Parsha Insights - Vuetchanan 2007

We read in our parsha this past week

(Deut 7:7)
לֹא מֵרֻבְּכֶם מִכָּל-הָעַמִּים, חָשַׁק יְהוָה בָּכֶם--וַיִּבְחַר בָּכֶם: כִּי-אַתֶּם הַמְעַט, מִכָּל-הָעַמִּים.
In English:
The LORD did not set His love upon you, nor choose you, because ye were more in number than any people--for ye were the fewest of all peoples

So, Israel is much smaller than the other nations. Lest someone say that it is not so, I'll point out that the Torah actually says this many times.
Deut 4:38 לְהוֹרִישׁ, גּוֹיִם גְּדֹלִים וַעֲצֻמִים מִמְּךָ--מִפָּנֶיךָ
Deut 7:1 וְנָשַׁל גּוֹיִם-רַבִּים מִפָּנֶיךָ הַחִתִּי וְהַגִּרְגָּשִׁי וְהָאֱמֹרִי וְהַכְּנַעֲנִי וְהַפְּרִזִּי, וְהַחִוִּי וְהַיְבוּסִי--שִׁבְעָה גוֹיִם, רַבִּים וַעֲצוּמִים מִמֶּךָּ

What exactly does that mean? According to these websites:

here and here

the population of the world at the time of the Exodus was 50 million.

I'm not sure how reliable that number is, but if I shoot forward 1,000 years to the year 0 C.E. the range of estimates I get is 170-400 million
here, here, here, and here

so, to me, assuming 50 million 1,000 years prior seems to fit.

So, if the world population is 50 million, and the Jewish population is 2 million, how exactly are they "the smallest of all the nations?" How many nations are there? Remember, Israel alone has 7 nations and Israel is a very small part of the world. What about Egypt, Aram, Moav, Amon, Edom? What about the Phoenicians? Greeks? All the bnei Yefet? the Germanic tribes? Africa? The Native Americans? Chinese? Asian Indians? Australians? I'm assuming the 50 million estimate is including all of them. I'm assuming the portion of the 50 million that resided in Israel was small, and yet, we seem to be saying that Israel contained a population of at least 14 million people.

I'm not sure, but, consider this. If indeed the Torah is correct, there must have been more than 14 million people living in Israel since at the time since it had 7 nations. Modern day Israel is 20,770 sq km,. Ancient Israel was smaller, so let's say it was 10,000 square km.

According to this website, the maximum amount of people you can stick into 1 sq km is enough for 12 people

This means, ancient Israel, which I'm assuming was 10,000 sq km would have been able to hold a maximum of 100,000 people. The Torah is saying it held more than 14 million. And, that's the best case scenario. In reality, things are worse than they seem because:
1. The Torah implies Israel's population was MORE than 14 million
2. Not all of Israel was inhabited. Some of it would have been desert or forest. For example, see Josh 17:15
וַיֹּאמֶר אֲלֵיהֶם יְהוֹשֻׁעַ, אִם-עַם-רַב אַתָּה עֲלֵה לְךָ הַיַּעְרָה, וּבֵרֵאתָ לְךָ שָׁם, בְּאֶרֶץ הַפְּרִזִּי וְהָרְפָאִים: כִּי-אָץ לְךָ, הַר-אֶפְרָיִם
And Joshua said unto them: 'If thou be a great people, get thee up to the forest, and cut down for thyself there in the land of the Perizzites and of the Rephaim; since the hill-country of Ephraim is too narrow for thee.'
3. 10 people per sq km is a maximum amount and only for irrigated locals. Israel wasn't irrigated. If we use the number for non irrigated locals we have only room for 10,000 people.

If the Bible's numbers are correct, there would have been more than one person living in every 714 sq meters in Israel. That means every person's land would be a plot of 26 meters by 26 meters, or 88 feet by 88 feet, and again, it would be much smaller due to the reasons noted above. I don't really know enough about farming to know how feasible that is, but the websites above don't seem to think it's that feasible. But, anyway, you can look at it like this. If the entire planet was that densley populated, the population of the Earth would be 209 Billion people. And, remember, it should be more than that since Israel is SMALLER than the 7 nations, not the same size. So, unless we have some reason to assume Israel is somehow special, we are basicaly saying the population of the Earth was over 200 billion at the year 1,000 BCE.

