"History tells us—through the testimony of generations of people—that the Torah was written by Moses through divine revelation at one point in time."
This statement is incorrect. History tells us no such thing, and "the testimony of generations" is, by definition, hearsay at best. It makes no sense to say that a generation which was not present for a particular event could testify as to the truth or falsity of that event. My generation cannot "testify" to the events in Philadelphia in 1776. We can read what contemporaries wrote about those events, we can consider varying views, and we can arrive at conclusions as to what did or did not happen based on the evidence-- but the very idea of our "testimony" is silly. It is also grossly inaccurate to state that "textual criticism... starts with the hypothesis that the Torah has multiple... authors." In fact, textual criticism makes no such assumption; rather, that was the conclusion of the scholars who studied Biblical texts. You are free to disagree with their conclusions. However, it is, I think, dishonest to accuse them of assuming what they have concluded when, in fact, the only people assuming their own conclusions are the rabbis who accept, as an article of faith, that the Torah cannot possibly have more than one author, and then set about offering "proofs" like the supposed opinions of various generations with no direct knowledge on the subject.
|