When did the authors write the Bible? How can we date the Levitical laws in the first five books of the Bible? Were these laws in the Bible written down during the time of Moses? Is there evidence for a later date for the composition of the legal code in the Pentateuch? The time of the writing of the Bible can be determined by comparing history books like Samuel and law books like Leviticus, and this analysis, among others, reveal that the Torah was composed later than the time of the earliest history books in the Bible. If principle characters in the Bible were law breakers, then Moses composed the entire Torah. If these characters did not follow Torah regulations because they were unfamiliar with the rules (the rules being composed later than their time, by Levites) then it becomes obvious that the Torah evolved gradually over time.
The evidence of the contradictory nature of history and doctrine on the pages of the Torah indicates that the documents did not come from a single source. The Bible is found to be edited in a very strange manner, with variant traditions submerged and blended in an attempt to create the impression that the documents did not contain sources, but rather represent a single source. That it was considered imperative that the Torah be considered to have originated from a single source is obvious, for religious and political reasons (the single source being God who told Moses).
We find that the editing technique that is characteristic of the Torah (submerging, hiding, harmonizing, disguising) is also characteristic of the rest of the Bible. The Levite scribes had the most to gain by propagating the myth of divine authorship, and were the final editors of Biblical manuscripts. They did not allow variants to coexist, since this would undermine the divine authority that they wished to impute to the documents, and thus we find in the Bible the most peculiar form of editing. Sources were preserved, indicating that a dynamic was at work that compelled the Levites not to dispose of sources, even when that would have been more convenient. While sources were preserved, they could not be openly displayed, without revealing the true nature of the documents in question, and thus they were ‘chopped up' and edited together and submerged in the finished manuscripts. The fact that the sources were inconsistent and contradictory allows us to make note of both the sources and the strange editing process.
Evidence is abundant both that the laws and regulations did not come from a single source, that history in the Bible is hardly consistent with the theory of a single source, and the evidence also reveals that in the earliest manuscripts little is known of Levitical regulations and the Torah.
For example, in the early works of Samuel, we are told that "David's sons were priests.' (2 Samuel Chapter 8 verse 18) This is only one of many indications that the authors of the Samuel accounts knew nothing of Leviticus, for example. It was a law, formulated later in the self interest of the Levitical temple priests, that only Levites from the tribe of Levi were allowed to be priests (and there is an even narrower interpretation, formulated by one small faction of Levites, that stated that only Levites who were linear descendants of Aaron were allowed to be priests). The author of Samuel knew nothing of such matters, and allowed David's sons, were from the tribe of Judah, and also of ‘mixed origins' (Moabite-Israelite) to serve as priests.
"No Ammonite or Moabite shall enter the assembly of YAHWEH; even to the tenth generation none belonging to them shall enter the assembly of YAHWEH for ever ... You shall not seek their peace or their prosperity all your days for ever." (Deuteronomy Chapter 23 verse 3)
The regulations then specify that an Egyptian or Edomite could enter the assembly after a few generations. (But Moabites were banned forever.)
"You shall not abhor an Edomite, for he is your brother; you shall not abhor an Egyptian, because you were a sojourner in his land. The children of the third generation that are born to them may enter the assembly of YAHWEH." (Deuteronomy Chapter 23 verse 7)
Mixed marriages were banned, and the book of Ezra looks back on the law, and makes a specific point of mentioning that marriages with Moabites were banned. (Ezra Chapter 9 verse 1)
"You must utterly destroy them; you shall make no covenant with them, and show no mercy to them. You shall not make marriages with them, giving your daughters to their sons or taking their daughters for your sons." (Deuteronomy Chapter 7 verse 2)
David's sons were disbarred from the priesthood both by being from the tribe of Judah, and by being of mixed origins, and were also barred, by Levite regulations, from even participating in the assembly of the people at the Temple, much less being priests, for the reasons of being both of mixed origins, and specifically of Moabite lineage. (Moabites were banned forever, according to Deuteronomy.) By the time that Chronicles was composed (after the return from exile) Levitical regulations were in force, and these sections of the Torah had been composed (accumulating over centuries of Temple practice) and so the Chronicler edited the Samuel account to read that ‘David's sons were high officials in service to the King.' (And not priests, a violation of the later Levitical law code.) (1 Chronicles Chapter 18 verse 17)
This is not the only example of editing in Chronicles which reveals a knowledge of Torah regulations that was unknown in earlier manuscripts. You might recall that the law forbid despising an Edomite.
