Fundamentalism isn't just for Christians

March 9, 2002

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/03/09/arts/09BIBL.html

As Rabbis Face Facts, Bible Tales Are Wilting

By MICHAEL MASSING

Abraham, the Jewish patriarch, probably never existed.  Nor did
Moses. The entire Exodus story as recounted in the Bible probably
never occurred. The same is true of the tumbling of the walls of
Jericho. And David, far from being the fearless king who built
Jerusalem into a mighty capital, was more likely a provincial leader
whose reputation was later magnified to provide a rallying point for a
fledgling nation.

Such startling propositions — the product of findings by
archaeologists digging in Israel and its environs over the last 25
years — have gained wide acceptance among non- Orthodox rabbis. But
there has been no attempt to disseminate these ideas or to discuss
them with the laity — until now.

The United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism, which represents the 1.5
million Conservative Jews in the United States, has just issued a new
Torah and commentary, the first for Conservatives in more than 60
years. Called "Etz Hayim" ("Tree of Life" in Hebrew), it offers an
interpretation that incorporates the latest findings from archaeology,
philology, anthropology and the study of ancient cultures. To the
editors who worked on the book, it represents one of the boldest
efforts ever to introduce into the religious mainstream a view of the
Bible as a human rather than divine document.

"When I grew up in Brooklyn, congregants were not sophisticated about
anything," said Rabbi Harold Kushner, the author of "When Bad Things
Happen to Good People" and a co-editor of the new book. "Today, they
are very sophisticated and well read about psychology, literature and
history, but they are locked in a childish version of the Bible."

"Etz Hayim," compiled by David Lieber of the University of Judaism in
Los Angeles, seeks to change that. It offers the standard Hebrew text,
a parallel English translation (edited by Chaim Potok, best known as
the author of "The Chosen"), a page-by-page exegesis, periodic
commentaries on Jewish practice and, at the end, 41 essays by
prominent rabbis and scholars on topics ranging from the Torah scroll
and dietary laws to ecology and eschatology.

These essays, perused during uninspired sermons or Torah readings at
Sabbath services, will no doubt surprise many congregants. For
instance, an essay on Ancient Near Eastern Mythology," by Robert
Wexler, president of the University of Judaism in Los Angeles, states
that on the basis of modern scholarship, it seems unlikely that the
story of Genesis originated in Palestine. More likely, Mr. Wexler
says, it arose in Mesopotamia, the influence of which is most apparent
in the story of the Flood, which probably grew out of the periodic
overflowing of the Tigris and Euphrates rivers. The story of Noah,
Mr. Wexler adds, was probably borrowed from the Mesopotamian epic
Gilgamesh.

Equally striking for many readers will be the essay "Biblical
Archaeology," by Lee I. Levine, a professor at the Hebrew University
in Jerusalem. "There is no reference in Egyptian sources to Israel's
sojourn in that country," he writes, "and the evidence that does exist
is negligible and indirect." The few indirect pieces of evidence, like
the use of Egyptian names, he adds, "are far from adequate to
corroborate the historicity of the biblical account."

Similarly ambiguous, Mr. Levine writes, is the evidence of the
conquest and settlement of Canaan, the ancient name for the area
including Israel.  Excavations showing that Jericho was unwalled and
uninhabited, he says, "clearly seem to contradict the violent and
complete conquest portrayed in the Book of Joshua." What's more, he
says, there is an "almost total absence of archaeological evidence"
backing up the Bible's grand descriptions of the Jerusalem of David
and Solomon.

The notion that the Bible is not literally true "is more or less
settled and understood among most Conservative rabbis," observed David
Wolpe, a rabbi at Sinai Temple in Los Angeles and a contributor to
"Etz Hayim." But some congregants, he said, "may not like the stark
airing of it." Last Passover, in a sermon to 2,200 congregants at his
synagogue, Rabbi Wolpe frankly said that "virtually every modern
archaeologist" agrees "that the way the Bible describes the Exodus is
not the way that it happened, if it happened at all." The rabbi
offered what he called a "litany of disillusion" about the narrative,
including contradictions, improbabilities, chronological lapses and
the absence of corroborating evidence. In fact, he said,
archaeologists digging in the Sinai have "found no trace of the tribes
of Israel — not one shard of pottery."

The reaction to the rabbi's talk ranged from admiration at his courage
to dismay at his timing to anger at his audacity. Reported in Jewish
publications around the world, the sermon brought him a flood of
letters accusing him of undermining the most fundamental teachings of
Judaism. But he also received many messages of support. "I can't tell
you how many rabbis called me, e- mailed me and wrote me, saying, `God
bless you for saying what we all believe,' " Rabbi Wolpe said. He
attributes the "explosion" set off by his sermon to "the reluctance of
rabbis to say what they really believe."

