what every seminarian knows, but is afraid to talk about ! who “wrote?” “composed?”...
TRANSCRIPT
Who “Wrote?” “Composed?” “Compiled?” “Edited?” the Torah or the Pentateuch
What every Seminarian knows, but is afraid to talk about !
The information and pictures are mostly from the public domain. If an image is copyrighted and we missed it let us know and we will change it.
Habe nun, ach! Philosophie,Juristerei und Medizin,Und leider auch TheologieDurchaus studiert, mit heißem Bemühn.Da steh ich nun, ich armer Tor!Und bin so klug als wie zuvor;Heiße Magister, heiße Doktor garUnd ziehe schon an die zehen JahrHerauf, herab und quer und krummMeine Schüler an der Nase herum-Und sehe, daß wir nichts wissen können!Das will mir schier das Herz verbrennen.Zwar bin ich gescheiter als all die Laffen,Doktoren, Magister, Schreiber und Pfaffen;Mich plagen keine Skrupel noch Zweifel,Fürchte mich weder vor Hölle noch Teufel-Dafür ist mir auch alle Freud entrissen,Bilde mir nicht ein, was Rechts zu wissen,Bilde mir nicht ein, ich könnte was lehren,Die Menschen zu bessern und zu bekehren.
Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
Ah! Now I’ve done Philosophy, I’ve finished Law and Medicine (History) and (Education) And even Theology: Taken fierce pains, from end to end. Now here I am, a fool for sure! No wiser than I was before: Master, Doctor’s what they call me, And I’ve been (many) ten years, already, Leading my students by the nose, And see that we can’t know – allot! It almost sets my heart burning. I’m cleverer than all these teachers, Doctors, Masters, scribes, preachers:
I’m not plagued by doubt or scruple, Scared by neither Hell nor Devil –
Instead all Joy is snatched away, What’s worth knowing, I am not sure, I can’t say what I should teach To make men better or convert each.
1. Expresses some of my Ambivalent
Feelings Today !
Why mention Goethe’s Faust?
2. You needed to hear some German, since most of the rascally critical Bible
scholars are Germans
Johann Gottfried Eichhorn
Johann S. Vater, Wilhelm M. L. De Wette,
Heinrich Ewald , Franz Delitzsch,
Hermann Hupfeld, Karl Heinrich Graf, Julius Wellhausen , Gerhard von Rad,
Rolf RendtorffEtc.
Hupfeld
De Wette
Ewald
Wellhausen
Gunkel
von Rad
Noth
Eichhorn
Rendtorff
3. I just wanted to get your attention !
Oral Sources of the Faust Legends
A Real PersonDr. Johann Faust or Faustus (c. 1480–1540),
a German scholar of supposedly magical powers.
Published DocumentsHistoria von D. Johann Fausten, 1587
Christopher Marlowe’s The Tragical History of Dr. Faustus, c. 1588
4. Literary Criticism influenced recent Source Studies of the Old
Testament
Then Goethe’s “Faust”
If things don’t go well with the presentation,I will say: what do you expect
My area of expertise is:
Early Modern Europe with emphasis on Austria
and Education in the Third Reich with emphasis on Adult Education
My Major 58 years ago was Theology
If things go well with the presentation,I will say:
Yah-weh Elohim
The LORD God
ה הו�� ים י� � לה א�
Who “Wrote?” “Composed?” “Compiled?” “Edited?” the Pentateuch
Higher Criticism,Source Criticism, &
The Documentary Hypothesisclaim to have the Answer?
Do they?
“…no new paradigm or scholarly consensus has emerged to displace the old theories “ (Documentary Hypothesis)… even though many new theories have been proposed. Gordon Wenham, Themelios 22.1 (October 1996): 3
“The Documentary Hypothesis is a widely-held theory about the historical origin and formation of the first and most important section of the Old Testament, the Pentateuch”. Mark A. McNeil, The Documentary Hypothesis, http://vfbaptist.org/articles/articles/article00047.htm
“The Documentary Hypothesis is widely taught and accepted at the most respected Christian and Jewish seminaries around the world.” http://greek-language.com/bible/palmer/05torahauthorship.PDF P.8
“Most critical bible scholars, however, accept the principle of multiple authorship, and Wellhausen's identification of four basic accounts…the New International Version take a middle ground, believing that Moses was the author of much of the text, and editor and compiler of the majority of the rest. “ http://www.cs.umd.edu/~mvz/bible/doc-hyp.pdf
Why should we be familiar with the Documentary Hypothesis of the Pentateuch ?
“This approach has been the predominant scholarly model for the last two hundred years” Lloyd R. Bailey, The Pentateuch, (Abingdon Press: Nashville,1983) p. 35
Why should we be familiar with the Documentary Hypothesis of the Pentateuch ?
“…so thoroughly has it dominated the field that some scholars simply assume it to be correct and feel no need to offer evidence to support it. This in spite of the fact that recently penetrating critiques from both evangelical and liberal scholars have exposed its major weaknesses”.
Greg A. King (Pacific Union College) The Documentary Hypothesis, Journal of the Adventist Theological Society, 12/1 (2001): 22.
Greg A. King
Smallpox killed an estimated 300 million to 500 million during the 20th century alone. Smallpox has been one of humanity's most merciless scourges but has been totally eradicated. How?Through VaccinesMost vaccines contain a little bit of a disease germ that is weak or dead.Vaccines create immunity that protects from an infection without causing the suffering of the disease itself.
Could exposure to questionable Theories under controlled conditions create immunity
to Dangerous Ideas ?
Why should we be familiar with the Documentary Hypothesis of the Pentateuch ?
My teenage experience – Reading:
Deuteronomy 34 : 5, 7-8 Donation of Constantine
My teenage experience – readingDeuteronomy 34 : 5, 7-8
5 So Moses the servant of the LORD died there in the land of Moab, according to the word of the LORD7 And Moses was an hundred and twenty years old when he died: his eye was not dim, nor his natural force abated. 8 And the children of Israel wept for Moses in the plains of Moab thirty days: so the days of weeping and mourning for Moses were ended.
I Thought how strange, but I did not think anything about it. My German Bible names the books of the Pentateuch – The “Books of Moses”So it must beMoses who wroteabout his own death
It took some years toreconsider the fact
Lorenzo Valla
The Donation of Constantine suggests that Constantine I "donated" the whole of the Western Roman Empire to the Roman Catholic Church as an act of gratitude for having been miraculously cured of leprosy by Pope Sylvester I.
