Rating: 
Summary: If History Begins in Sumer, Law Begins in Genesis...
Review: ....let's discuss this enlightening book which explores the stories
from the first book (Genesis) of the five books of Moses (Torah) from
the perspective of law and justice. Based on Torah, Talmud, rabbinic
commentaries, the Hasidic commentaries of Rabbi Levi Isaac of
Berditchev, and the legal insight of a yeshiva educated Harvard law
professor, the reader follows the development of the concept of
justice. Consider the flawed personalities in the Book of
Genesis... it's like watching 5 seasons of Law & Order: Adam and
Eve (expulsion); Cain and Abel (murder and favoritism); Noah, Abraham
and Isaac (attempted murder, the akedah), Hagar and Sarah; Abraham,
Sodom and ten good people (collective punishment?); Esau and Jacob
(bait & switch, verbal contracts and trickery); Jacob and Laban;
Hamor, circumcision, and Jacob's sons; Joseph and his
brothers. Dershowitz provides an enlightening read and ready access to
commentaries that remove the rose-colored glasses from the stories you
heard as a child.
Rating: 
Summary: Sounds of Silence
Review: Back in the 1960's, the Beatles wrote and produced a song whose title is uniquely fitting for this book by Dershowitz, the "Sounds of Silence." I saw the book in the bookstore recently and being familiar with Constitutional Law theory for which Dershowitz is most noted among the legal community, I was interested to see how he treated the topics of the Ten Commandments and the dilemma of the Madonna vs the Prostitute in religious dogma as it affects our laws now. What I found was a most enthusiastic treatment of consequence where Dershowitz has outdone himself in addressing some of our most difficult moral problems rooted in our Biblical heritage to which we seem to cling with near steadfast loyalty. I actually think this book outperforms the work of Dershowitz in Constitutional Law since he is clearly enthralled by the topics, and his combination of legal and religious knowledge offer remarkably logical analysis in why we think as we do, and whether it is appropriate to think as we do. He has used his logical and linguistic skills very effectively to illuminate subjects that need a rational approach. If anything, he may not go far enough in relation to his analysis of the double standard that so affects the female in our culture as it relates to the economics of power and social freedom, but which also affects males due to their loss of equivalent resources from combining their talents in a life alliance. The aggregation of resources does not necessarily produce the benefits it should due to the low wages and glass ceilings their women cannot penetrate. It appears to be a very valuable read and a thoughtful, unique analysis of our human condition. I think he should do more since revelations like his can help to break "the sounds of silence" that such injustices rely upon to maintain the status quo.
Rating: 
Summary: An "Interesting Commentary"
Review: Dershowitz argues that Genesis shows God evolving from an arbitrary being, dictating ad-hoc rules to a mature being bound by the rule of law. Dershowitz's "evolving-God" argument underlies his theme that Genesis is a metaphor showing how legal systems generally evolve from arbitrary rules to the mature rule of law. (pp. 14, 203-215.) I question the validity of Dershowitz's argument that Genesis depicts God as evolving from an arbitrary dictator to a "constitutional monarch, binding himself to rules" (p. 210.) The seeds for deconstructing Dershowitz's evolving-God argument are found in the story which he refers to as his guiding principal in writing his book. Two great rabbis, both experts on Maimonides, die and go to heaven, where they continue to argue about an inconsistency between one Maimonidean text and another. Maimonides himself resolves the conflict by pointing out a simple transcription error in one of the texts-that is, the Rabbis are arguing about a text Maimonides did not actually write. The rabbis hear this simple solution to their argument and dismiss Maimonides altogether, stating that their debate involving an error-ridden text is much more interesting than contemplating the meaning of an accurate text. (pp. 15-16.) In this story, the privileged concept is debate for debate's sake. So it for Dershowitz, who repeatedly states he is not looking for answers but "interesting commentary" (16, 33.) Debate for debate's sake. The concept Dershowitz suppresses is the question of Textual Accuracy. That is, does the text Dershowitz quotes accurately recount the revelations from God which the recipients originally put to paper? "For purposes of this book, it does not matter whether Genesis was dictated to Moses by God or compiled by an editor from multiple sources." (p. 14.) But of course it matters. For example, Dershowitz wallows in juvenile joy about stumping a teacher with questions of Cain's wife. (There is no reference in Genesis to any female children being born of Adam and Eve, so where did Cain's wife come from?) Nahum M. Sarna argues that the passage regarding Cain's wife "cannot be other than a fragment of what was once a well-known and fuller story, now etched in the barest outline." (JPS Torah Commentary, Genesis, p. 45.) Is it so difficult to think that Adam and Eve bore girls, one of whom grew into a woman and