Q&A: The Code of Hammurabi
The Code of Hammurabi
Question
The topic has certainly already been beaten to death and is fairly worn out, but even so I want to sharpen the question, since I haven’t received a satisfactory answer to it. The issue is the very general outlines that point to copying, or if not copying then at least inspiration for the writing of the Hebrew Bible (Tanakh). So true, they have found dozens and hundreds of differences between Hammurabi’s law code and the Hebrew Bible, but that is only natural—of course there would be many differences between them, because what would be the point of writing a book if it were similar to another book (especially if you want to claim it was written from Heaven and it needs at least a bit of credibility…)? And yet the very fact that one has to distinguish between the books shows that there is definitely similarity between them, and many parallel lines, which is puzzling in light of the fact that God is beyond time; there should not be so many similarities to something that fits the spirit of that period more than today’s, for example (and I’m not talking here only about terminology). That raises the hypothesis that the writer simply did not know, and assumed, that ways of thinking, punishment, and morality would change so much.
Answer
There are so many unnecessary and strange assumptions here that it is hard even to point them all out.
The fact that God is above time says nothing about what He writes. The text is intended for people who exist in time, and there is no reason it should not be written in a language that speaks to them.
The similarity to Hammurabi’s laws is not just a change made so they wouldn’t discover the copying. There are substantive differences in outlook there, and many have already discussed this.
Beyond that, it is not clear who came first. The giving of the Torah is not necessarily the time when the Torah was written down. The Sages speak about the study hall of Shem and Ever, and about God revealing Himself to people already from the time of Adam, so there is no obstacle to saying that these things passed from the Torah / the Holy One, blessed be He, to Hammurabi, and not the other way around.
And even if the Torah “copies” from Hammurabi—so what? Whatever is correct in his laws can also be included in the Torah. Was all morality invented in the Torah? Was all justice invented in it? Why assume such a thing?
Discussion on Answer
If the Torah copied from Laban the Aramean what he said to Jacob, then apparently the Torah itself does not see a problem with copying.
I wrote in parentheses that I wasn’t talking about terminology and writing style, but about justice and morality, so the issue of a language that speaks to people is beside the point. Even if morality and justice were not invented in the Torah, it is reasonable to assume (or maybe not, I no longer know…) that they were not invented at some particular time thousands of years ago more than in the current period after the giving of the Torah. That is to say, anything is possible, but once the possibility of imitation and copying exists, it sounds more convincing in light of that. And the question is also whether the substantive changes were not introduced after the fact. I read a large part of them, and many seem clearly unnecessary. Thanks.