I think you will find that there is a subtle reference to Moses NOT writing the books of Genesis in Luke 7:22 --
Yet, because Moses gave you circumcision (although actually it did not come from Moses, but from the Patriarchs), ...
Every other reference to Moses but one that I could find in the New Testament referred to specific laws that came through Moses. This would be from Exodus on.
The one reference that differs in in Luke 24:27, where "Moses and the Prophets" refers to all of the Hebrew Scriptures as a customary way of referring to them.
Moses is credited
by tradition with Genesis, and the Torah, the first five books, are put together as the Law and also the Law of Moses. But in the same way the older references to Isaiah included the writings of other prophets, reference to the Torah as the Law of Moses does the same. First of all, we know Moses did not write the chapter on his own death. We also know that he would not have been at all humble had he been the one who wrote about himself that he was the most humble of all men!
We also have several points in Genesis which are clearly editorial comments that Moses himself may have inserted when he was collating the written material he had that had come down from the patriarchs. You will see in Genesis 5:1 a distinct reference to the fact that this material is written, by the way.
Moses, as editor of Genesis in putting it together, is credited with the book. This is still done with editors who collect a series' of other's writings today. Thus, Genesis is grouped by the ancients with the direct writings of Moses, as all five books ended up coming as a group from him.
Jesus said no differently. He said the law was given through Moses, and so it was. During the sojourn in the wilderness.
Of course the Magoi (not 'magi' please!) were aware of Daniel's prophecies! Where do you think he had been a prisoner? Where was it that he became the chief of all the astrologers of his time? For several kings!
If you are serious about this question, however, (instead of just mocking me), here:
http://www.ldolphin.org/birth.html
It's 'reasonably' well-researched -- biblically and astronomically and historically. They all fit together, which is exactly what we would expect of God, right?
Aaron asked why no recognized authorities accept the Tablet Hypothesis (the name of it) of Genesis. They DO! I have posted on this SO many times, Aaron!
There is are two good URL's on the net regarding this:
http://www.biblemysteries.com/library/biblestudy.htm
http://www.ldolphin.org/tablethy.html
also
Oswald T. Allis of Princeton and later Westminster Theological Seminary
in "The Five Books of Moses" Presbyterian & Reformed (1964)
R. K. Harrison, Prof. of Old Testament, Wycliffe College, University of Toronto, "Introduction to the Old Testament", Eerdsmans, 1969.
Ishmael contributed his family's geneology in Gen. 25:12-18, which is incorporated into Isaac's account, which ends with his signature tolodot in verse 19. In a similar way, Jacob incorporated Esau's contribution regarding his family line into Gen. 36:1-43. Jacob closes his account in Genesis 37:2a. From 37:2b to the end the account was probably written by a scribe of Joseph's, since he became royalty and would have had a scribe to take dictation.
Seigfried, the woman I translated for (actually I translated for the deaf friend who knew the hand language for the deaf/blind, which I don't) was so excited to hear about Jesus. She was ready for it. She kept signing, "God told me there was something special. This is it. It is Jesus!"
I don't know how God spoke to her. All I know is that she immediately knew that Jesus was the truth and she grabbed on to Him in a way that would shame most of the rest of us. I remember feeling almost numb with shock. I believe she has died now; she was quite elderly when we were with her, and when my deaf friend moved, the contact was broken. But alive or dead, I know whose arms she is at rest in.
I don't know how God has dealt with the other blind/deaf in history. But I do know He has.