married Cain? Just because Dershowitz's version of Genesis does not mention the birth of girls does not mean they were not born. To state otherwise-as Dershowitz does (p. 5)-is to be as fundamentalist as any fundamentalist he criticizes. "My version of Genesis says it (or does not say it). I believe it. Case closed." (p. 8.) Questions of Textual Accuracy make all the difference for purposes of Dershowitz's book and for biblical scholarship generally. If Dershowitz's Genesis text is inaccurate, then all we are left with is a man who takes an error-ridden, fictional text, makes clever comments about it, adds clever titles, and tries to pass the whole thing off as serious midrash. It is exactly like the two rabbis who continue their silly debate even after the truth is revealed to them. Several times, Dershowitz approaches the issue of Textual Accuracy, only to dance around it. For example, consider what he says about whether justice is found in this world or the next (ellipsis omitted): "It is untrue to the text of Genesis to read into punishment threatened here and now an implicit postponement to a world to come. It is also a far less interesting answer. It is far more interesting to search for enduring interpretations based on what was believed at the time, not centuries later." (p. 33.) This statement is packed with problems. First, Dershowitz argues that we must take the text in the context of the beliefs of those who wrote it. But to take the text in context is precisely to ask crucial questions as to who in fact wrote the text, when it was written, what they wrote, and whether what we have reflects what they wrote and what they believed! But remember, Dershowitz says these questions are exactly what is not important for his book. (p. 14.) Well, are they or not? Ultimately, questions of context (authorship and accuracy) are precisely the ones Dershowitz must suppress, because they may in fact prove that his reading of Genesis is the one that is untrue, that his own centuries-later interpretation of the context is actually not what the authors of Genesis believed at all. Dershowitz's insistence that his book is not part of the debate regarding Textual Accuracy, but rather "how we are to understand the stories" will not do, for how are we possibly to understand these "sacred stories" (p. 8) if the stories are incomplete and inaccurate? This book convinces me that for Dershowitz God is nothing more than a metaphor, and therefore questions of Textual Accuracy really are irrelevant. Dershowitz is interested only in using the metaphor of God and a particular text to engage in an interesting intellectual game. Dershowitz really is like the two rabbis debating the faulty Maimonidean text. The truth is irrelevant. All that matters is the debate, gaining power in the community, and making some money. For me though, questions of God's existence and nature are not a game-not a commodity to be bartered. For me, the Bible is a record of a living God's revelations to specific individuals. To me, as to Sarna and other commentators, it is clear that the full record of these revelations has been lost and what we do have has been terribly tampered with. Questions regarding Textual Accuracy are indispensable to determining who God is. Thus I struggle with the texts and contexts, and my struggles reveal a mountain of hard evidence that, contrary to Dershowitz's view, the living God is more than some "student in the university of the universe."
Rating: 
Summary: An "Interesting Commentary"
Review: Dershowitz argues that Genesis shows God evolving from an arbitrary being, dictating ad-hoc rules to a mature being bound by the rule of law. Dershowitz's "evolving-God" argument underlies his theme that Genesis is a metaphor showing how legal systems generally evolve from arbitrary rules to the mature rule of law. (pp. 14, 203-215.) I question the validity of Dershowitz's argument that Genesis depicts God as evolving from an arbitrary dictator to a "constitutional monarch, binding himself to rules" (p. 210.) The seeds for deconstructing Dershowitz's evolving-God argument are found in the story which he refers to as his guiding principal in writing his book. Two great rabbis, both experts on Maimonides, die and go to heaven, where they continue to argue about an inconsistency between one Maimonidean text and another. Maimonides himself resolves the conflict by pointing out a simple transcription error in one of the texts-that is, the Rabbis are arguing about a text Maimonides did not actually write. The rabbis hear this simple solution to their argument and dismiss Maimonides altogether, stating that their debate involving an error-ridden text is much more interesting than contemplating the meaning of an accurate text. (pp. 15-16.) In this story, the privileged concept is debate for debate's sake. So it is for Dershowitz, who repeatedly states he is not looking for answers but "interesting commentary" (16, 33.) Debate for debate's sake. The concept Dershowitz suppresses is the question of Textual Accuracy. That is, does the text Dershowitz quotes accurately recount the revelations from God which the recipients originally put to paper? "For purposes of this book, it does not matter whether Genesis was dictated to Moses by God or compiled by an editor from multiple sources." (p. 14.) But of course it matters. For