THE AUTHOR OF TORAH----------------> 2:- (THE CRITICS HISTOTY)

       During the darkness period of the Middle Ages, the criticism movement of "Rabbi Isaac Ibn Jasos" was the major theory, on which all the Critics, established their critical attitude, toward the TORAH, The most famous group of them was, "Ibn Ezra" at 1167,"Carlstadt" at 1480-1541 even Spinoza at 1670                                                               In brief,His idea was to collect the similar names from the TORAH ,and suggests that , at the time of the later one, Some one re -write the old story, using his modern knowledge,with the modern data,so,"Hadad"of Genesis 36.35 is the same "Hadad" of 1Kings 11.14 {because he belongs to Edomite country-------------!!!!)  . Why his opinion is not logical from our point of view?                                  The answer is:- (1)We knew, as we are Eastern people, that our traditions, teaches us, that the people used to call their babies, from the first moment of their birth, by some of historical names, perhaps,the famous reputations of these historical names, urged them to use the name again, wishing that the baby becomes famous, as the real owner of that name----------------------- The similarity then is the normal base in the east , specially between the people of the same race or citizenship in the old times.                                                                                            (2)The first" Hadad " was "Hadad ben badad" who smote Midian in the field of "Moab" "Genesis"  36.35 , but the second was "Hadad Ezer ben Rehob" the king of "Zobah" one of the "Edomite" countries, he was an enimy against" David "the father of "Solomon" ,---------------Tthe different sites of their sovereignty capitals,the different accidents Which they were famous for,also the different fathers of the two similar "Hadad"s makes us quite sure that we are before two persons refers to different times                                                                                                                                                                             Similarly he discussed "Genesis "12.6 and tied it with "Genesis "22.14, also tied "Deuteronomy" 1.1 with" Deuteronomy" 3.11 and so on .                                                                                                                                    Even during the "Renaissance"we find "Carlstadt" discussing  the problem of the authorship, of the "TORAH",according to the wrong style of "Issac ben Jasos" ,which build its assumptions ,on the bases of" similarity or differentialy "between the parts, inside the "TORAH", His opinion was briefly, established upon the different sorts ,of the literature writings poetry, instructions, laws, history recordings.....etc, in spite of he confessed that, their are a unity in its style of writing through the book of " Deuteronomy".  But he added his logical assumption that, It was impossible for "Moses" to write about his death details---------from his point of view, it proves that the writer was not "Moses", but another one after him, perhaps his disciple "Joshua", or any other person, ,                    But ,(1) He confessed that the writer has one peculiar style in writing                                                                                                         (2) the story of "Moses"death does not contrasts with his being the real writer, because he was a prophet,which can till the future, according to the mighty power of the administrations of the inspiration. (3) the inspiration source is unlimited in knowledge , who can give his prophet many aspects of the learning, according to the real necessities,or needs of the people ,he wrote the history records,the laws ,the songs,the instructions ...etc,                                                         "The Renaissance"s coming, gave the Critics a new kinds of Criticism, as we shall discuss later                  Rev.Joseph