And, finally, if there were 14 million people living in Israel at the time, why is there no archaeological evidence for that?

Ger, Yatom, Almanah

This trio appears 11 times in D. 5 with Levi and 6 without.

Ger, Yatom, Almanah, & Levi in D:
1. דברים פרק יד פסוק כט
וּבָא הַלֵּוִי כִּי אֵין לוֹ חֵלֶק וְנַחֲלָה עִמָּךְ וְהַגֵּר
וְהַיָּתוֹם וְהָאַלְמָנָה אֲשֶׁר בִּשְׁעָרֶיךָ
2. דברים פרק טז פסוק יא
וְשָׂמַחְתָּ לִפְנֵי יְקֹוָק אֱלֹהֶיךָ אַתָּה וּבִנְךָ וּבִתֶּךָ וְעַבְדְּךָ וַאֲמָתֶךָ וְהַלֵּוִי אֲשֶׁר בִּשְׁעָרֶיךָ וְהַגֵּר
וְהַיָּתוֹם וְהָאַלְמָנָה אֲשֶׁר בְּקִרְבֶּךָ
3. דברים פרק טז פסוק יד
וְשָׂמַחְתָּ בְּחַגֶּךָ אַתָּה וּבִנְךָ וּבִתֶּךָ וְעַבְדְּךָ וַאֲמָתֶךָ וְהַלֵּוִי וְהַגֵּר
וְהַיָּתוֹם וְהָאַלְמָנָה אֲשֶׁר בִּשְׁעָרֶיךָ:
4. דברים פרק כו פסוק יב
כִּי תְכַלֶּה לַעְשֵׂר אֶת כָּל מַעְשַׂר תְּבוּאָתְךָ בַּשָּׁנָה הַשְּׁלִישִׁת שְׁנַת הַמַּעֲשֵׂר וְנָתַתָּה לַלֵּוִי לַגֵּר
לַיָּתוֹם וְלָאַלְמָנָה וְאָכְלוּ בִשְׁעָרֶיךָ וְשָׂבֵעוּ
5. דברים פרק כו פסוק יג
וְאָמַרְתָּ לִפְנֵי יְקֹוָק אֱלֹהֶיךָ בִּעַרְתִּי הַקֹּדֶשׁ מִן הַבַּיִת וְגַם נְתַתִּיו
לַלֵּוִי וְלַגֵּר
לַיָּתוֹם וְלָאַלְמָנָה כְּכָל מִצְוָתְךָ אֲשֶׁר צִוִּיתָנִי לֹא עָבַרְתִּי מִמִּצְוֹתֶיךָ וְלֹא

Ger, Yatom, Almanah in D:
1.
דברים פרק י פסוק יח
עֹשֶׂה מִשְׁפַּט יָתוֹם וְאַלְמָנָה וְאֹהֵב גֵּר לָתֶת לוֹ לֶחֶם וְשִׂמְלָה
2. דברים פרק כד פסוק יז
לֹא תַטֶּה מִשְׁפַּט גֵּר
יָתוֹם וְלֹא תַחֲבֹל בֶּגֶד אַלְמָנָה
3. דברים פרק כד פסוק יט
כִּי תִקְצֹר קְצִירְךָ בְשָׂדֶךָ וְשָׁכַחְתָּ עֹמֶר בַּשָּׂדֶה לֹא תָשׁוּב לְקַחְתּוֹ לַגֵּר
לַיָּתוֹם וְלָאַלְמָנָה יִהְיֶה לְמַעַן יְבָרֶכְךָ יְקֹוָק אֱלֹהֶיךָ בְּכֹל מַעֲשֵׂה יָדֶיךָ
4. דברים פרק כד פסוק כ
כִּי תַחְבֹּט זֵיתְךָ לֹא תְפַאֵר אַחֲרֶיךָ לַגֵּר
לַיָּתוֹם וְלָאַלְמָנָה יִהְיֶה: ס
5.דברים פרק כד פסוק כא
כִּי תִבְצֹר כַּרְמְךָ לֹא תְעוֹלֵל אַחֲרֶיךָ לַגֵּר
לַיָּתוֹם וְלָאַלְמָנָה יִהְיֶה
6. דברים פרק כז פסוק יט
אָרוּר מַטֶּה מִשְׁפַּט גֵּר
יָתוֹם וְאַלְמָנָה וְאָמַר כָּל הָעָם אָמֵן