"You shall not abhor an Edomite, for he is your brother." (Deuteronomy Chapter 23 verse 7)
According to 2 Samuel Chapter 8 verse 13 David killed 18,000 Edomites in the valley of Salt and stationed garrisons throughout Edom. Once again this is edited (the Chronicler always portrays David in a positive light, and law breaking is out). According to the edited version in Chronicles, it was Abishai son of Zeruiah who killed those eighteen thousand Edomites in the valley of Salt; and he stationed garrisons throughout Edom. (1 Chronicles Chapter 18 verse 13) A few verses later the Samuel account mentions that David's sons were priests and this is also edited. This reveals the late dating of these particular laws (known to the Chronicler, unknown in David's day, or in the later times even, when the David stories were recorded.) As I mentioned in my commentary on Edomite prophecy, on the page false prophecy in the prophets the Edomites were viciously attacked by a certain school of prophets (faring even worse than Sodom) and this law was introduced into the law code to restrain this hateful conduct.
The earlier historical accounts provide abundant evidence to support the testimony of the prophet Jeremiah who testified that the laws concerning burnt offering and sacrifice were not brought by Moses. He was an honest man, and he was actually present to watch the Levitical system develop and to listen to the claims being made by the temple Levites that their expanding universe of rules and regulations were of ‘divine origin, and came down from God.' He was there, and he is a witness. He also testified that the Levites were forging the laws of God and his testimony is consistent with the evidence that the Bible itself provides.
There is abundant evidence that Levitical regulations were unknown early in the period of the two kingdoms, as recorded particularly in the books of Samuel, the earliest ‘historical' manuscripts in the Bible.
For example we know that the judge and prophet Samuel was from the tribe of Ephraim. The lineage of his father was described in the opening passage of the books.
"There was a certain man of Ramathaimzophim of the hill country of Ephraim, whose name was Elkanah the son of Jeroham, son of Elihu, son of Tohu, son of Zuph, an Ephraimite." (1 Samuel Chapter 1 verse 1)
Anyone familiar with the Bible in its finished form knows that the rules regarding the priesthood and priestly duties, such as sacrifice or burning incense restricted the practice to only Levites, from the tribe of Levi. If you read the page on the book of Numbers you will also be familiar with the later concept that narrowed the definition of a priest even further, by restricting it only to those Levites who were considered linear descendants of Aaron the Levite. The law code is quite explicit and clear on these matters. As I point out on the page discussing the book of Numbers, the ‘Aaronite' stand taken in Numbers is rejected in Deuteronomy, and in the following passages all Levites are considered priests. It is their job to do perform the priestly functions.
"And of Levi he said, Give to Levi thy Thummim, and thy Urim to thy godly one. They shall teach Jacob thy ordinances, and Israel thy law; they shall put incense before thee, and whole burnt offering upon thy altar." (Deuteronomy Chapter 33 verse 8)
The book of Leviticus, closely connected to the Aaronite cult in the Jerusalem temple, defines a priest more narrowly, as an Aaronite, and also describes their duties.
"And the sons of Aaron the priest shall put fire on the altar, and lay wood in order upon the fire; and Aaron's sons the priests shall lay the pieces, the head, and the fat, in order upon the wood that is on the fire upon the altar." (Leviticus Chapter 1 verse 7)
Deuteronomy contains evidence that it is a post temple composition (centralization of worship is emphasized, demonstrating knowledge of the temple system in the constant refrain ‘the place which YAHWEH your God will choose.' The temple, of course.) When the time comes to make the cereal offering you seek out a priest.