The Donation of Constantine, could not possibly have been written in the historical era of Constantine I (4th Century), as its vernacular style dated conclusively to a later era (8th Century)
A 13th-century fresco of Sylvester and Constantine, showing the purported Donation.
Santi Quattro Coronati, Rome
Claims are not always correct.
They can be investigated!
My teenage experience: Florence
Pope SylvesterEmperorConstantine
1.The Enlightenment (Age of Reason) The Bible was not considered God’s special revelation but was written by mere human beings
a. Everything is to be explained naturally. b. The supernatural is excluded from interpretationsc. The Bible is only a human book and is to be interpreted
as such naturalistically
2. Hegelian PhilosophyChange from simple to more complex
3. Evolution
Higher Criticism is a Product of the: Noumenal
World
God
Phenomenal
WorldOur
Sensory World
G A P
Kant
Higher Criticism is a branch of literary analysis that investigates the books of the Bible and compares them to other texts. . . It Includes:
Source, Source criticism questions traditional authorship, it attempts to determine the original sources. In the Old Testament it focuses on the sources of the Pentateuch (Documentary hypothesis) and Kings and Chronicles Form, attempts to determine literary patterns in Scripture, isolate units of text, and trace each unit to its “origin” in oral tradition. It seeks to determine a unit's original form and the historical context. Redaction, Redaction criticism believes the present day documents are merely edited versions, so it attempts to determine the specific revisions or edits to the text. Traditio-historical criticism - tries to trace the oral traditions, History of Transmission Literary, as well as others.
Source criticism is the pivotal method of higher criticism
Higher Criticism claims to solve the Questions raised.
Oral tradition which have already some coherence
SagenMyth
Laws Form criticism identifies the earliest oral
stories
Traditio-historical criticism describes the process leading up to the formation of the longer written source documents
SongsRituals
Folk Tales
Source criticism explains how the source-documents were identified and brought together
Literary criticism is interested in the Final
Product, the text of the Pentateuch
Genesis Exodus Leviticus Numbers Deuteronomy
Pentateuch
J E D PRedaction criticism. Putting it all togetherRedaction
1. Traditional Conservative View (also Adventist)
a. Moses is the author of the Pentateuch
b. It was written ca. 1400 BCc. It is inspired by God
2. Radical Documentarian View
a. Moses is not the author of any of itb. It was written much later than
Moses’ timec. It is a composite of many documents
and authors and a result of literary evolution
d. It is not inspired by God.
Pentateuch: Competing World Views
Glenn Giles, The Documentary Hypothesis - Evidence for Christianity
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Documentary_hypothesis
Spanish rabbi
Abraham Ibn Ezra (1089-?)
He believed certain passages did not come from Moses' own hand:
passages that referred to Moses in the third person, terms that Moses would not have known, places where Moses had never been, language that reflected another time and locale from those of Moses.
Early Suspicions about the Mosaic Origin of the Pentateuch
The Book Exodus with the commentary of Abraham ibn Ezra, Naples 1488
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraham_ibn_Ezra
Andreas Carlstadt, (1486 –1541)
One time friend of Martin Luther and 16th century scholar
The description of Moses' death was written in the same style as preceding narrative. Moses could not have described his own death, therefore the book of Deuteronomy may not be his work.
Otto Eissfeldt, The Old Testament an Introduction, (1965) 159
Early Suspicions about the Mosaic Origin of the Pentateuch
Baruch Spinoza (1632 –1677) a Spanish Jewish scholar who claimed the Pentateuch was not written by Moses because:
1. in passages he is spoken of in third person rather than first person (he rather than I) (“Now the man Moses was very humble, more than any man who was on the face of the earth.” Numbers 12:3 )
2 Moses could not have written of his own death in Deut. 34 3. unsubstantiated historical references (Gen 14:14; Ex 16:35; Deut 1:1;
etc.),
4. inconsistencies within the text (Ex 4:20; 18:2)
A redactors (Ezra) composed the present-day Pentateuch many years after the death of Moses. (ca. 480 - 440 B.C.)
Early Suspicions about the Mosaic Origin of the
Pentateuch
The Birth and History of DH
• From there Abraham journeyed toward the region of the Negeb…While residing in Gerar as an alien, Abraham said of his wife Sarah, “She is my sister.” (Gen. 20:1-2)
• So Isaac settled in Gerar. When the men of the place asked him about his wife, he said “She is my sister.” (Gen. 26:6-7)
• Richard Simon (1638-1712) noticed that some stories in Genesis were very similar.
• He developed the theory that the Pentateuch was a compilation of a number of sources.
• Some of these sources could have been derived from Moses.
For Simon, Ezra was the editor of the final form of the Pentateuch.Thus, the Torah was a product of the postexilic period; the fifth century B.C.
The Birth and History of DH
• Jean Astruc (1684-1766) noticed something odd about some lines in Genesis 2.
• One referred to God as Elohim. See blue arrow:
• The other used Yhwh. See red arrow:
Jean Astruc 1684-1766
www9.georgetown.edu/faculty/pilchj/Documentary_Hypothesis.ppt
Gen 1:1-2:3
Gen 2:4-25
Moses compiled Genesis
from several centuries of
oral and written materials, laying them
out in four columns;
later editors combined these columns to produce a
continuous Narrative.
This explains why some of the narrative material is not in chronological order
To identify the Sources he Employed :1. divine names Elohim
and YHWH2. duplicate
narratives
He found two recognizable primary and parallel sources, as well as some 10 minor fragmentary sources.
From this time forward Moses was no longer considered the direct author of the Pentateuch
Jean Astruc
1684-1766
The source, based on Elohim, he titled A; the other source, based on YHWH, he titled B; the remaining material he placed in two other columns, C and D. Otto Eissfeldt, The Old Testament an Introduction, (1965) 161
Jean Astruc 1684-1766
Elohim
The Birth and History of DH1. He extended Astruc’s criteria of:
a) divine names usedb) duplicate narratives
to include: c) literary style d) thought content,
2.broaded his approach to include the entire Pentateuch.He Changed Astruc’s A and B to E and J respectively, which are the first letters of the corresponding divine names—
He also identified several smaller Sources
3.Concluded that the Pentateuch was much later than Moses and he could not be the author.
