Genesis 36:31-37:1
For nearly a thousand years, Edom was an autonomous country. Initially it appears to have been a loose association of clans or tribes, About the time of Israel’s Exodus from Egypt, they developed a united kingdom, with Bela the son of Beor named as the first king. Another of Beor’s sons, Balaam, is described as a prophet of God in Numbers 22:-24. Eventually, Israel established their own monarchy and conquered Edom. During that period, Edom was ruled by a Jewish deputy or governor, as prophesied to Rebekah in Genesis 25:23. “And the LORD said unto her, Two nations are in thy womb, and two manner of people shall be separated from thy bowels; and the one people shall be stronger than the other people; and the elder shall serve the younger.”
This passage and I Chronicles outline the history of Edom before they were conquered by Israel. The Edomite kings were contemporaries of Israel’s judges. Being king does not appear to have been a hereditary position among the Edomites.
“And these are the kings that reigned in the land of Edom, before there reigned any king over the children of Israel.
And Bela the son of Beor reigned in Edom: and the name of his city was Dinhabah. And Bela died, and Jobab the son of Zerah of Bozrah reigned in his stead. And Jobab died, and Husham of the land of Temani reigned in his stead. And Husham died, and Hadad the son of Bedad, who smote Midian in the field of Moab, reigned in his stead: and the name of his city was Avith.
And Hadad died, and Samlah of Masrekah reigned in his stead. And Samlah died, and Saul of Rehoboth by the river reigned in his stead. And Saul died, and Baalhanan the son of Achbor reigned in his stead. And Baalhanan the son of Achbor died, and Hadar reigned in his stead: and the name of his city was Pau; and his wife's name was Mehetabel, the daughter of Matred, the daughter of Mezahab.” (Genesis 36:31-39)
Prior to the development of the kingdom the various clans occupied specific parts of Edom, and the descendants of Esau are listed specifically by their different groups, distinguishing them from the descendants of the Horites.
“And these are the names of the dukes that came of Esau, according to their families, after their places, by their names; duke Timnah, duke Alvah, duke Jetheth, Duke Aholibamah, duke Elah, duke Pinon, Duke Kenaz, duke Teman, duke Mibzar, Duke Magdiel, duke Iram: these be the dukes of Edom, according to their habitations in the land of their possession: he is Esau the father of the Edomites.” (Genesis 36:40-43)
More detail about Edomite history can be found at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edom. The history of Edom shows once again that God has fulfilled his promises, even for those who did not serve him.
“And Jacob dwelt in the land wherein his father was a stranger, in the land of Canaan.” (Genesis 37:1)
Because their respective bands were more than the area could support in addition to the various Canaanite tribes, Esau had chosen to move to Edom. Undoubtedly, his decision to go was influenced by his wives connections to the Ishmaelites and the Horite, Seir. Since Jacob had no such connections, it made sense for him to remain where he was. Having sold his birthright, Esau had given up his right to claim God’s promise to Abraham and Isaac to own that land, so it was proper that he should be the one to leave.
Tradition proclaims Moses as the writer of the first five books of the bible, Genesis to Deuteronomy. Since Israel did not have a king until about five hundred years after Moses’ death, it is fairly obvious that Moses could not have written this part of the book as he would not have known the sequence of Edomite kings to follow him. Since the Bible does not attribute the books to Moses, this is not a problem, despite the arguments. Like many of the religious conflicts, the debate here is based on tradition rather than scripture.
Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy all record things Moses said, as well as what God said. The statements in Mark 12:26 and I Corinthians 3:15 do not necessarily indicate Moses is the author but rather that just as Joshua deals primarily with Joshua’s leadership, these books deal primarily with events during Moses’ leadership. Since most historical records do not name the record keeper, the fact that no writer is named is consistent with this as an actual contemporary historical record. As such there would have been a number of writers, which is consistent with manuscript analysis. Document examiners say there were at least five different writers. Moses may of may not have been one of them. Rather than discrediting the Pentateuch, this supports it’s historical value.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Thanks for this post, it has many interesting points.
ReplyDeleteBut may I quote what Jesus himself said to his oppressors:
"If you believed Moses, you will believe me, for he wrote about me. But since you do not believe what he wrote, how are you going to believe what I say?" (John 5:46-47, see also Luke 24:27,44).
This might have been where the tradition had originated, and maybe why Moses spent so much time with God up on Mount Sinai. Could it be that God was dictating to Moses what to write?
I'm not picking a fight by any means, but what do you make of John 5:46-47. "For if you believed Moses, you would believe Me; for he wrote about Me. But if you do not believe his writings, how will you believe My words?"
ReplyDeleteThis, at least, declares that Moses wrote portions of the Pentateuch since Christ affirms Moses as the author. Internal evidence likewise supports Moses writing at least portions, such as Exodus 17:14; Deuteronomy 28:58, etc. This seems a fair bit of evidence to retain the tradtional or orthodox view. What are your thoughts?
I suspect Moses did write parts of the Pentateuch, but Deuteronomy 34 clearly was not written by Moses. Nowhere is it implied that Moses wrote all five books. Moses or his son would have been about the only ones with sufficient information to write about much of Exodus, Numbers and Deuteronomy. The only time there is difficulty is if we insist that all was written by Moses.
ReplyDeleteBoth I John and II Peter refer to them writing about what they had experienced. There is no reason that God would have settled for less in other books. Many of the writers of the other books are not known either.
There seem to be portions that are addendums (such as the record of Moses' death). Mr. Henry Morris believed that Genesis was a compilation of records from various patriarchs' perspectives and Moses was the compiler of the material rather than the writer. Whatever the truth of the author is it does not detract from the authority or inspiration of the books, as you already stated. Thanks you kindly for the answer.
ReplyDeleteThanks Ian.
ReplyDeleteI had not read Morris's statement but is is closely aligned with what I believe. Rather than detracting, it seems to me that it reinforces the authority, and inspiration, that God maintained an ongoing record of what happened. Several years ago detractors of the Bible were using this point to claim it was not to be trusted. Recognizing that Moses probably did not write it all eliminated their entire position while not contradicting any scriptures. Insisting Moses had to write it all only legitimized their position.
I always thought it was fascinating that Moses wrote about things that happened before he came into existence, how cool is that. God must have told everything he had to write word for word.
ReplyDelete