Subscribe
Subscribe to receive new posts:
Available Now!
When Judaism Meets Science
Posts Tagged ‘Bronze Age’
The Metals of the Hebrew Bible: Gold and Silver
Of the ninety-two elements naturally occurring on Earth, the Hebrew Bible (the “Tanach”) mentions only six. The two most abundant elements in the Earth’s crust, by mass, are oxygen and silicon. Even though together they account for just over three-quarters of the mass of the crust, the Tanach says nothing about them. Aluminum is the next most common element, accounting for about eight percent of the mass of the crust, but it, too, is unknown, or at least unmentioned, by the authors of the Tanach.
The elements that the Hebrew Bible does identify, ordered by the frequency of mention, are gold, silver, copper, iron, tin, and lead. Uniquely, in the Book of Numbers (at 31:22), they are mentioned together and in that order as metals that can be purified by fire. Sometimes they are mentioned elsewhere in different combinations and various orders. Mostly, though, they are mentioned separately , although gold and silver are often cited jointly.
Gold, zahav in Hebrew, is the most frequently mentioned metal, being identified almost 400 times, according to one concordance. Silver, or kesef, is mentioned the next most frequently, almost 300 times. Counting copper is a bit problematic as the Hebrew word for copper is nechoshet, but that word is also translated sometimes as bronze and sometimes as brass, both of which are alloys of copper. Despite the frequency of their mention, gold, silver, and copper together account for less than 0.007% of the Earth’s crust. Still, the Torah mentions these three metals as important, for instance in the adornment of the Tabernacle. (See, e.g., Ex. 31:3-5.)
read more
The Camel’s Nose and the Torah’s Tent
The time is out of joint – O cursed spite,
That ever I was born to set it right!
Nay, come, let’s go together.
Shakespeare, Hamlet, I, 5
For those who hold that the Bible, and particularly the Torah, is the Word of God, without flaw and inerrant, the last few hundred years have been very frustrating. The development of the Documentary Hypothesis, the idea that the Torah was a compilation of works from several discrete sources, was and, despite scholarly challenge, remains a formidable obstacle to the claim of unitary and divine authorship. But the Documentary Hypothesis is, for all its power and value, just that, a hypothesis. Similarly, the notion that much of the Torah text is pretext, i.e., a series of allegories designed to enhance the image of one or more Kings of Judah, is another provocative and persuasive concept, but again, just that, a concept.
Yet while some would dismiss such broad theories as too sweeping, and not definitive, small, stubborn little problems with the text cannot be so easily refuted and disregarded. One sign that the Torah is not the work of a single writer, much less a divine one, is the presence of anachronisms in the text. read more