Eichhorn
Johann Gottfried Eichhorn (1780-83)
Competing Views on the
Origin of Genesis thru
Deuteronomy
Astruc (Documentary Theory)
1. Fragmentary Theory2. Supplementary
Theory3. Crystallization Theory
Wellhausen (Documentary Theory)
Chart from: Did Moses Write the Torah? Examining the JEDP Theory. Allan A. MacRae. Robert C. Newman. Abstracts of Powerpoint Talks. - newmanlib.ibri.org
Competing Views on the Origin of Genesis thru Deuteronomy
Alexander Geddes, a Scottish Roman Catholic priest proposed a “fragmentary theory” in 1792. Pentateuch was copied from many fragments
Johann S. Vater, advanced in his Commentar uber Den Pentateuch Vol 1-3 (1802,1805) the idea that Genesis was composed from at least 39 different fragments which he dated from Moses’ time up to 586 B.C.
Redactor
1400 BC
Fragmentary Theory
Chart from: Did Moses Write the Torah? Examining the JEDP Theory. Allan A. MacRae. Robert C. Newman. Abstracts of Powerpoint Talks. - newmanlib.ibri.org
"The work might have been compiled by a single editor who joined together into a single but somewhat jumbled whole a mass of quite independent short written pieces." [Whybray, The Making of the Pentateuch, 17]
Joining intoPentateuch
950 BC
586 BC
“Grundschrift”
JahwehisticSource
Supplementing
Other Material
Other Material
Other Material
Competing Views on the Origin of Genesis thru Deuteronomy
Supplementary Hypothesis One basic source with numerous expansions.
". . . there might originally have been a single, consistent, unified account composed by a single author, to which, for various reasons, later writers made additions, so distorting the original unity of the composition.“
[Whybray, The Making of the Pentateuch, 17]
E
Competing Views on the Origin of Genesis thru Deuteronomy
The origin of the Supplementary Hypothesis is to be found in Heinrich Ewald review of J.J. Stahelin, Kritische Untersuchungen uber die Genesis (1831), and in Franz Delitzsch (1852)
Heinrich Ewald (1823) noticed an impressive unity running thru Genesis. It couldn’t very well be a mass of independent fragments.
a. proposed the “supplementary theory” of the origin of the Pentateuch in which there was “one basic document or body of tradition (E) which underlay all the rest and which dated from about 1050-950 BC” (Archer, 83)
b. later additions were made by the J author
c. laws attributed to Moses by the text were genuinely his. The rest were codified by priests after the conquest of Canaan
Heinrich Ewald
Supplementary Hypothesis
Franz Delitzsch
“Grundschrift”
JahwehisticSource
Supplementing
Other Material
Other Material
Other Material
E
Ewald suggested that J and E were types of material which gradually accumulated, being composed in view of the currently existing compilation.
Crystallization Theory
Competing Views on the Origin of Genesis thru Deuteronomy
accumulation
accumulation
gradually accumulate
d
accumulation
accumulation
gradually accumulate
d
Ewald later developed this theory to solve problems in the Supplementary Theory, as it looked like both J and E materials assumed the existence of the other.
J E
JEDP
Pentateuch
Analogies for explaining the Composition of the Pentateuch
Documentary Hypothesis
Fragmentary Hypothesis
Supplementary
Hypothesis
E
Jahwehistic Source
one basic document
Pentateuch
Pentateuch
Astruc (Documentary Theory)
1. Fragmentary Theory2. Supplementary
Theory3. Crystallization Theory
Hupfeld Graf KuenenWellhausen (Documentary Theory)
Back to the Development of the Documentary Hypothesis
Hermann Hupfeld (March 31, 1796 – April 24, 1866)The 4 document theory
Re-examined the E document and proposed that there were two documents (E1 and E2)
SourcesE2
Sources
D
Hermann Hupfeld
SourcesE1
Sources
J
The documents could be distinguished within the extant text of the Torah, but they could actually be recovered and reconstructed as separate documents from that text.
Hupfeld posited the existence of an “editor,” or Redaktor, (R)
Later
E
P
JD
Development of the DH
Development of the DH
Karl Heinrich Graf (1866) a. P contained legal material so proposed
“legal-P” document. b. “legal-P” was later than Dc. Historical P was very early so had order
of documents as P,E,J,D, legal-Pd. E supplemented by J, E-J put together
by the author of D in Josiah’s day.
Abraham Kuenen (1869) a. argued for a unified P document which
should not be splitb. argued that the entire P document had
to be of late origin. c. now the order changed from P-E-J-D-legalP
to J-E-D-P. P went from the earliest to the latest in dating.
Historical P
E
JD
Legal-P
J
E
D
P
Definitive Formulation of the
Documentary Hypothesis
Astruc DeWette Hupfeld Valke Eichhorn Ewald Graf
E E E1 E2 JJ J E2 J E D J D D D E1 P
Wellhausen
Tortures Development of the Documentary Hypothesis of the Pentateuch
Definitive Formulation
Julius Wellhausen (1878).
a. contributed basically nothing new
b. restated the four source theory with “great skill and persuasiveness, supporting the JEDP sequence upon an evolutionary basis” fitted into Hegelian dialecticism and the supposed evolutionary development of polytheism to monotheism in the Jewish religion. Gleason Archer, A Survey of Old Testament Introduction (1985 ed), p.89
“…was largely based on a Hegelian philosophy of history, not upon his literary analysis. It was an a priori evolutionary scheme that guided him…" – G.E.Mendenhall in The Bible & the Ancient Near East: Essays in Honor of William F. Albright., 32.
c. Became “Graf-Wellhausen Hypothesis” or “The Documentary Hypothesis”
d. Classic statement is found in his Prolegomena to the History of Ancient Israel (New York: The World Publishing Co, 1957).
Definitive Formulation of theDocumentary Hypothesis
http://www.evidenceforchristianity.org/the-documentary-hypothesis-power-point/
Wellhausen proposed that the Pentateuch was composed these four main sources.
J = Yahwist
E = Elohist
D = Deuteronomist
P = Priestly writer
Visualizing the Documentary Hypothesis
JEDP
Pentateuch
A helpful analogy. A phone cords consist of several wires that run parallel to one another. These wires are covered by an outer casing. The outer casing, is the only portion visible, makes these cords look like a unity. However,when the outer casing is removed, distinct wires are visible.
The Pentateuch may look like a unity, once it is carefully examined, several distinct strands (Documents) become visible to critical scholars.