"When you come into the land which YAHWEH your God gives you for an inheritance, and have taken possession of it, and live in it ... you shall go to the place which YAHWEH your God will choose, to make his name to dwell there. And you shall go to the priest who is in office at that time. Then the priest shall take the basket from your hand, and set it down before the altar of YAHWEH your God." (Deuteronomy Chapter 26 verse 1)
The regulations are so strict that any ‘non Aaronite' Levite who tried to perform the priestly functions would be put to death (in the Aaronite Numbers source).
"And you (Aaron) and your sons with you shall attend to your priesthood for all that concerns the altar and that is within the veil; and you shall serve. I give your priesthood as a gift, and any one else who comes near shall be put to death." (Numbers Chapter 18 verse 7)
The reasons for this strictness is then ‘made clear' by showing just how ferocious God was when priestly regulations and protocol were violated. Interlopers attempted to offer incense, a priestly job.
"And fire came forth from YAHWEH, and consumed the two hundred and fifty men offering the incense ... the censers of these men who have sinned at the cost of their lives; so let them be made into hammered plates as a covering for the altar ... Thus they shall be a sign to the people of Israel. ... to be a reminder to the people of Israel, so that no one who is not a priest, who is not of the descendants of Aaron, should draw near to burn incense before YAHWEH." (Numbers Chapter 16 verse 35)
Only priests could do the job of priests. Furthermore, the utensils and required instruments were all so holy that the altar, attended to by the priests required constant service to maintain its holiness.
"You shall also anoint the altar of burnt offering and all its utensils, and consecrate the altar; and the altar shall be most holy." (Exodus Chapter 40 verse 10)
"And every day you shall offer a bull as a sin offering for atonement. Also you shall offer a sin offering for the altar, when you make atonement for it, and shall anoint it, to consecrate it. Seven days you shall make atonement for the altar, and consecrate it, and the altar shall be most holy; whatever touches the altar shall become holy. Now this is what you shall offer upon the altar: two lambs a year old day by day continually. I will consecrate the tent of meeting and the altar; Aaron also and his sons I will consecrate, to serve me as priests." (Exodus Chapter 29 verse 36)
Because of the constant service the altar required to maintain its holiness, it was necessary that worship be centralized. The manuscript shows an awareness of the fact that this state of affairs was not being observed previous to this time (a polemical reference to the fact that Levite laws were unknown in the times described by the Samuel manuscripts, a point I will demonstrate.)
"But you shall seek the place which YAHWEH your God will choose out of all your tribes to put his name and make his habitation there; thither you shall go, and thither you shall bring your burnt offerings and your sacrifices ... You shall not do according to all that we are doing here this day, every man doing whatever is right in his own eyes." (Deuteronomy Chapter 12 verse 5)
We know that Samuel was from the tribe of Ephraim. He was not a Levite, and he certainly was not an Aaronite Levite (depending on how strict you want to get about those rules.) Nevertheless he proceeded to build an ‘unholy' altar. Given the divine regulations and the large numbers of animals to sacrificed everyday just to keep that altar holy, one must wonder where Samuel found the cash to keep that altar holy. But then one must wonder what an Ephraimite was doing building an altar in the first place.
"Then he would come back to Ramah, for his home was there, and there also he administered justice to Israel. And he built there an altar to YAHWEH." (1 Samuel Chapter 7 verse 17)
And of course, what is an altar without sacrifices being offered on it? Samuel did not restrict himself to sacrificing on his personal altar in Ramah, but he also sacrificed at the High Places in Gilgal.
"And you shall go down before me to Gilgal; and behold, I (Samuel) am coming to you to offer burnt offerings and to sacrifice peace offerings. Seven days you shall wait, until I come to you and show you what you shall do. When he had finished prophesying, he came to the high place." (1 Samuel Chapter 10 verse 8)
Now, just in case someone might try employing some of those torturing of Bible verses (called apologetics) and try to suggest perhaps that Samuel was merely sinning against God, perhaps, it is worthy of note that Samuel is portrayed as knowing God personally and in very good favor with God, in spite of all his ‘law breaking ways'
"And Samuel grew, and YAHWEH was with him and let none of his words fall to the ground. And all Israel from Dan to Beersheba knew that Samuel was established as a prophet of YAHWEH. And YAHWEH appeared again at Shiloh, for YAHWEH revealed himself to Samuel at Shiloh by the word of YAHWEH." (1 Samuel Chapter 3 verse 19)
So you can see that God was with Samuel, the Ephraimite, and the fact that he had a personal altar, or that he went up to the high places to sacrifice made no difference.
