Was Abraham the founding father of what became the Jewish people, only the precursor of Moses? Alternatively, does he represent the human ideal, from which his descendants went astray, but that can be partially achieved through observance of the Torah?

Moses transformed into an angel, sat upon the divine throne, and was an instantiation of the Greek God, Hermes: These are some of the ways Second Temple authors reimagined Moses.

Before the Babylonian conquest of Jerusalem, Ezekiel condemns Judah's alliance with Egypt, depicting Egypt and its pharaoh as a monster that YHWH will destroy. The prophet accuses Judah of harlotry with Egypt and blames their foolish alliance on their resurgent worship of the Egyptian gods they adopted during their sojourn there.

The story of the ancestors in Genesis serves as a prequel to that of Moses in Exodus. Originally, however, each were self-standing accounts of Israel’s origin. They were combined for the first time by the Priestly author in the post-exilic period.

Three curious details in the plagues of blood and frogs show the hand of a post-priestly editor and his concern about purity laws.

God reveals his name to Moses as “I am,” from the Hebrew root ה.ו.י, “being.” The name YHWH, however, originates in Midian, and derives from the Arabic term for “love, desire, or passion.”

Is the Bible’s portrayal of the magicians (Ḥarṭummīm) in accord with Egyptian literature and ritual practice? How did the Israelite writers obtain this knowledge?

The plague of blood developed as a mythological amplification of an older account in which Moses strikes the Nile to kill the fish and make the water stink.

Demonstrating God’s control of the world

Moses and Aaron compete with the Egyptian ḥarṭummīm, “magicians,” who have the power to perform wonders. What do we know about such magicians from Egyptian sources?

When God reveals the name YHWH to Moses in Exodus, he says that not even the patriarchs knew this name, yet they all use it in Genesis. Critical scholarship’s solution to this problem led to one of the most important academic innovations in biblical studies in the last three hundred years: the Documentary Hypothesis.

It seems unethical for God to deny Pharaoh free will and then punish him for his actions. Rashi, Nahmanides, and Maimonides all struggle with this problem, and each assumes that even Pharaoh deserves to be treated fairly.

Could the story have its basis in natural phenomena?

Before several plagues, God commands Moses to warn Pharaoh. Moses delivers this warning, but his actual words are not recorded. In the plague of locusts, the opposite occurs, and God’s wording is not recorded while Moses’ warning is. The SP fills in these lacunae by recording each instance.

The plague story expanded over time in three main stages: The oldest stage (E) has Moses perform 3 plagues on his own; this was revised to create a story of an all-powerful God performing 8 plagues (J), utilizing Moses as a mouthpiece. Finally, the Priestly redactor revised this into our familiar narrative of 10 plagues, in which God uses the miracles to announce himself to Egypt and the world.

An inductive approach.

When a Temple of Yahu Stood Near a Temple of Khnum

The all pervading cosmic force. 

YHWH tells Moses to go see Pharaoh in the morning by the Nile (Exodus 7:15). Why was he there? Did Pharaoh take a daily stroll by the Nile? Did he use the Nile as a privy, or worship it? Perhaps a literary approach may be more fruitful.

Is Moses raised by an Egyptian princess? Does he kill an Egyptian man? Does he run away to Midian and marry the daughter of a Midianite priest? Not according to P, which cleanses Moses of these problematic elements.

A literary strategy used by pre-modern editors and authors that works in a similar way to the classic cinematographic catch-phrase, “Meanwhile, Back at the Ranch.” (With an addendum by Prof. Marc Brettler)