Moses": The name "Moses" is Egyptian, meaning "born of," and is found in other Egyptian names. This doesn't prove the biblical Moses didn't exist, but it does suggest a possible Egyptian origin for the name and potentially the story.

Scholarly Debate: Many scholars, especially historians and archaeologists, find the biblical account problematic and view the Exodus story as a foundational myth for the Israelite religion and identity.

Arguments for historicity are largely based on faith in the biblical text and interpretations of the text as literal history. For example, some point to the appearance of Moses in the Transfiguration of Jesus as evidence of his historical existence, according to A Frank Voice. However, this interpretation is not universally accepted, and even within religious traditions, there is room for interpreting the biblical narrative as having symbolic or mythological elements.

[otseng]

I would first like to know your position, as it is yet another one of those debated topics.... Is your position that...

a) Moses wrote all of the Torah?
b) Moses wrote some of the Torah?
c) other?

My belief is Moses wrote most of the Torah.

as I simply do not buy any of the supernatural claims within any of the storylines.

Whether the supernatural realm exists or not is an entirely different topic. And just because someone writes about the supernatural does not mean they didn't write it.

And for what it's worth, now that we have the power of AI, here is more fuel to the fire.:

As I've demonstrated before, AI can be wrong. So please cite the actual source that AI is referencing in the future so we can look at those.

[otseng]

Debate topic: Did Moses write the Torah?

It is generally accepted multiple authors over a span of time are involved in the writing of the Torah.

The composition of the Torah (or Pentateuch, the first five books of the Hebrew Bible—Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy) was a process that involved multiple authors over an extended period of time.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Composition_of_the_Torah

There is no consensus on what was the process, particularly among scholars.

The precise process by which the Torah was composed, the number of authors involved, and the date of each author remain hotly contested.

Scholars frequently use these newer hypotheses in combination, making it challenging to classify contemporary theories as strictly one or another. The general trend in recent scholarship is to recognize the final form of the Torah as a literary and ideological unity, based on earlier sources, was likely completed during the Persian period (539–333 BCE).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Composition_of_the_Torah

Previously, the documentary hypothesis (DH) was very popular.

The documentary hypothesis (DH) is one of the models used by biblical scholars to explain the origins and composition of the Torah (or Pentateuch, the first five books of the Bible: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy). A version of the documentary hypothesis, frequently identified with the German scholar Julius Wellhausen, was almost universally accepted for most of the 20th century.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Documentary_hypothesis

However, modern scholars have moved away from the classical DH model because of its many problems.

The consensus around the classical documentary hypothesis has now collapsed.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Documentary_hypothesis

Replacing the DH model, other models, such as the "fragmentary" and "supplementary" models, have been proposed.

As a result, there has been a revival of interest in "fragmentary" and "supplementary" models, frequently in combination with each other and with a documentary model, making it difficult to classify contemporary theories as strictly one or another. Modern scholars also have given up the classical Wellhausian dating of the sources, and generally see the completed Torah as a product of the Achaemenid period (probably 450–350 BCE), although some would place its production as late as the Hellenistic period (333–164 BCE), after the conquests of Alexander the Great.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Documentary_hypothesis

In biblical studies, the supplementary hypothesis proposes that the Pentateuch (the first five books of the Bible) was derived from a series of direct additions to an existing corpus of work.

While documentarians originally placed the authorship of the Pentateuch in the 10th to the 6th centuries BCE, the supplementary hypothesis places the authorship of the Pentateuch later, in the 7th to 5th centuries.

The supplementary hypothesis denies the existence of an extensive Elohist (E) source, one of the four independent sources described in the documentary hypothesis.

While the hypothesis is not the only revision of the documentary hypothesis to be made, it is one of the few at the forefront of Pentateuch studies and has been suggested by many scholars.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supplementary_hypothesis

[POI]

My belief is Moses wrote most of the Torah.

Can you please clarify what you mean exactly by 'most of the Torah'? This is a somewhat vague, or an overly broad statement. Since it is a debated topic, I'd like to your position about it? Exactly what part(s) weren't and what parts were written by 'Moses' and how do you know?

And just because someone writes about the supernatural does not mean they didn't write it.

??? I know someone had to write it. Quite honestly, anyone who makes many many many claims of the supernatural is going to raise an eyebrow or two regarding credibility. The question kind of remains though... <Was> Moses an actual person from antiquity? Hmmm? If Moses was not a real dude, then I guess we can obviously rule him out as a viable option.

As I've demonstrated before, AI can be wrong. So please cite the actual source that AI is referencing in the future so we can look at those.

Didn't you also demonstrate that cited source(s) can also be 'wrong'? So really, what's the difference.... Anyone can argue anything. As I've also stated prior, when AI doesn't give one an answer one likes, keep searching.

[otseng]

Can you please clarify what you mean exactly by 'most of the Torah'? This is a somewhat vague, or an overly broad statement. Since it is a debated topic, I'd like to your position about it? Exactly what part(s) weren't and what parts were written by 'Moses' and how do you know?