"So Samuel (the Ephraimite) took a sucking lamb and offered it as a whole burnt offering to YAHWEH; and Samuel cried to YAHWEH for Israel, and YAHWEH answered him. (Not a problem.) As Samuel (the Ephraimite, who was not put to death) was offering up the burnt offering, the Philistines drew near to attack Israel; but YAHWEH thundered with a mighty voice that day against the Philistines and threw them into confusion; and they were routed before Israel. So the Philistines were subdued and did not again enter the territory of Israel. And the hand of YAHWEH was against the Philistines all the days of Samuel." (1 Samuel Chapter 7 verse 9)
Samuel's ‘law breaking' included going up to the high places to sacrifice.
"Samuel answered Saul, "I am the seer; go up before me to the high place, for today you shall eat with me, and in the morning I will let you go and will tell you all that is on your mind." (1 Samuel Chapter 9 verse 19)
"They answered, "He is; behold, he is just ahead of you. Make haste; he has come just now to the city, because the people have a sacrifice today on the high place. As soon as you enter the city, you will find him, before he goes up to the high place to eat; for the people will not eat till he comes, since he (Samuel, the Ephraimite) must bless the sacrifice; afterward those eat who are invited. Now go up, for you will meet him immediately." So they went up to the city. As they were entering the city, they saw Samuel coming out toward them on his way up to the high place." (1 Samuel Chapter 9 verse 12)
Needless to say Samuel's conduct was condemned by the priests later in the Torah (who did not want any religion that was not strictly under their control, as you can tell by reading their propaganda.)
"And I will destroy your high places, and cut down your incense altars, and cast your dead bodies upon the dead bodies of your idols; and my soul will abhor you. And I will bring a sword upon you, that shall execute vengeance for the covenant; and if you gather within your cities I will send pestilence among you, and you shall be delivered into the hand of the enemy. And if in spite of this you will not hearken to me, but walk contrary to me, then I will walk contrary to you in fury, and chastise you myself sevenfold for your sins. You shall eat the flesh of your sons, and you shall eat the flesh of your daughters. And I will destroy your high places, and cut down your incense altars, and cast your dead bodies upon the dead bodies of your idols; and my soul will abhor you. And I will lay your cities waste, and will make your sanctuaries desolate, and I will not smell your pleasing odors. And I will devastate the land, so that your enemies who settle in it shall be astonished at it." (Leviticus Chapter 26 verse 30)
Samuel (the Ephraimite) also practiced the priestly rites of consecration.
"And he said, "Peaceably; I have come to sacrifice to YAHWEH; consecrate yourselves, and come with me to the sacrifice." And he consecrated Jesse and his sons, and invited them to the sacrifice." (1 Samuel Chapter 16 verse 5)
Now it turns out that Samuel, the Ephraimite, was not the only one offering sacrifices. Everyone was offering sacrifices. All the people offered sacrifices.
"So all the people went to Gilgal, and there they made Saul king before YAHWEH in Gilgal. There they sacrificed peace offerings before YAHWEH, and there Saul and all the men of Israel rejoiced greatly." (1 Samuel Chapter 11 verse 15)
David's family of course sacrificed as well, every year.
"If your father misses me at all, then say, ‘David earnestly asked leave of me to run to Bethlehem his city; for there is a yearly sacrifice there for all the family.'" (1 Samuel Chapter 20 verse 6)
"He (David, the half Moabite Judean) said, ‘Let me go; for our family holds a sacrifice in the city, and my brother has commanded me to be there. So now, if I have found favor in your eyes, let me get away, and see my brothers.' For this reason he has not come to the king's table." (1 Samuel Chapter 20 verse 29)
Of course, with every Tom, Dick and Harry sacrificing, David (the Moabite Judean) also sacrificed. He also wore the priestly ephod.
