Imagine your friend lends you a novel. You don't know when it was written, but it appears to be set in the 1600s. The men till the land with wooden plows. The women draw water from wells and cook food over fireplaces. Everybody has a proper 17th century name, such as Bartholomew and Agnes. Then, suddenly, Bartholomew walks into a barn and switches on a lightbulb. "That's odd," you think. "Lightbulbs weren't invented until the 1800s. What a silly mistake by the author!"
At dinner one morning, Agnes bemoans that President Bush pulled the US into war in Iraq on false pretenses. "Another anachronism!" You think. "If this is meant to be the 1600s, the author is doing a poor job of showing it."
You return the book to your friend, and ask her when it was written.
"Why, the 1600s, of course!" She says.
"That can't be," you argue. "The book references lightbulbs and the Second Gulf War. It couldn't have been written earlier than 2003."
Your friend shakes her head. "Ah, but there are many accurate references to 17th century life. The author knew that people used crude farming tools. He knew that nobody had running water. Therefore, it must have been written in the 17th century."
"You buffoon!" You exclaim unkindly. "There are many ways someone in the 2000s can know about life in the 1600s. There is no way someone in the 1600s can know about life in the 2000s!"
Your friend represents frum Jews who claim that the Torah was written in 1313 BCE. These Jews point toward details in the narrative that accurately reflect the second millennium, such as Yosef being sold for twenty pieces of silver (the average price of a slave during that period), or the use of names that were popular at that time. You point out that that's all good and well, but the Plishtim didn't arrive in Canaan until 1175 BCE, and the Kasdim of Ur-Kasdim didn't exist before 850 BCE.
"Well," say the kiruv rabbis, "you may have details saying that the Torah was written between the 600s-400s BCE, but I have an equal number of details corroborating that it was written in the 1300s. Therefore, you should consider both theories equally."
That, however, is ridiculous. It takes only one anachronism to disprove their theory--and archaeologists have found many.
(Part 1/2)