Thetorah.com is leaning hard into the Ten Commandments' origins: Horeb / Sinai and then the Decalogue. "Decalogue" interprets that 'asharat al-kalimâti construct as a compound word, as perhaps it should at least in Hebrew. I'd not blogged the former but, two make a trend, especially if Paleojudaica notes both.
From Edenburg: Exodus 19 is a theophany, of YHWH, who does not propose to reveal the Law there. In the next chapter the people react to the vision of their Lord. So at first, He was to reveal only Himself. The Law which we modern readers read there got inserted there, by a time-traveller from the more-orthodox Jewish future. So far, so Mattison also; Mattison points out that the Covenant Collection was delivered to Moses afterward in private. Mattison further views Exodus 24 as Priestly so unconcerned with ethics, to no Edenburgian objections. Exodus 24 is, for Mattison, a witness-to (even an argument-for!) the non-Torah version of Exodus 19-20. Neither author so much as mentions Leviticus' Holiness Code; I must surmise Mattison, at least, considers it on par with Jubilees.
Back to Edenburg: Deuteronomy 5 concedes a law revealed to Israel but is inconsistent about how. Hosea 4:1 and Jeremiah 7:9 cite Things Not To Do but don't refer to Sinai/Horeb (you'd think that Jeremiah, at least, would know Deuteronomy).
But but but Mattison says Deuteronomy's whole point is the Decalogue; Deuteronomy is, here, overturning the Covenant Collection. Edenburg would counter: okay... but which Decalogue? There was no prohibition against muh graven images for the Ark itself! Exodus 34:17-26 offers ten such words. They're cultic, not moral.
Edenburg instead sees the moral precepts of Torah as an outgrowth of wisdom-literature and proverbs. Hosea and Jeremiah would be party to these as well, although perhaps not the same copy; it may be Jeremiah simply cited Hosea, and from memory.
No comments:
Post a Comment