Before the introduction of "Etz Hayim," the Conservative movement
relied on the Torah commentary of Joseph Hertz, the chief rabbi of the
British Commonwealth. By 1936, when it was issued, the Hebrew Bible
had come under intense scrutiny from scholars like Julius Wellhausen
of Germany, who raised many questions about the text's authorship and
accuracy.  Hertz, working in an era of rampant anti-Semitism and of
Christian efforts to demonstrate the inferiority of the "Old"
Testament to the "New," dismissed all doubts about the integrity of
the text.

Maintaining that no people would have invented for
themselves so "disgraceful" a past as that of being
slaves in a foreign land, he wrote that "of all
Oriental chronicles, it is only the Biblical annals
that deserve the name of history." 

The Hertz approach had little competition until 1981, when the Union
of American Hebrew Congregations, the official arm of Reform Judaism,
published its own Torah commentary. Edited by Rabbi Gunther Plaut, it
took note of the growing body of archaeological and textual evidence
that called the accuracy of the biblical account into question. The
"tales" of Genesis, it flatly stated, were a mix of "myth, legend,
distant memory and search for origins, bound together by the strands
of a central theological concept." But Exodus, it insisted, belonged
in "the realm of history." While there are scholars who consider the
Exodus story to be "folk tales," the commentary observed, "this is a
minority view."

Twenty years later, the weight of scholarly evidence questioning the
Exodus narrative had become so great that the minority view had become
the majority one.

Not among Orthodox Jews, however. They continue to regard the Torah as
the divine and immutable word of God. Their most widely used Torah
commentary, known as the Stone Edition (1993), declares in its
introduction "that every letter and word of the Torah was given to
Moses by God."

Lawrence Schiffman, a professor at New York University and an Orthodox
Jew, said that "Etz Hayim" goes so far in accepting modern scholarship
that, without realizing it, it ends up being in "nihilistic
opposition" to what Conservative Jews stand for. He noted, however,
that most of the questions about the Bible's accuracy had been tucked
away discreetly in the back. "The average synagogue-goer is never
going to look there," he said.

Even some Conservative rabbis feel uncomfortable with the depth of the
doubting. "I think the basic historicity of the text is valid and
verifiable," said Susan Grossman, the rabbi of Beth Shalom
Congregation in Columbia, Md., and a co-editor of "Etz Hayim." As for
the mounting archaeological evidence suggesting the contrary, Rabbi
Grossman said: "There's no evidence that it didn't happen. Most of the
`evidence' is evidence from silence."

"The real issue for me is the eternal truths that are in the text,"
she added. "How do we apply this hallowed text to the 21st century?"
One way, she said, is to make it more relevant to women. Rabbi
Grossman is one of many women who worked on "Etz Hayim," in an effort
to temper the Bible's heavily patriarchal orientation and make the
text more palatable to modern readers. For example, the passage in
Genesis that describes how the aged Sarah laughed upon hearing God say
that she would bear a son is traditionally interpreted as a laugh of
incredulity. In its commentary, however, "Etz Hayim" suggests that her
laughter "may not be a response to the far- fetched notion of
pregnancy at an advanced age, but the laughter of delight at the
prospect of two elderly people resuming marital intimacy."

In a project of such complexity, there were inevitably many points of
disagreement. But Rabbi Kushner says the only one that eluded
resolution concerned Leviticus 18:22: "Do not lie with a male as one
lies with a woman; it is an abhorrence." "We couldn't come to a
formulation that we could all be comfortable with," the rabbi
said. "Some people felt that homosexuality is wrong. We weren't
prepared to embrace that as the Conservative position. But at the same
time we couldn't say this is a mentality that has been disproved by
contemporary biology, for not everyone was prepared to go along with
that." Ultimately, the editors settled on an anodyne compromise,
noting that the Torah's prohibitions on homosexual relations "have
engendered considerable debate" and that Conservative synagogues
should "welcome gay and lesbian congregants in all congregational
activities."

Since the fall, when "Etz Hayim" was issued, more than 100,000 copies
have been sold. Eventually, it is expected to become the standard
Bible in the nation's 760 Conservative synagogues.

Mark S. Smith, a professor of Bible and Near Eastern Studies at New
York University, noted that the Hertz commentary had lasted 65
years. "That's incredible," he said. "If `Etz Hayim' isn't around for
50 years or more, I'd be surprised."

Its longevity, however, may depend on the pace of archaeological
discovery.