Julius Wellhausen’s three Key
Presuppositions
1. Scripture must submit itself to human reason and contemporary methods of study and modes of thought;
2. Humans are the only authors of scripture.
3. Scripture has errors
Wellhausen established the criteria for the classical theory of the documentary hypothesis.
Since then, proponents use five literary identifiers to distinguish the sources.
1. variation in the ways of referring to God ((Elohim myhla and Yahweh hwhy)
2. Duplication (Doublets) and repetition of material;
3. variation in vocabulary and literary style;
4. contrasting author perspectives;
5. evidence of editorial activity.
Wellhausen’s Criteria for the Documentary Hypothesis.
www9.georgetown.edu/faculty/pilchj/Documentary_Hypothesis.ppt
Some Examplesof the Identifiers to distinguish the Sources
1. Variation in the ways of referring to God
Gen. 1:1In the beginning God created heaven and earth. Bereshit bara Elohim et hashamayim ve'et ha'arets.Gen. 1:2 The earth was without form and empty, with darkness on the face of the depths, but God's spirit moved on the water's surface. Veha'arets hayetah tohu vavohu vechoshech al-peney tehom veruach Elohim merachefet al-peney hamayim.Gen. 1:3 God said, 'There shall be light,' and light came into existence.
Vayomer Elohim yehi-or vayehi-or.
Gen 2 & 3 uses YHWH Elohim
--The use of two different names for God (Elohim myhla & Yahweh hwhy) in different passagesFor example: 1:1-2:3 uses Elohim
Gen. 4: 6-16 uses Yahweh6 Lord (Yahweh) said to Cain, "Why are you angry? …9 Yahweh said to Cain, "Where is Abel, your brother?" …10Yahweh said, "What have you done? …13 Cain said to Yahweh, "My punishment is greater than I can bear. .. 15 Yahweh said to him, "Therefore whoever slays Cain, vengeance will be taken on him sevenfold." Yahweh appointed a sign for Cain, lest any finding him should strike him. 16 Cain went out from Yahweh's presence, and dwelt in the land of Nod, on the east of Eden.
a. two different stories of creationb. two converged stories of the floodc. two stories of the covenant between God and Abrahamd. two stories of Abraham claiming Sarah is his sistere. two stories of Jacob making a journey to Mesopotamiaf. two stories of God changing Jacob's name to Israelg. two stories of Moses getting water from a rock at a place
called Meribah (From http://prophetess.lstc.edu/~rklein/Doc4/source.htm).
Some Examplesof the Identifiers to distinguish the Sources
2. Doublets seemingly repeating the same story
Genesis 1:2-2:3 Genesis 2:4b-25
plants plants were created on the third day of the initial week (11-12)
animals animals as existing before man (24-26)
Man & woman (simultaneous) man was made on the sixth day (26ff),
man Adam created before the animals are formed (19)
plants plants and herbs s appear after the formation of man (5ff)
animals Woman (21ff)
Creator Elohim mentioned thirty-five times
Elohim speaks, separates, names, and blesses
Yahweh or Yahweh Elohim mentioned eleven times
Yahweh forms, breathes, plants,puts to sleep, builds
Doublets repeating the same story with consequent contradictions
E J
Some Examplesof the Identifiers to distinguish the Sources
Noah's special statusThen the LORD said to Noah, "Go into the ark, you and all your household, for I have seen that you alone are righteous before me in this generation. [7:1]
Noah's special status"For my part, I am going to bring a flood of waters on the earth, to destroy from under heaven all flesh in which is the breath of life; everything that is on the earth shall die. But I will establish my covenant with you; and you shall come into the ark, you, your sons, your wife, and your sons' wives with you." [6:17-18]
Animals by pairs and seven pairs"Take with you seven pairs of all clean animals, the male and its mate; and a pair of the animals that are not clean, the male and its mate; and seven pairs of the birds of the air also, male and female, to keep their kind alive on the face of all the earth. For in seven days I will send rain on the earth for forty days and forty nights; and every living thing that I have made I will blot out from the face of the ground." And Noah did all that the LORD had commanded him. [7:2-5]
Animals by pairs"And of every living thing, of all flesh, you shall bring two of every kind into the ark, to keep them alive with you; they shall be male and female. Of the birds according to their kinds, of every creeping thing of the ground according to its kind, two of every kind shall come in to you, to keep them alive. Also take with you every kind of food that is eaten, and store it up; and it shall serve as food for you and for them." Noah did this; he did all that God commanded him. [6:19-22]
Duration of flood
The rain fell on the earth forty days and forty nights. [6:12]
Duration of floodAnd the waters swelled on the earth for one hundred fifty days. [7:24]
End of floodAt the end of forty days Noah opened the window of
the ark that he had made and sent out the raven; and it went to and fro until the waters were dried up
from the earth. Then he sent out the dove ... He waited another seven days, and again he sent out the dove... Then he waited another seven days, and sent out the dove; and it did not return to him any more. [8:6-12]
End of floodIn the six hundred first year, in the first month, the first day of the month, the waters were dried up from the earth; and Noah removed the covering of the ark, and looked, and saw that the face of the ground was drying. In the second month, on the twenty-seventh day of the month, the earth was dry. Then God said to Noah, "Go out of the ark, you and your wife, and your sons and your sons' wives with you....[8:13-16]
Doublets repeating the same story with consequent contradictionsWeaving together two previous versions of the Flood Story, J source and P source
J P
http://www.evidenceforchristianity.org/the-documentary-hypothesis-power-point/
Triplets repeating the same story with consequent contradictions
Genesis 12: 10-20 Abram (Abraham)
Genesis 20:1-18 Abraham Genesis 26:6-14 Isaac
Pharaoh was told of the beauty of Sarah“Behold now, I know that thou art a fair woman to look upon:..13 Say, I pray thee, thou art my sister: that it may be well with me for thy sake; and my soul shall live because of thee. (v.13-15)
“and there Abraham said of his wife Sarah, "She is my sister." Then Abimelek king of Gerar sent for Sarah and took her.” (v.2)
6 So Isaac stayed in Gerar.7 When the men of that place asked him about his wife, he said, “She is my sister,” because he was afraid to say, “She is my wife.”
Pharaoh gave Abram gifts before discovering that Sarah was Abraham’s wife not sister (v. 16)
Abimelech gave Abraham gifts after discovering thatSarah was Abraham’s wife not sister (v. 14-16)
J E J
Abraham/Isaac Claiming Wife Is the Sister
In the first account Israel sees the thunder and lightning and stays at a distance from the mountain. But, in the second account they go up to the mountain and see the smoke and fire.