example, Dershowitz wallows in juvenile joy about stumping a teacher with questions of Cain's wife. (There is no reference in Genesis to any female children being born of Adam and Eve, so where did Cain's wife come from?) Nahum M. Sarna argues that the passage regarding Cain's wife "cannot be other than a fragment of what was once a well-known and fuller story, now etched in the barest outline." (JPS Torah Commentary, Genesis, p. 45.) Is it so difficult to think that Adam and Eve bore girls, one of whom grew into a woman and married Cain? Just because Dershowitz's version of Genesis does not mention the birth of girls does not mean they were not born. To state otherwise-as Dershowitz does (p. 5)-is to be as fundamentalist as any fundamentalist he criticizes. "My version of Genesis says it (or does not say it). I believe it. Case closed." (p. 8.) Questions of Textual Accuracy make all the difference for purposes of Dershowitz's book and for biblical scholarship generally. If Dershowitz's Genesis text is inaccurate, then all we are left with is a man who takes an error-ridden, fictional text, makes clever comments about it, adds clever titles, and tries to pass the whole thing off as serious midrash. It is exactly like the two rabbis who continue their silly debate even after the truth is revealed to them. Several times, Dershowitz approaches the issue of Textual Accuracy, only to dance around it. For example, consider what he says about whether justice is found in this world or the next (ellipsis omitted): "It is untrue to the text of Genesis to read into punishment threatened here and now an implicit postponement to a world to come. It is also a far less interesting answer. It is far more interesting to search for enduring interpretations based on what was believed at the time, not centuries later." (p. 33.) This statement is packed with problems. First, Dershowitz argues that we must take the text in the context of the beliefs of those who wrote it. But to take the text in context is precisely to ask crucial questions as to who in fact wrote the text, when it was written, what they wrote, and whether what we have reflects what they wrote and what they believed! But remember, Dershowitz says these questions are exactly what is not important for his book. (p. 14.) Well, are they or not? Ultimately, questions of context (authorship and accuracy) are precisely the ones Dershowitz must suppress, because they may in fact prove that his reading of Genesis is the one that is untrue, that his own centuries-later interpretation of the context is actually not what the authors of Genesis believed at all. Dershowitz's insistence that his book is not part of the debate regarding Textual Accuracy, but rather "how we are to understand the stories" will not do, for how are we possibly to understand these "sacred stories" (p. 8) if the stories are incomplete and inaccurate? The deeper I consider this book, the more convinced I am that for Dershowitz God is nothing more than a metaphor, and therefore questions of Textual Accuracy really are irrelevant. Dershowitz seems to be interested only in using the metaphor of God and a particular text to engage in an interesting intellectual game. Dershowitz really is like the two rabbis debating the faulty Maimonidean text. The truth is irrelevant. All that matters is the debate, gaining power in the community, and selling a few books. For me though, questions of God's existence and nature are not a game. For me, the Bible is a record of a living God's revelations to specific individuals. To me, as to Sarna and other commentators, it is clear that the full record of these revelations has been lost and what we do have has been terribly tampered with. Questions regarding Textual Accuracy are indispensable to determining who God is. Thus I struggle with the texts and contexts, and my struggles reveal a mountain of hard evidence that, contrary to Dershowitz's view, the living God is more than some "student in the university of the universe."
Rating:
Summary: Engaging and Entertaining...
Review: For those with an open mind and a thirst for new Biblical insights, this book is a delight. It is just what you might expect from a brilliant legal mind, and more. Alan Dershowitz shares his research and analysis in an engaging and entertaining style on a subject for which he obviously has a tremendous passion.
Maimonides, Soren Kierkegaard, Abraham Ibn Ezra, Franz Kafka, Blaise Pascal, Everett Fox, and Bob Dylan are just a small handful of the voices invited to the party. The genius of this work is that while it presents so many different viewpoints (without necessarily adopting one "correct" interpretation over another), Dershowitz is still able to clearly show the reader that within the complex and confusing assortment of narratives that is Genesis, there exists a straightforward path toward the Law. This path, while full of injustice along the way, does not merely show us the need for the Law; it shows a developing legal system in process.
No matter how familiar you may think you are with the book of Genesis, you will be able to experience the narratives afresh. Dershowitz holds up the book of Genesis like a crystal in sunlight, its beauty seen in the reflections of light, observed at a number of different angles.
Rating:
Summary: What Moral Lessons Do You Draw From Genesis?