"And it was told King David, "YAHWEH has blessed the household of Obededom and all that belongs to him, because of the ark of God." So David went and brought up the ark of God from the house of Obededom to the city of David with rejoicing; and when those who bore the ark of YAHWEH had gone six paces, he (David) sacrificed an ox and a fatling. And David danced before YAHWEH with all his might; and David was girded with a linen ephod." (2 Samuel Chapter 6 verse 12)
And Absalom sacrificed (and why not. Everybody else did.)
"And while Absalom was offering the sacrifices, he sent for Ahithophel the Gilonite, David's counselor, from his city Giloh." (2 Samuel Chapter 15 verse 12)
King Solomon sacrificed. He also burned incense, which, if you remember the priestly polemic described above, was a good way to get burned yourself.
"Three times a year Solomon used to offer up burnt offerings and peace offerings upon the altar which he built to YAHWEH, burning incense before YAHWEH. So he finished the house." (1 Kings Chapter 9 verse 25)
Of course with everybody sacrificing, wearing ephods, and consecrating people, well, those Levites in the Jerusalem temple were not going to stand for that for very long. (Keep in mind that the reference to ‘the Tent of Meeting' supposedly built by Moses was a polemical reference to the both the Temple and the Levites there, and also a reference to that myth of divine origins of the Torah.)
"If any man of the house of Israel kills an ox or a lamb or a goat in the camp, or kills it outside the camp, and does not bring it to the door of the tent of meeting, to offer it as a gift to YAHWEH before the tabernacle of YAHWEH, bloodguilt shall be imputed to that man; he has shed blood; and that man shall be cut off from among his people. This is to the end that the people of Israel may bring their sacrifices which they slay in the open field, that they may bring them to YAHWEH, to the priest at the door of the tent of meeting, and slay them as sacrifices of peace offerings to YAHWEH; and the priest shall sprinkle the blood on the altar of YAHWEH at the door of the tent of meeting, and burn the fat for a pleasing odor to YAHWEH. So they shall no more slay their sacrifices for satyrs, after whom they play the harlot. This shall be a statute for ever to them throughout their generations. And you shall say to them, Any man of the house of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn among them, who offers a burnt offering or sacrifice, and does not bring it to the door of the tent of meeting, to sacrifice it to YAHWEH; that man shall be cut off from his people." (Leviticus Chapter 17 verse 3)
The Levite regulations were not immune to the intrusion of political polemic and political propaganda. We can see varying portraits of King David in the historical accounts (which are not actually ‘history' but rather political polemic, accounting for the inconsistencies and contradictions found in the manuscripts. See the page on the Bible as history for one such example of anit- Davidic propaganda.) These politically motivated controversies can then be found reflected in sections of the Torah regulations, that both introduce conflicts into the Torah itself and reveal a political agenda at work that corresponds to the political agenda revealed in an analysis of the propaganda presented as history. The reasons for these controversies are found when you consider that David was of mixed origins, coming from Moabite descent. There were elements in this ancient society who were hostile to the fact that ‘a Moabite half breed' was sitting on the throne of Judah, and that a dynasty of ‘Moabite half breeds' then ruled over Judah for centuries.
Evidence for both support for David's cause and the hostility against a Moabite on the throne would bring out in people is found on the pages of the Bible. For example, the book of Ruth is the story of David's grandmother, and most likely was a pro-Davidic monarchy political composition. Ruth was a Moabite. She was (supposedly) banned by the Torah regulations forever, for this very reason. No one was to be concerned for her welfare, forever. No one descended from her would be allowed into ‘the assembly' forever, and certainly not allowed as a priest (as David's sons were), and, it goes without saying, certainly not allowed to sit on the throne or establish a dynasty in Judah. Boaz, a Jewish man, obviously violated this law in Deuteronomy, and is presented as showing constant concern for the welfare of Ruth. Boaz was presented as a righteous man, and Ruth was presented as the epitome of a righteous woman. The laws banning both their marriage and the ban on Moabites in particular were later politically motivated compositions and their target was the Davidic monarchy.