Doublets repeating the same story with consequent
contradictions
When the people saw the thunder and lightning and heard the trumpet and saw the mountain in smoke, they
trembled with fear. They stayed at a distance (Exodus 20:18, NASB)
Then Moses led the people out of the camp to meet with
God, and they stood at the foot of the mountain. Mount Sinai was covered with smoke, because the LORD descended on it in fire. The smoke billowed up from it like smoke from a furnace, the whole mountain trembled violently (Exodus 19:17-18, NASB)
Three versions of the crossing of “The Red Sea” , which hang more or less together when separated (Exodus 13:17-
14:31) • Version 1
• YHWH• Israelites flee • Pharaoh responds • Egyptians pursue• A pillar of cloud
stands between Israel & the Egyptians
• Sea pushed back from shore by a wind
• Egyptians thrown into panic
• Egyptians flee onto dry seabed & are drowned when the sea returns (17:23,28))
• Version 2
• Elohim• Israelites
permitted to leave
• Pharaoh’s & Egyptians’ minds are changed
• Egyptians pursue
• Angel of Elohim stands between Israel and the Egyptians
• Nothing happens to the sea.
• Angel clogs Egyptians’ chariot wheels; they can’t pursue (but are not killed) (17:25)
Triplets repeating the same story with consequent contradictions
Version 3
YHWH
Israelites leave
YHWH hardens Pharaoh’s heart
Egyptians pursue
Moses splits sea, creating a path with walls of water on both sides
Egyptians pursue Israelites into the path
Moses closes sea, drowning the Egyptians
Vivid narrative of Exodus 2—the childhood and early career of Moses—
Ponderous accounts of the building and equipping of the tent sanctuary in Exodus 36-40.
Some Examplesof the Identifiers to distinguish the Sources
"I talked to mom” or "I spoke to my mother.“ These two phrases are from two different people.
These same variations in writing style can be seen in the Torah. "Yahweh said to Moses." Numbers 21:16 "Yahweh spoke unto Moses." Exodus 4:30
3. Language and Style differences
Certain parts of the Pentateuch are: statistical or enumerative, other parts are narrative most of Deuteronomy consists of exhortation
No. Documents No. of Distinct Styles
Two Documents 2 2
Fragmentary Many Many
Supplementary 2 2
Crystallization Many 2
JEDP 4 3
BROAD STYLES IN GENESIS- NUMBERSLofty, grandiose, formal, dull, intimate etc.
J is primarily narrative using "Yahweh."E is primarily narrative using "Elohim."D is primarily exhortation.P is primarily statistical and tabular material.
A closer look at each of the four Documents in Documentary Hypothesis
1)J = Yahwist
2)E = Elohist
3)D = Deuteronomist
4)P = Priestly writer
J Jahwist
written ca 800 BC;Prefers the narrative style and stories
stress on Judah;Calls indigenous people “Canaanites”
stresses leaders
anthropomorphic speech about God
God walks and talks with us
God is YHWH
uses "Sinai” for God’s mountain
Jahwist9th cent BC
E Elohist
Written ca 750 BC
stress on northernIsrael;Calls indigenous people “Amorites”
stresses the prophetic
refined speech about God, narrative, stories of warning
God speaks in dreams
God is Elohim (till Ex 3)
Uses "Horeb” as God’s mountain in place of Sinai
JE JE
Jahwist9th cent BC
Elohist750 BC
D Deuteronomist
Written under high priest Hilkiah & king Josiah 621 BCUsed to ReformAbandon worship in High
Places stress on central shrine.
stresses fidelity toJerusalem
speech recalling God's work
moralistic approach
God is YHWH
has speeches and long sermons
Hilkiah the high priest said to Shaphan the secretary, "I have found the Book of the Law in the temple of the LORD." He gave it to Shaphan, who read it. 2 Kings 22:8
JE
Jahwist9th cent BC
JE (D) Deuteronomist
650 BC later
Elohist750 BC
P Priestly
Written in various stages (Ezekiel to Ezra)
stress on Judah
stresses the
cultic
majestic speech about God
cultic approach to God
God is Elohim (till Ex 3)
has genealogies and lists
Deuteronomist
650 BC later
JE
Jahwist9th cent BC
JE (D)
Elohist750 BC
Deuteronomist
650 BC laterPriestly
JEDP
JE
Jahwist9th cent BC
JE (D)
Elohist750 BC
Deuteronomist
650 BC laterPriestly
JEDP
Redactor
Redactors (Editors) combine the sources at various stages
PPT] Did Moses Write the Torah? - Newmanlib.ibri.org
Oral
1. Deuteronomy found in temple under Josiah 622. A Document that did not know ideas of Deuteronomy had
to be before 622. If it knew items from Deuteronomy it had to be after.