It never really appears outside of D. Though, Ex 22:20
וְגֵר לֹא-תוֹנֶה, וְלֹא תִלְחָצֶנּוּ: כִּי-גֵרִים הֱיִיתֶם, בְּאֶרֶץ מִצְרָיִם
is juxtiposed to Ex 22:21
כָּל-אַלְמָנָה וְיָתוֹם, לֹא תְעַנּוּן
However, note there is a marked difference between this instance and the others in that in this case, the ger is sperate from the yatom and almonah, just next to it. In all of the D instances, the trio is combined. Note, also, in D, the passuk is usualy about charity though in the verse in Ex it is about not opressing the yatom et al (though some of the verses in D resemble that theme).

Temunah

Temunah (meaning avodah zurah) in D:
1. Ex 20:3
לֹא-תַעֲשֶׂה לְךָ פֶסֶל, וְכָל-תְּמוּנָה
2. Deut 4:16,
פֶּן-תַּשְׁחִתוּן--וַעֲשִׂיתֶם לָכֶם פֶּסֶל, תְּמוּנַת כָּל-סָמֶל
3. Deut 4:23,
וַעֲשִׂיתֶם לָכֶם פֶּסֶל תְּמוּנַת כֹּל, אֲשֶׁר צִוְּךָ יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ
4. Deut 4:25,
וְהִשְׁחַתֶּם, וַעֲשִׂיתֶם פֶּסֶל תְּמוּנַת כֹּל
5. Deut 5:7
לֹא-תַעֲשֶׂה לְךָ פֶסֶל, כָּל-תְּמוּנָה

Temunah (meaning avodah zurah) outside of D:

nowhere

Pesel

Pesel in D

1. ex 20:3

לֹא-תַעֲשֶׂה לְךָ פֶסֶל, וְכָל-תְּמוּנָה,

2. Deut 4:16,

פֶּן-תַּשְׁחִתוּן--וַעֲשִׂיתֶם לָכֶם פֶּסֶל, תְּמוּנַת כָּל-סָמֶל:

3. Deut 4:23,
וַעֲשִׂיתֶם לָכֶם פֶּסֶל תְּמוּנַת כֹּל

4. Deut 4:25,

וְהִשְׁחַתֶּם, וַעֲשִׂיתֶם פֶּסֶל תְּמוּנַת כֹּל
5. Deut 5:7,

לֹא-תַעֲשֶׂה לְךָ פֶסֶל, כָּל-תְּמוּנָה

6. Deut 7:5,

וַאֲשֵׁירֵהֶם, תְּגַדֵּעוּן, וּפְסִילֵיהֶם, תִּשְׂרְפוּן בָּאֵשׁ

7. Deut 7:25,

פְּסִילֵי אֱלֹהֵיהֶם, תִּשְׂרְפוּן בָּאֵשׁ

8. Deut 12:3,

וּפְסִילֵי אֱלֹהֵיהֶם תְּגַדֵּעוּן

9. Deut 27:15

אָרוּר הָאִישׁ אֲשֶׁר יַעֲשֶׂה פֶסֶל וּמַסֵּכָה תּוֹעֲבַת יְהוָה

Pesel in the rest of the Torah:

1. Lev 26:1

לֹא-תַעֲשׂוּ לָכֶם אֱלִילִם, וּפֶסֶל וּמַצֵּבָה לֹא-תָקִימוּ לָכֶם

Coincidence?