That such zealous bigots could be found in Israel and Judah at the time, is best evidenced when you compare the story line in the book of Ruth, with the rabid racism of Ezra-Nehemiah. One of the principle themes of these two manuscripts is the crackdown on mixed marriages, like that of David's grandfather and grandmother. In these manuscripts the people had not separated from ‘the natives'. The ‘holy race' had been intermarrying with the banned, ‘unholy races,' including, as you can see, the unclean, unholy race of Moabites. This is political diatribe and just as the book of Ruth is pro-Davidic political composition, these conflicting racist compositions reflect the anti-Davidic political movement, and encapsulate the view point of certain passages we find in the Torah (which were themselves anti-Davidic political compositions).
"No Ammonite or Moabite shall enter the assembly of YAHWEH; even to the tenth generation none belonging to them shall enter the assembly of YAHWEH for ever ... You shall not seek their peace or their prosperity all your days for ever." (Deuteronomy Chapter 23 verse 3)
These regulations are explicitly referenced again and again in the manuscripts, and the political position stated that to allow this ‘foreign intermarriage' (or to allow ‘half breeds Moabites' to rule as a dynasty over Judah) brings social and political disaster to the nation. There is an explicit reference to the ban on being concerned for Moabites found in Deuteronomy quoted above (and this is once again a thinly disguised referent to the ‘half breed Moabite' David dynasty. The highest officials are presented as the ones most guilty of the offence, another indication of the political nature of the polemic. Keep in mind that the entire book of Deuteronomy takes place in Moab, and that the Moabites were friendly with the Israelites, indicating that the anti-Moab polemic in Deuteronomy is a later addition. The italics are mine.)
"Therefore give not your daughters to their sons, neither take their daughters for your sons, and never seek their peace or prosperity, that you may be strong, and eat the good of the land, and leave it for an inheritance to your children for ever.'" (Ezra Chapter 9 verse 12)
"Therefore let us make a covenant with our God to put away all these wives and their children, according to the counsel of my lord and of those who tremble at the commandment of our God; and let it be done according to the law." (Ezra Chapter 10 verse 3)
"After these things had been done, the officials approached me and said, "The people of Israel and the priests and the Levites have not separated themselves from the peoples of the lands with their abominations, from the Canaanites, the Hittites, the Perizzites, the Jebusites, the Ammonites, the Moabites, the Egyptians, and the Amorites. For they have taken some of their daughters to be wives for themselves and for their sons; so that the holy race has mixed itself with the peoples of the lands. And in this faithlessness the hand of the officials and chief men has been foremost." When I heard this, I rent my garments and my mantle, and pulled hair from my head and beard, and sat appalled. Then all who trembled at the words of the God of Israel, because of the faithlessness of the returned exiles, gathered round me while I sat appalled until the evening sacrifice. And at the evening sacrifice I rose from my fasting, with my garments and my mantle rent, and fell upon my knees and spread out my hands to YAHWEH my God, saying: "O my God, I am ashamed and blush to lift my face to thee, my God, for our iniquities have risen higher than our heads, and our guilt has mounted up to the heavens." (Ezra Chapter 9 verse 1)
The political polemic continues, and emphasis is placed on both the ‘sin' of mixed marriage, and the need to separate (a veiled reference to the need to rid the nation of the ‘half breed Moabite dynasty of David) in order to ‘avert the fierce wrath of God' kindled by this matter. (This is all, of course, just one more Biblical contradiction, as you can tell by reading Ruth and then reading these racist, politically motivated polemics in Ezra-Nehemiah. The story is political polemic.)
"And Ezra the priest stood up and said to them, "You have trespassed and married foreign women, and so increased the guilt of Israel. Now then make confession to YAHWEH the God of your fathers, and do his will; separate yourselves from the peoples of the land and from the foreign wives." Then all the assembly answered with a loud voice, "It is so; we must do as you have said ... till the fierce wrath of our God over this matter be averted from us." (Ezra Chapter 10 verse 10)
The political polemic is also carried on in the book of Nehemiah.