Deuteronomy became one of the Anker for the dating the Pentateuch
Wellhausen’s Sequencing and Dating
2. Wellhausen divided, sequenced and dated the sources according to his view of the development of the Israelite
religion and Hegelian evolutionary ideas
Lit. Society Religion Law1. J
E
primitive, tribal, semi-nomadic (Judges)
free, unorganized, natural worship at many local shrines; monolatrous at best
Book of the CovenantEx. 20:22 – 23:19; (esp. 20:24)
2. D monarchy (Samuel, Kings)
prophets, the real founders of Israelite religion, advocate strict monotheism; God personal, not national; ethical, not natural; worship centralized
Deuteronomic Law(esp. 12:1-7)
3. P ecclesiastical hierarchy in post-exilic times
cultus end in itself; denatured, formulistic worship; fraudulent ancient setting created to give it authority
Priestly CodeEx 25-31; 35-40; Lv and legal portions of Numbers
J & E D PTheology
Polytheism, HenotheismMonotheism
Ethics Lower Higher
Worship and Laws Simpler More Complex
Place of Worship Many One One Assumed
Priest Head of Family
Levites Priests
Wellhausen’s Sequencing and Dating
CHARACTERISTICS OF DIFFERENT ERAS AND SOURCES
Early Monarchy / J E
Late Monarchy / D Post-Exilic / P
Place of worship
Any holy place
Attempt to centralize all worship in Jerusalem
Jerusalem the only sanctuary
Sacrifice Voluntary, joyful family occasion
Sacrifices only in Jerusalem. Secular slaughter elsewhere
Sacrifices highly regulated and expiatory
Festivals Local harvest celebration
Pilgrimage to Jerusalem required
Festivals fixed by calendar. Linked to history not harves
Priesthood Anyone could act as priest and sacrifice
Tribe of Levitical priests becoming important
Highly organized priesthood with great authority. Descended from Levi and Aaron
Priestly Income
Parts of sacrifices voluntarily given by offerer
Shoulder, cheeks and stomach of sacrifices
Many sacrificial animals, tithes, firstlings
Wellhausen’s Sequencing according to Hegel
Thesis Anti-Thesis
JESynthesis Anti-Thesis
D
J E
Grand Synthesis
P
New Thesis
“The purpose of J, then, was to provide Judah with a ‘historical’ document that would justify Judah’s and Jerusalem’s claim to be the governmental center of all Israel. Likewise, E would be the antithetical production of the kingdom of north Israel, led by the tribe of Ephraim, to show that there were historical antecedents in the Patriarchs and in Joshua for the governmental center to be located in the north.”—G. Herbert Livingston, The Pentateuch In Its Cultural Environment (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1974), 228-231
United kingdom
Divided Kingdoms1. Israel (North)2. Judah (South)
Assyrian
Babylonian
Persian
Israel Judah
Captivity
Reform
Wellhausen’s Sequencing and Dating
Post-Exile
CREATION OF THE PENTATEUCH
2100 BC--Abraham's Lifetime
2000 BC 1900 BC 1800 BC 1700 BC 1600 BC 1500 BC
1400 BC--End of Moses' Life Conservative Date for Pentateuch
1350 BC 1300 BC 1250 BC 1200 BC 1150 BC 1100 BC 1050 BC
1000 BC--King David's Reign J
950 BC 900 BC 850 BC 800 BC 750 BC
721 BC--Fall of Northern Kingdom E
650 BC JE
600 BC--Josiah's Reform D
550 BC--Babylonian Exile P W
500 BC 450 BC W
400 BC Q JEDPPentateuch
The Evolution of the JEDP Document
1 Then the LORD said to Noah, "Go into the ark, you and all your household, for I have seen that you alone are righteous before me in this generation. 2 Take with you seven pairs of all clean animals, the male and its mate; and a pair of the animals that are not clean, the male and its mate; 3 and seven pairs of the birds of the air also, male and female, to keep their kind alive on the face of all the earth. 4 For in seven days I will send rain on the earth for forty days and forty nights; and every living thing that I have made I will blot out from the face of the ground." 5 And Noah did all that the LORD had commanded him.6 Noah was six hundred years old when the flood of waters came on the earth. 7 And Noah with his sons and his wife and his sons' wives went into the ark to escape the waters of the flood. 8 Of clean animals, and of animals that are not clean, and of birds, and of everything that creeps on the ground,9 two and two, male and female, went into the ark with Noah, as God had commanded Noah. 10 And after seven days the waters of the flood came on the earth.17 The flood continued forty days on the earth; and the waters increased, and bore up the ark, and it rose high above the earth.18 The waters swelled and increased greatly on the earth; and the ark floated on the face of the waters. 19 The waters swelled so mightily on the earth that all the high mountains under the whole heaven were covered; 20 the waters swelled above the mountains, covering them fifteen cubits deep. 21 And all flesh died that moved on the earth, birds, domestic animals, wild animals, all swarming creatures that swarm on the earth, and all human beings; 22 everything on dry land in whose nostrils was the breath of life died. 23 He blotted out every living thing that was on the face of the ground, human beings and animals and creeping things and birds of the air; they were blotted out from the earth.Only Noah was left, and those that were with him in the ark. 24 And the waters swelled on the earth for one hundred fifty days.
Bold type for (red) J sections, ordinary type (yellow) for P sections, and underlined type for “harmonizing additions” from a later editor (blue). (Gen 7:1-9, 17-24)
A. Campbell and M. O’Brien, Sources of the Pentateuch: text, introductions, annotations. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993.
Genesis 5Jawist (J) Source Priestly (P) Source Redactor (R) Source
29) Now he called his name Noah, saying, "This one will give us rest from our work and from the toil of our hands arising from the ground which the LORD has cursed."
30) Then Lamech lived five hundred and ninety-five years after he became the father of Noah, and he had other sons and daughters. 31) So all the days of Lamech were seven hundred and seventy-seven years, and he died. 32) Noah was five hundred years old, and Noah became the father of Shem, Ham, and Japheth.
Genesis 6
1) Now it came about, when men began to multiply on the face of the land, and daughters were born to them, 2) that the sons of God saw that the daughters of men were beautiful; and they took wives for themselves, whomever they chose. 3) Then the LORD said, "My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, because he also is flesh; nevertheless his days shall be one hundred and twenty years." 4) The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of men, and they bore children to them. Those were the mighty men who were of old, men of renown. 5) Then the LORD saw that the wickedness of man was great on the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. 6) The LORD was sorry that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart. 7) The LORD said, "I will blot out man whom I have created from the face of the land, from man to animals to creeping things and to birds of the sky; for I am sorry that I have made them." 8) But Noah found favor in the eyes of the LORD.
9) These are the records of the generations of Noah. Noah was a righteous man, blameless in his time; Noah walked with God. 10) Noah became the father of three sons: Shem, Ham, and Japheth. 11) Now the earth was corrupt in the sight of God, and the earth was filled with violence. 12) God looked on the earth, and behold, it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted their way upon the earth. 13) Then God said to Noah, "The end of all flesh has come before Me; for the earth is filled with violence because of them; and behold, I am about to destroy them with the earth. 14) "Make for yourself an ark of gopher wood; you shall make the ark with rooms, and shall cover it inside and out with pitch. 15) "This is how you shall make it: the length of the ark three hundred cubits, its breadth fifty cubits, and its height thirty cubits. 16) "You shall make a window for the ark, and finish it to a cubit from the top; and set the door of the ark in the side of it; you shall make it with lower, second, and third decks. 17) "Behold, I, even I am bringing the flood of water upon the earth, to destroy all flesh in which is the breath of life, from under heaven; everything that is on the earth shall perish. 18) "But I will establish My covenant with you; and you shall enter the ark--you and your sons and your wife, and your sons' wives with you. 19)
A Sample of the Distribution of Sources in the Pentateuch
Distribution of materials of Jahwist, Elohist and Priestly sources, as well as Redactor's
contribution in the first four books, following Richard Friedman
Distribution of Sources in the Pentateuch
R Friedman
The Documentary Hypothesis Implications from the Wellhausen hypothesis which became widely
accepted
1. Moses could not have authored the Pentateuch2. The Pentateuch is much later then the traditional view3. The Law originated after the historical books, not before them.4. The true history of Israel is very
different from the history narrated by the OT.
