Some of this thread is the theory of the development of the Hebrew language, and like any theory, it provides a possible answer unless disproven of replaced by a better one. I have read several books over the years on how languages of any kind develop, and I am no closer to being an expert than when I started! Now given that, I thought I would throw a few more items into the mix, since I do speak the language and have studied the texts in question.
First of all, the source for the hebrewe language is most likely related to the development of the other semitic langues, given the similarities in style and syntax. Hebrew and Aramaic are not that different, and if you have mastered one, you can read the other. Arabic is a cousin, and the speaker of one can shift to the other with some moderate effort, but not much. Finally, there are a handful of words in the Torah that have always been problematic, since they are Aramaic ones, and not Hebrew, and commentators have come up with some interesting mental gymnastics to explain those.
As far as Moses being the author of the first book, that comes from the single statement that he wrote the sefer haBrit when he came down from the mountain, and many religious commentators make an assumption. But in truth, the story never says what that book was any more than what was in the "book of wars" and so forth.
I would disagree with what it takes to write a scroll. My son in law is a scribe, and while there are a few common elements (the ink is from a common material that needs to crumble with time) and is written on leather, which, while a bit laborous, there usually isn't a lack of cows, sheep, goats, or whatever to write upon their skin.
On the other hand, historically, we know that during the time of Ezra, the Jews were mostly illiterate, and had no real connection with their belief system. According to the jewish writers, it was not the cream of the crop that left with Ezra, but the bottom of the bowl of society. And why call him a scribe? Perhaps he was the writer? It is one way of looking at it. And who were the men of the Great Assembly that put the book together? Nobody knows for sure. Were they great because of their size? Certainly they were not great because of their knowledge.
Now to touch on the Septuigint.
Why is it called that at all? If you are referring to Jewish legend that 70 Rabbis wrote it in seperate jail cess and brought them to the greek King and a miracle happened that they were all the same - well, that is a legend. And if you accept that part of the legend, then why not the part where there is a description of certain passages that they changed because of an assortment of translation issues, problems that are not in the modern text called by the same name. But we really don't know why the Septuigint is called that for certain, but everyone has a theory - each one better or worse than the other.
Finally, an interesting point on the DSS - apparently, there are 2 forms of ancient Hebrew writing, the priestly (modern) form, and the common (paleo-hebrew) form. In the Torah scrolls that were discarded, you find the tetragrammaton written in paleo-hebrew while the rest is in priestly hebrew. You can interpret this as the paleo-hebrew being more important, or less, depending on your bent on things.
There have been changes, edits, and the like. As to the origin of it all, and how it all started, and who wrote what, and how the language and religion developed, nobody really knows. All we really know is that it's literature, like the works of Homer. But unlike Homer, where people do not believe in giant cyclops or witches that turn men into pigs, people have devoted their lives and, tragically, have given up their lives for these writings, willing to be burnt alive as a kiddush HaShem, as an honor to a god who was never there.
Chaval!
First of all, the source for the hebrewe language is most likely related to the development of the other semitic langues, given the similarities in style and syntax. Hebrew and Aramaic are not that different, and if you have mastered one, you can read the other. Arabic is a cousin, and the speaker of one can shift to the other with some moderate effort, but not much. Finally, there are a handful of words in the Torah that have always been problematic, since they are Aramaic ones, and not Hebrew, and commentators have come up with some interesting mental gymnastics to explain those.
As far as Moses being the author of the first book, that comes from the single statement that he wrote the sefer haBrit when he came down from the mountain, and many religious commentators make an assumption. But in truth, the story never says what that book was any more than what was in the "book of wars" and so forth.
I would disagree with what it takes to write a scroll. My son in law is a scribe, and while there are a few common elements (the ink is from a common material that needs to crumble with time) and is written on leather, which, while a bit laborous, there usually isn't a lack of cows, sheep, goats, or whatever to write upon their skin.
On the other hand, historically, we know that during the time of Ezra, the Jews were mostly illiterate, and had no real connection with their belief system. According to the jewish writers, it was not the cream of the crop that left with Ezra, but the bottom of the bowl of society. And why call him a scribe? Perhaps he was the writer? It is one way of looking at it. And who were the men of the Great Assembly that put the book together? Nobody knows for sure. Were they great because of their size? Certainly they were not great because of their knowledge.
Now to touch on the Septuigint.
Why is it called that at all? If you are referring to Jewish legend that 70 Rabbis wrote it in seperate jail cess and brought them to the greek King and a miracle happened that they were all the same - well, that is a legend. And if you accept that part of the legend, then why not the part where there is a description of certain passages that they changed because of an assortment of translation issues, problems that are not in the modern text called by the same name. But we really don't know why the Septuigint is called that for certain, but everyone has a theory - each one better or worse than the other.
Finally, an interesting point on the DSS - apparently, there are 2 forms of ancient Hebrew writing, the priestly (modern) form, and the common (paleo-hebrew) form. In the Torah scrolls that were discarded, you find the tetragrammaton written in paleo-hebrew while the rest is in priestly hebrew. You can interpret this as the paleo-hebrew being more important, or less, depending on your bent on things.
There have been changes, edits, and the like. As to the origin of it all, and how it all started, and who wrote what, and how the language and religion developed, nobody really knows. All we really know is that it's literature, like the works of Homer. But unlike Homer, where people do not believe in giant cyclops or witches that turn men into pigs, people have devoted their lives and, tragically, have given up their lives for these writings, willing to be burnt alive as a kiddush HaShem, as an honor to a god who was never there.
Chaval!
“I've done everything the Bible says — even the stuff that contradicts the other stuff!"— Ned Flanders