Review: I hesitate to wade in with an opinion on this book, since so many readers come to this subject matter with a pre-set agenda. However, I think that anyone with an open mind (Christian, Jew, agnostic or atheist) will find moral insight in Dershowitz's analysis of these 10 stories from Genesis. He is a "believer," but he proceeds with his own thoughtful workup of stories that most of us have heard but not really thought through. No, this isn't biblical scholarship per se, but it has insight and independence. I think a wide variety of folks will find it interesting.
Rating:
Summary: Magnificent!
Review: I was utterly amazed at the depth of insight, the logic, and the fairness demonstrated by Alan Dershowitz's treatment of this difficult topic. This is a book for anyone who has pondered questions of justice, from a human and from a divine viewpoint. Having recently read Just Revenge, Alan's second novel (highly recommended), I preordered this book knowing it would be special. It made me laugh sometimes--if Abraham had possessed the chutzpah of Alan Dershowitz, who knows how differently things might have turned out. Seriously, I found the book extremely well researched and enlightening. I'm Catholic, and was especially surprised by the author's seemingly favorable view of Jesus. Alan pointed out that Jesus wanted to make the law more compassionate, but that he contradicted himself by saying he came not to destroy but to fulfill the law. I don't feel there was a contradiction there, because as Alan himself demonstrated, the Bible is a living document in which the concepts of righteousness and justice evolved into a more mature understanding as time moved on. Well...I think that happened by God's design, and that Christ was indeed the fulfillment of not only the law, but the unanswered questions. I halfway expected Alan to arrive at that conclusion himself in the last chapter, when he discussed the question of an afterlife. I only wish Alan Dershowitz were a Christian, because he would be one of the most moral and effective evangelists of all time.
Rating:
Summary: thoughtful, repetitive interpretation of origins of justice
Review: It pains me to write an unflattering review of "The Genesis of Justice," as I admire both the integrity and intelligence of its author, Alan Dershowitz. Professor Dershowitz is at his best in descriptive analysis; he dissects ten stories from the book of Genesis in his attempt to prove his essential thesis: the Bible "uses stories of injustice to teach about the need for justice." If you judge "Genesis" by that standard, he has succeeded admirably. Dershowitz is a talented and prolific writer; his style is graceful and his arguments are exquisitely prepared and developed. However, a discerning reader ought expect more than biblical exigesis and patterned presentations of pro and con arguments about the stories selected. This volume reads much more like a series of interrelated, independent magazine-length stories than a comprehensive treatment of his selected thesis. By book's end, the reader can almost anticipate heavily repeated phrases to appear once and again. Sadly, his final four chapters seem almost to appear as a post-script rather than serve as a stirring summation of the understandings gained through synthesis and interpretation of the book of Genesis. Lest I appear disrespectful of Professor Deshowitz's efforts, I must praise his own passion for justice. His obvious quest for understanding, for combining a search for truth, understanding and retribution make this work an important philosophical keystone for anyone who hopes to understand how our culture reflects and aspires towards the ideals of justice articulated in the Bible. His own admonition that justice is a state never achieved but constantly sought after is both a warning and a call to action. "The Genesis of Justice," though flawed by repetitions and poor editing, is an important contribution to both our understanding of the Bible and our hopes for justice.
Rating:
Summary: thoughtful, repetitive interpretation of origins of justice
Review: It pains me to write an unflattering review of "The Genesis of Justice," as I admire both the integrity and intelligence of its author, Alan Dershowitz. Professor Dershowitz is at his best in descriptive analysis; he dissects ten stories from the book of Genesis in his attempt to prove his essential thesis: the Bible "uses stories of injustice to teach about the need for justice." If you judge "Genesis" by that standard, he has succeeded admirably. Dershowitz is a talented and prolific writer; his style is graceful and his arguments are exquisitely prepared and developed. However, a discerning reader ought expect more than biblical exigesis and patterned presentations of pro and con arguments about the stories selected. This volume reads much more like a series of interrelated, independent magazine-length stories than a comprehensive treatment of his selected thesis. By book's end, the reader can almost anticipate heavily repeated phrases to appear once and again. Sadly, his final four chapters seem almost to appear as a post-script rather than serve as a stirring summation of the understandings gained through synthesis and interpretation of the book of Genesis. Lest I appear disrespectful of Professor Deshowitz's efforts, I must praise his own passion for justice. His obvious quest for understanding, for combining a search for truth, understanding and retribution make this work an important philosophical keystone for anyone who hopes to understand how our culture reflects and aspires towards the ideals of justice articulated in the Bible. His own admonition that justice is a state never achieved but constantly sought after is both a warning and a call to action. "The Genesis of Justice," though flawed by repetitions and poor editing, is an important contribution to both our understanding of the Bible and our hopes for justice.