“On the face of it, the study of the Pentateuch is in ferment . . . The debate between different points of view is lively and sometimes heated. As yet, no new consensus has emerged about the composition of the Pentateuch.” (Gordon Wenham “Pentateuchal Studies Today,” Themelios 22:1 (October 1996): 3
“a fix is needed”
(Antony F. Campbell and Mark A. O’Brian , Rethinking the Pentateuch: Prolegomena to the Theology of Ancient Israel (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2005), 1.
“the study of the Pentateuch is in ferment …no new consensus has emerged…”
“a fix is needed”
"... it is true that the documentary hypothesis has increasingly been shown to be flawed, and will survive, if at all, only in a greatly modified form, but that does not mean that we should ignore the results of the last two centuries of investigation. Our task is to find better ways of understanding how the Pentateuch came to be without writing off the real advances of our predecessors.“
J. Blenkinsopp, The Pentateuch, p 28:
Flawed, but don’t Ignore and find a better way
Great Dissatisfaction with the adequacy of the Documentary Hypothesis
0Supplementary H
Van Seters, Rendtorff
2000
“There have been few sustained attempts to produce an alternative source analysis for the
Pentateuch” T.D. Alexander, From Paradise to the Promised land (Baker Academic: 2002), p.53
No new Consensus among scholars for a new Hypothesis
YET
The supplementary hypothesis was developed over the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, primarily deriving from a dissatisfaction with the adequacy of the documentary hypothesis, and came to a head in the 1970s with the publication of works by John Van Seters, Rolf Rendtorff. In their book, An Introduction to the Bible, Kugler and Hartin argue that “the work of John Van Seters best reflects the revival of the supplementary hypothesis”
Revival of the Supplementary Hypothesis due to a dissatisfaction with the adequacy of the
Documentary Hypothesis
2000
J EDPForm
CriticismH Gunkel
M Noth, G von Rad
R.N. Whybray6th cent,
single author,
Supplementary HVan Seters, Rendtorff
Refinements but no Alternative
Docu
men
tary
H
yp
oth
esis
A new critical methodology called form criticism (Formgeschichte) examined the genres used in the biblical text to identify the Sitz im Leben (setting in life) that produced the text. It attempts to go behind the larger literary sources by identifying the smaller and older sources used by their authors.This approach was based on the assumption that each genre is organically associated with a particular social and historical situation.Developed for Old Testament studies by Hermann Gunkel. Martin Noth, Gerhard von Rad, and other scholars, who used it to supplement the documentary hypothesis with reference to its oral foundations
Form Criticism: Another searched for the Foundations of the Pentateuch
J E
DP
OralWritten
OralWritten
Myth
Sagas
Torah
Rituals
http://infidels.org/library/modern/gerald_larue/otll/chap3.html
United kingdom
Divided kingdom
Assyrian
Babylonian
Persian
Israel Judah
Folk TraditionsConflict between brothers:Cain/Abel, Jacob/Esau, Joseph/the 11
Wife who can not bear children until God helps:
Sarah, Rebecca, RachelOral Stories, laws, rituals, sagas in “J” & “E” may go back to Moses time
Analyzes different literary types, styles (genre) - (narrative, poetry, wisdom. Find the “Sitz im Leben – “situation in life” The settings in which the different literary types were used The documentary sources, these longer accounts are made up of smaller units of narration: folk tales, genealogies, anecdotes, war hymns, battle stories and formulas for priestly rituals Form criticism would look up the stories behind the stories (i.e. the oral narrative that became the written)
Form Criticism
Noth, Martin:Rad, Gerhard von:
-The Hexateuch was simply an expansion of the historical creed(s) found in Deut 6:20-24, 26:5b-9 and Josh 24:2-3.
-The Exodus and the Sinai Tradition was separate from the Creedal tradition.
Coalesce into
“Grundlage”
(common basis)
EJ
Another searched for the Foundations of the Pentateuch
"G (Grundlage = a common basis) underlying J and E according to Noth: "The situation at hand cannot be explain very well except by postulating a common basis (Grundlage) for the two sources, for which both - independently of each other - have drawn the nucleus of their content. In those elements of the tradition where J and E run parallel, they concur to such an extent that their common Grundlage already must have existed in a fixed form, either one oral or written.
Cultic OriginHistoric Creed(s)
Cult of Tribal Federation
Traditio-Historical CriticismTries to trace the oral traditions, History of Transmission
Not Dead Yet:The Re-Emergence of Source Criticism:
The Neo-Documentary HypothesisThe Documentary Hypothesis, challenged in much pentateuchal scholarship of the last 30 years, is making a significant resurgence, although in a new and more precisely argued form. It is once again taking its place as a significant theory of the composition of the Pentateuch.
Joel S Baden
Schwartz, Baruch J. “What Really Happened at Mount Sinai? Four biblical answers to one question," Bible Review 13 (1997): 20-30.
Documentary Hypothesis
European scholarship Neo-Documentary Hypothesis
In recent years, many continental scholars have abandoned the traditional theory of documentary sources in the Pentateuch as a relevant model for explaining its development, and in its place adopted a “Fragmentary” or “Supplementary” Hypothesis
“The newer contributions to Pentateuchal research from Europe do not aim at overthrowing the Documentary Hypothesis rather, they strive to understand the composition of the Pentateuch in the most appropriate terms, which… includes ‘documentary’ elements as well.” Konrad Schmid, “Has European Scholarship Abandoned the Documentary Hypothesis?..” in The Pentateuch: International Perspectives on Current Research (eds. Thomas Dozeman et al.; FAT 78; Tübingen, 2011), 17-18, n. 6.
The documentary approach still has a strong following in North American and Israeli scholarship and new arguments have been put forward recently reaffirming its validity (Baden, Schwartz, Stackert, Hendel, among others).