Genesis 1 - 11

A few months ago, I posted that the literal interpretation of Gen 1 – 11 did not transpire.

The question is, what is the implication of this for our theology? It’s a complex question. Does it mean the whole theology is wrong? All made up? Does it mean the Torah is indeed Divinely inspired but not Divinely written, and the author genuinely made an error? Does it imply that God can err? There are many possibilities. Of course, I personally, favor the view that says “it’s all made up.”

Some have attempted to sidestep the whole question by arguing that the original intent of the author was that these events were metaphorical. I have 3 problems with this view.


1, There’s no reason to assume Gen 1 – 11 is mythology. If one assumes it is mythology, than why don’t we think the whole Torah (including maamad Har Sinai) is mythology, what’s the difference?

2. A priori, there’s no reason to assume that there should be a correlation between the verifiable portions of the Torah and those that are mythology. In other words, isn’t it convenient, that precisely those chapters that can be tested scientifically are assumed to be those that are a mushul and those that can’t ever be confirmed or disproved are those that are assumed to be factual?

3. Very simply, the chapters just don’t sound like they are anything but literal. Below, I’ve listed 8 textual reasons why I assume these chapters were not meant metaphorically. By metaphorically, I mean have no basis in reality at all. One might suggest instead that these stories have some basis in reality, but not all the details are correct (e.g. local flood). In that case, some of these arguments would apply and some would not. However, in that case, other arguments would refute that view.

a. The chain of lineage from Adam to Moshe is unbroken in the text. If some of these people existed and some didn’t, you have a situation of a fiction character begetting a real one, a feat worthy of Cervantes, not a Divine book

b. The lineage articulated in Genesis is repeated in Chronicles as part of a very technical family tree giving the yichus of King David. It would be highly odd for such a lineage to be employed in such a fashion if it was fictional.

c. Read Genesis 5 and similar chapters in Gen 1 - 11. They are dense with technical details and are worthy of a town ledger, or an accounting firm, not mythology.

d. Much of the mythology revolves around explaining observed facts in our world. The origin of species is one example. Another is the diversity of nations and language explained by the palagah. It’s pretty obvious that the purpose of those chapters is to explain this diversity. Actually, the Torah says this numerous times explicitly. How does a story explain an observed phenomenon if the story is not factual? If anything, these stories are the least likely in the Torah to be nonfactual (in the mind of the author) because the author seems to be attempting to explain real world observed phenomenon

e. Many of the players in the stories are ancestors of specific nations and there’s a clear attempt to explain the lineage of those nations. For example, read Gen 10:6. And then see 10:20

This is clearly an attempt to give the origin of the Egyptian people. How does that work in a fictional story? And yet, when you do the math, the person the Bible calls “Mitzraim” lived after Egyptian civilization arose.

f. Gen 1 – 11 is literarily part of the same unit that defines much of the rest of the Torah. For example, the “Toldos” literary feature is found a few times in Gen 1 – 11 and also in the rest of Genesis. The theme of “Pru Urvu” begins and Genesis 1, but continues afterwards even into the latter books of the Pentateuch. If the book is one unified whole, it’s weird to say that part is mythology and part is real – unless you are comfortable saying the Exodus didn’t happen either.

g. The factual stories (like the Exodus) are alongside the fictional mythologies (like Gen 1 – 11) with no discernable difference.

h. One of the problems with Gen 1 – 11 is the very long ages. But, the ages don’t normalize till after the book of Joshua. Consider the following lifespans:

Avraham – 175
Yishmael - 137
Yitzchak – 180
Yaakov – 147
Levi – 137
Kehas – 133
Moshe – 120
Aaron – 123
Yehoshua – 110

So, basically, everyone lives to be over 100. Note, this is after Gen 1 – 11 is over. Are we really expected to believe that these events are factual? If not, and they are metaphorical, does that mean the rest of the Exodus is also a metaphor? Is it just the ages that are metaphorical, stuck in amongst fact? If anything, one would expect the ages precisely to be the non metaphorical elements. They seem dry and statistical.

Desolate, With No One Living There

(except for the 700,000 people who do)