It's not disputed by Jews or historians that the Talmud is about 3,500 years old... not that it really matters within the context of this discussion because there's no doubt in any honest person's mind that the Talmud is far older than Jesus Christ and so are the teachings of the rabbis that the book contains.
That's just not correct.
Moses lived between 1,300 and 1,400 years before Christ.
The notion that Jewish scholars didn't talk about Mosaic Law until a few centuries before Jesus Christ is laughable. Deserving of ridicule.
Who is saying that?
The Deuteronomic texts were probably based on oral traditions dating to the times you stated, if not perhaps a few centuries later. The texts themselves were not being compiled before 1,000 B.C.
What's disputed here is not the Torah, but the oral Torah, of which the Talmud is one part. The Talmudic Jews like to retroactively antedate their Talmudic tradition to earlier than it actually was. You're arguing that there must have been a secret oral law given to Moses, in addition to what we get as the exoteric Mosaic law. There's no evidence for that, other than from rabbinic Jews themselves, who would have a great interest in legitimizing their much later commentaries by claiming they were far earlier than they were.
So Moses receives the law between 1400-1300, and we have the Deuteronomic texts being compiled 1,000-800 B.C. But we supposedly don't get any written forms of the Oral Torah until 200 B.C.? Over 1 millennium later?
That deserves ridicule. Nobody, other than the lying Rabbis, think the Talmud's contents date to a time before Christ.
(post is archived)