"And the Israelites separated themselves from all foreigners, and stood and confessed their sins and the iniquities of their fathers. And they stood up in their place and read from the book of the law of YAHWEH their God for a fourth of the day; for another fourth of it they made confession and worshiped YAHWEH their God." (Nehemiah Chapter 9 verse 2)
As the polemic builds towards its conclusion (another condemnation of ‘half breeds'), all of it couched in praise for Torah regulations, a reference is made to ‘appointing a leader to take them back into bondage to Egypt' (David, ‘the half breed Moabite' is the target of these polemics). It was only because ‘God was merciful' that the nation did not come to immediate disaster (a polemical excuse).
"But they and our fathers acted presumptuously and stiffened their neck and did not obey thy commandments; they refused to obey, and were not mindful of the wonders which thou didst perform among them; but they stiffened their neck and appointed a leader to return to their bondage in Egypt. But thou art a God ready to forgive, gracious and merciful, slow to anger and abounding in steadfast love, and didst not forsake them." (Nehemiah Chapter 9 verse 16)
This is followed by many racist remarks about ‘the natives of the land' and then a reference to ‘treating them any way you like' is found. (These passages in Ezra and Nehemiah are some of the ugliest scriptures in the Bible, extolling and celebrating the most arrogant form of racism, extermination, genocide, plundering and robbery, and the Holy War ideology of the Levites.)
"So the descendants went in and possessed the land, and thou didst subdue before them the inhabitants of the land, the Canaanites, and didst give them into their hands, with their kings and the peoples of the land, that they might do with them as they would." (Nehemiah Chapter 9 verse 24)
One of the differences between the Nehemiah and the Ezra manuscripts is that in Nehemiah the attack on David is muted, by including a positive reference to Solomon, David's son. This is evidence for later editorial redaction in the manuscript, recognizable, as is always the case, by the bizarre inconsistencies in doctrine that such intrusions always bring with them. In context, the reference is somewhat idiotic, for Solomon himself was one of those unwanted ‘half breeds' and the product of an Israelite-Moabite union, condemned just verses previous to this, as being a cause of great evil and conduct worthy of a really good beating. After praising the half breed Solomon, Nehemiah then attacks the son-in-law of a Horonite, which is equally downright idiotic in the context of the passage, indicating that the later editor of Nehemiah understood the anti-Davidic nature of the polemic in Ezra-Nehemiah and was trying to mute the critique and shift the focus to condemning racial mixing in general. As I said, the passage is dimwitted, but then only a dimwit could hold to such an offensive and repulsive ideology, so that isn't surprising to me. He then claims to have ‘purged them of everything foreign', well, everything except the influence of that half breed Davidic monarchy. But you do have to make some exceptions, even when it comes to the previously vaunted ‘Law of Moses,' and sometimes show partiality and favoritism to the right half breed family, of course, right?
"In those days also I saw the Jews who had married women of Ashdod, Ammon, and Moab; And I contended with them and cursed them and beat some of them and pulled out their hair; and I made them take oath in the name of God, saying, "You shall not give your daughters to their sons, or take their daughters for your sons or for yourselves. Did not Solomon king of Israel sin on account of such women? Among the many nations there was no king like him, and he was beloved by his God, and God made him king over all Israel; nevertheless foreign women made even him to sin. Shall we then listen to you and do all this great evil and act treacherously against our God by marrying foreign women?" And one of the sons of Jehoiada, the son of Eliashib the high priest, was the son-in-law of Sanballat the Horonite; therefore I chased him from me. Remember them, O my God, because they have defiled the priesthood and the covenant of the priesthood and the Levites. Thus I cleansed them from everything foreign." (Nehemiah Chapter 13 verse 23)
The Torah can be examined in many ways, as history, as consistent law, by considering the testimony of the radical stream of Jewish prophecy, prophets, remember, who lived in the times they describe and were the ones who knew the truth about what was going on, and, in this case, by examining the date of the Torah composition. Taken together, all this evidence is overwhelming that the Torah did not come down from heaven from God to Moses on the mountaintop, but rather that it represents the interests of the Jerusalem Temple Levites. Its Holy War ideology, was their ideology, its ideology of sacrifice created in their self interest. For these reasons Christian theology must be rebuilt from the ground up because it was built on the foundation of a falsehood (Christ as a Levitical sin sacrifice). The TRUTH shall set you free!