Rating:
Summary: Provides a new way to appreciate Genesis
Review: Never underestimate Alan Dershowitz. That's a lesson I learned when I was a student of his at Harvard Law School. Just when it seemed like he was cornered, with his argument tattered to ribbons, he would emerge with a counterargument that depended on his first argument being devasted. He had just successfully set-up the other professor (who shall remain nameless here) once again. Since then, I have seen him use the same strategy successfully time and again in many of his most famous cases. He has the nerve to skirt the edge of defeat to grasp victory. So I was not surprised to see that having taken on the Book of Genesis as his client that a similar strategy prevails here. The book is based on his successful seminar on the same subject which he has recently been teaching at Harvard. He does a marvelous job of taking a religious text and examining it as a source of legal precedent both in sacred and secular terms. Few would have the nerve, but your understanding of Genesis will be greatly improved as a result. He encourages you, as well as his students, to bring your own religious beliefs to the discussion. He proposes no official interpretations, and shares a diversity of opinions from learned Rabbis and religious thinkers of the Christian and Moslem faiths. In each case, he also shares his own interpretation. If you are like me, you will not always agree with him, but you will be interested to know what he concludes. He undertakes his inquiry in the spirit of a disputatious Hebrew school student who earned rebukes for his impertinent questions about where Cain's wife came from. He also draws from the Jewish tradition of encouraging the faithful to study the texts for their meaning. He clearly confronts the contradictions within Genesis through examining 10 stories, one per chapter. In the story of Adam and Eve and the expulsion from the Garden of Eden, Professor Dershowitz emphasizes that God changes the deal. Having told Adam that he would die if he ate from the Tree of Knowledge, Adam goes on to live quite a long life. Having never told Eve not to eat from the tree, God punishes her with pain of childbirth and expulsion also. He describes God as having erred in dealing with Adam and Eve. You'll have to decide for yourself what your interpretation is. The title of the chapter is "God Threatens -- and Backs Down." Here are the rest of the first 10 chapter titles. They give you a sense of the argument that Professor Dershowitz is building: Cain Murders -- and Walks God Overreacts -- and Floods the World Abraham Defends the Guilty -- and Loses Lot's Daughters Rape Their Father -- and Save the World Abraham Commits Attempted Murder -- and Is Praised Jacob Deceives -- and Gets Deceived Dina Is Raped -- and Her Brothers Take Revenge Tamar Becomes a Prostitute -- and the Progenitor of David and the Messiah Joseph is Framed -- and Then Frames His Brothers His basic points in these chapters are that bad things happen to good people and vice versa, that punishment on earth is often disproportionate and inappropriate (such as punishing descendents as yet unborn), and that the rules keep shifting. Having driven you to the brink of despair about what Genesis means, he then offers his counterargument that all of this is purposeful on God's part. In chapters 11 and 12, he argues that Genesis is there to set the stage for the Ten Commandments, so show what a world is like without firm and lasting sacred rules that apply to all people at all times. In this context, God's apparent inconsistency is not so troubling, because it is replaced with the consistency of today. In chapter 13, he argues that a meaningful set of religious rules requires that there be justice in an afterlife. Otherwise, the obvious injustices in this life would leave people disaffected from religion. In chapter 14, he connects each of the Ten Commandments to one of the stories in Genesis. These form both a precedent for principle, as well, as a background for understanding the need for a better rule. He connects these points to secular law, as well. Those with a Jewish religious education will find the material most familiar. To make the text more available to Christians and Moslems, he adopts the common English translations of the Hebrew for his usual references. Fundamentalist Christians will find an occasional nod in their direction, but will probably not find the information very helpful in many cases. Agnostics and people from religions not based on the Old Testament will find the perspective of creating a legal code primarily relevant to their interests. The modern-day examples of crime and criminals will be appealing to all. I think any reason to spend more time with God's word is good, and I applaud Professor Dershowitz for adding another useful perspective to the riot of apparent contradictions in Genesis. Those with faith will feel affirmed. Those without faith may find a pathway closer to that having faith. After you finish this book, think of your own examples of religious texts that provide confusion in your mind. Then do some reading to better understand what those texts could mean. Have faith and prosper!
| 
