Josiah's Reform and Tradition
I understand that in the Rabbi's opinion, the witness' argument in itself is not that strong. I recently heard of a very strong counterargument that apparently works for me. So I wanted to ask your opinion. I'm talking about Josiah's reform. The Bible tells us that Passover was not celebrated properly (if at all, depending on the interpretation) from the time of the judges until King Josiah of Judah, which is a few hundred years in total. The Bible tells us that Ahaz, the king of Judah who preceded Josiah, burned all the books of the Torah, and overall the period before Josiah was characterized by terrible sins and disbelief in God, to the point that it says that after the book was found, 'Great is the wrath of the Lord that is kindled against our children because our fathers did not listen to the words of this book to do according to all that is written concerning us.' In any case, do you think that the witness's argument should be considered more of a secondary argument than a basis for belief in it?
And another small question on the subject, please elaborate. 2 Kings, Chapter 22, Verse 8 It is interpreted that the Torah had been forgotten since the days of Manasseh (also a king before Josiah) and even Josiah did not know the text of the Torah that was found and it was a novelty in his eyes. In contrast, in the Book of Chronicles it is written that Josiah began to eradicate idolatry even before the book was found, and how or why did he do this without knowing the Torah? How can the contradiction between the words of the Haredak and what is written in Chronicles be reconciled?
Thank you very much.
I'm not sure I understood the question. In my opinion, the witness' argument is not bad, but on its own it does not hold. Combined with philosophical arguments about the existence of God and His revelation, and a historical perspective, it certainly has reasonable weight. The matter with Josiah is not a counterargument in any way. I explained this in my first book. On the contrary, because you see that the Torah was passed down through ancient tradition.
That should be asked to the Radak. I do not deal with this literature. But as I wrote to you above, it is very unlikely that the Torah was forgotten. The incident of the finding of the Torah scroll proves that the tradition is ancient. The elimination of the Ha-Z before this event only adds to this.
How do you see that the Torah was passed down through ancient tradition? These are decades when there were no Torah scrolls at all in the kingdom and the entire nation was sinful and worshipping idols, with not a single mention of a Passover celebration and the tradition from the time of the judges to the reform of Joshua. Then Josiah finds a book that happened to have survived, discovers the curses written in it, and forces the celebration of Passover and the eradication of idolatry. If this is not forgetting, I find it hard to believe what is. How different is this from the transplant? It doesn't sound like there is a significant difference at all.
When you find such a book and convince everyone that it is the Torah of Moses given at Sinai, it means that everyone knew that there was such a book, but that it has disappeared. Otherwise, there is no reason for them to buy this lokash. Beyond that, we see that there were various halakhic elements even before, and only some have disappeared. In short, it is clear that there was an ancient tradition including a Torah scroll. I elaborated more in the first commandment. The people sinned and worshipped the Torah even when it was a scroll, and therefore it is irrelevant. Instincts are not related to the information we have.
I don't think that means everyone knew. Maybe King Josiah forced them. It literally says "and commanded" Josiah to keep this Passover. It could also be that a small group did not forget the tradition, and it greatly influenced the entire nation. If they were aware of all this, why would they repent only after Josiah's rebuke? And not after the rebuke of other prophets? Were they not afraid of the evil curses that were supposed to come upon them?
Add to this the story of Ahaz burning the Torah scrolls, and in general, I can't imagine a scenario in which the people were so sinful for decades, there were no Torah scrolls available, and yet the tradition was passed down.
This just seems like insistence to me. There will always be questions based on "maybe". That's it, I explained what I had to explain. If you think differently – that's your right.
Leave a Reply
Please login or Register to submit your answer