You asked for my opinion, and I gave it. But this is a debate, so it doesn't really matter what is my opinion, but what is the evidence and rational arguments to support the positions. And we'll look into those arguments in this thread.

Quite honestly, anyone who makes many many many claims of the supernatural is going to raise an eyebrow or two regarding credibility.

Do you accept modern claims in cosmology and physics? Did the universe start with a big bang? Do you believe singularities exist? What about the multiverse? What about the 26 spacetime dimensions in bosonic string theory?

Do you raise an eyebrow to any of these claims? Or do you accept them just because scientists claims these things?

How do you define what is natural and what is supernatural?

The question kind of remains though... <Was> Moses an actual person from antiquity? Hmmm? If Moses was not a real dude, then I guess we can obviously rule him out as a viable option.

Maybe Moses existed, maybe not. If you don't believe he existed, go ahead and present your evidence he did not exist.

Didn't you also demonstrate that cited source(s) can also be 'wrong'? So really, what's the difference....

All of AI is based on sources and AI can interpret those sources incorrectly. And by providing a source, we can all independently verify it. By simply quoting an AI summary, we cannot verify the claims.

[otseng]

It is generally accepted multiple authors over a span of time are involved in the writing of the Torah.

The composition of the Torah (or Pentateuch, the first five books of the Hebrew Bible—Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy) was a process that involved multiple authors over an extended period of time.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Composition_of_the_Torah

There is no consensus on what was the process, particularly among scholars.

I believe there are two options we can rule out on the authorship of the Torah:
1. Moses wrote all of the Torah.
2. The Torah was fabricated out of thin air post-exile without reference to any past historical knowledge.

Moses couldn't have written all of it because it talks about him dying. Obviously if you're dead, you can't write about your death.

Deut 34:5-6 - And Moses the servant of the LORD died there in Moab, as the LORD had said. He buried him in Moab, in the valley opposite Beth Peor, but to this day no one knows where his grave is.

Practically all scholars believe there is some element of truth behind the composition of the Torah. Even if it was written post-exile, the authors had extensive knowledge of Egyptian culture, linguistics, and history. So, somehow they had access to all that information. They could not have written the Torah without such knowledge and written it out of thin air.

So, the authorship of the Torah falls somewhere between these two extremes.

[POI]

Do you raise an eyebrow to any of these claims? Or do you accept them just because scientists claims these things? How do you define what is natural and what is supernatural?

We've touched on this before. Claims which have never been demonstrated remain in question. 'Moses', or other, makes many claims which have not been demonstrated. How many indemonstrable claims does the Torah place forth exactly?

Further, do you think both you and I would likely agree as to which claims in the Torah are deemed 'supernatural'?

Maybe Moses existed, maybe not.

Can we reasonably make such statements about any/all stated figures/characters from ancient antiquity (to the same level and degree)? Meaning, if we can be more confident that certain characters from antiquity existed over others, then where exactly does Moses line up within this (confidence barometer) -- low, medium, high, other?

I believe there are two options we can rule out on the authorship of the Torah:
1. Moses wrote all of the Torah.
2. The Torah was fabricated out of thin air post-exile without reference to any past historical knowledge.

Moses couldn't have written all of it because it talks about him dying. Obviously if you're dead, you can't write about your death.

Deut 34:5-6 - And Moses the servant of the LORD died there in Moab, as the LORD had said. He buried him in Moab, in the valley opposite Beth Peor, but to this day no one knows where his grave is.

Okay. Does this mean your position is that any part of the Torah which mentions Moses in the third person, or mentions his death, or any other obvious verse(s), was written from someone else? And all the rest is from Moses? And if so, who else wrote the rest of it and when?

Practically all scholars believe there is some element of truth behind the composition of the Torah. Even if it was written post-exile, the authors had extensive knowledge of Egyptian culture, linguistics, and history. So, somehow they had access to all that information. They could not have written the Torah without such knowledge and written it out of thin air.

Right. This is stated in my latest conclusion in the Exodus thread. In that the Bible authors likely borrowed/enhanced/embellished/other from other known events?.?.?.? As with all 'fake news', there can still be nuggets of truth. For example:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Exodus

"Most mainstream scholars do not accept the biblical Exodus account as historical for a number of reasons. It is generally agreed that the Exodus stories were written centuries after the apparent setting of the stories.[5] Archaeologists Israel Finkelstein and Neil Asher Silberman argue that archaeology has not found evidence for even a small band of wandering Israelites living in the Sinai: "The conclusion – that Exodus did not happen at the time and in the manner described in the Bible – seems irrefutable [...] repeated excavations and surveys throughout the entire area have not provided even the slightest evidence".[7] Instead, they argue how modern archaeology suggests continuity between Canaanite and Israelite settlements, indicating a heavily Canaanite origin for Israel, with little suggestion that a group of foreigners from Egypt comprised early Israel.[8][9] They also argue that the exodus narrative perhaps evolved from vague memories of the Hyksos expulsion, spun to encourage resistance to the 7th century domination of Judah by Egypt.

However, a majority of scholars believe that the story has a historical core,[11][12] despite disagreeing widely about what that historical kernel might have been.... (etc)"