Present State of Pentateuchal Studies
Combined editorially
Late
Rendtorff
Independent of each other
Study of Written Sources Study of Oral Sources
Source Criticism
Redaction Criticism
From Criticism
Traditio-Historical Criticism
Text AWAY from text
The Direction each Criticism Moves
< BACK to text
Some Critiques of the Documentary Hypothesis
Some General Challenges to the DH
1. The Documentary Hypothesis is Illogical and self-contradictory
“Thus the hypothesis can only be maintained on the assumption that while consistency was the hallmark
of the various documents, inconsistency was the hallmark of the redactors”
R.N. Whybray “ The Making of the Pentateuch: a Methodological Study (Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1987), p.49
According to JEDP theory non-contradiction and non-repetition are the chief criteria
for distinguishing sources.But when the sources were combined together, a
repetitious and contradictory account was produced.
That is odd, early writers did not tolerate contradictions or repetitions, but later
writers did.
With respect to the whole of the Documentary Hypothesis, there is not one shred of external objective evidence that has ever been found to support the
theory. That is, there has not been any “document” or part of one found which are hypothesized with the original Wellhausenian J E D P theory or any of its modern variants. The theory is based solely on internal hypothetical markers and presuppositions.
Glenn Giles, Class V: OT Source Criticism: The Documentary Hypothesis: Its History and Present Status. Apologetics. Biblical Criticism. December, 2009
Some General Challenges to the DH
We have no J, E, D, or P. Documents,
BUT
We have hundreds of manuscripts of the
Hebrew Bible
And many other ancient manuscripts
2. Not one Shred of External Objective Evidence has ever been found
No JEDP Document or shred of it ever found Nor are there any references to it anywhere
Chapter F D DiffGenesis
1:1 - 2:3 P P2:4a R P *
2:4b - 2:25 J J
3:1 - 24 J J
4:1 - 24 J J4:25-26a R J *
4:26b J J
5:1 -28 O P *
5:29 R J *
5:30-32 O P *
6:1-8 J J6:9a R P *
6:9b-22 P P7:1-5 J J7:6 J P *7:7 J J
7:8-10 P J *7:11 P P7:12 P J *
F - FriedmanD - DriverDiff - Different. * if Friedman and Driver are difference, nothing if they are the same.Sources:J - JE - ERJE - Redactor of J and EP - PR - RedactorO - Other
Some General Challenges to the DH 3. Scholars can not agree as to which part of the Pentateuch belongs to which Source AND which sources made up the Pentateuch
“…the existence of the diverse opinions clearly challenges the validity of the entire theory.” T.D. Alexander, From Paradise to the Promised Land:
An Introduction to the Pentateuch, p.56
4. Variation in the ways of referring to God
Some Specific Challenges to the DH in Favor of the Unity of the Pentateuch
The same author can use different names for God in order to reflect different characteristic
He “selected the name YHWH when the text reflects the Israelite conception of God, …express… attributes traditionally ascribed to Him by Israel, particularly in His ethical character” YHWH is employed when God is presented … in His personal character and in direct relationship to the people or nature”
“It preferred the name Elohim when the passage implies the abstract idea of the Deity…–God conceived as the Creator of the physical universe, as the Ruler of nature, as the Source of life” “Elohim… as the Transcendental Being who exists completely outside and above the physical universe” Umberto Cassuto (Hebrew, 1941; English translation, 1961) in The Documentary Hypothesis and the Composition of the Pentateuch: Eight Lectures (Jerusalem: The Magnes Press, 1961) (31)When applied to Gen. 1 and 2, it perfectly explains the different usages of the two terms in these
passages without a need to posit two different authors/sources.
--Genesis 1 is the story of Creation and Lord of the Universe which would require the term “Elohim.” Indeed “Elohim” is the word used in that passage. --With respect to Genesis 2-3, “God is portrayed as the moral Ruler,… YHWH. This is appropriate here as it is dealing with God’s personal relationship with people.
--It is assumed that doublets were pieced together by a redactor and this is the cause of the perceived “inconsistencies.”
--Kaiser quotes Whybray about doublets and the inconsistencies
“. . . the hypothesis can only be maintained on the assumption that, while consistency was
the hallmark of the various documents, inconsistency was the hallmark of the
redactors” Kaiser, 137
5. Doublets repeating the same story and consequent Inconsistencies
Some Specific Challenges to the DH in Favor of the Unity of the Pentateuch
Another arguments against doublets indicating different sources may be chiasms. Chiasms are simple literary structures which use reverse duplication. They are found in the Pentateuch such as in Genesis 9:6 ____A) Whoever sheds _____B) the blood ______C) of man ______C) by man shall _____B) his blood ____A) be shed.
6. Language and Style differencesVariety in Language and style “could just as well be a sign of differences in subject matter that carry with them their own distinctive vocabulary and style” Kaiser, 137
Umberto Cassuto found that “change in style depends on change of subject- matter, not on differences of sources”
Some Specific Challenges to the DH in Favor of the Unity of the Pentateuch
Style can vary widely and still belong to a single personConsider: The painter Pablo Picasso
New Living Translation (NLT):Passages in the Pentateuch itself:
Exodus 17:14 "Then the Lord instructed Moses, 'Write this down as a permanent record...'"Exodus 24:4 "Then Moses carefully wrote down all the Lord's instructions."Exodus 34:27 "And the Lord said to Moses, 'Write down all these instructions, for they represents the terms of my covenant with you and with Israel.'“
Passages elsewhere in the Hebrew Scriptures:Joshua 8:31-34 "He followed the instructions that Moses the Lord's servant had written in the Book of the Law...“2 Chronicles 34:14 "...Hilkiah the high priest...found the book of the Law of the Lord as it had been given through Moses.“
Passages in the Gospels which show that Jesus and John the Baptizer believed Moses to be the author:
Matthew 19:7-8 "...why did Moses say a man could merely write an official letter of divorce and send her away?", they asked. Jesus replied, 'Moses permitted divorce...'“Mark 12:24-26 "...haven't you ever read about this in the writings of Moses, in the story of the burning bush..."Luke 24:44 "...I told you that everything written about me by Moses and the prophets and in the Psalms must all come true.“
Passages elsewhere in the Christian Scriptures:Romans 10:5 "For Moses wrote..."
Some Challenges to the DH in Favor of the Unity of the Pentateuch
7. Moses the author of the Pentateuch according to the Bible
“Another point to be kept in mind is what I do not mean when I take the positionthat Moses was the author/compiler of the Pentateuch. I do not mean thatMoses wrote every single word so that the current form of the entire Hebrew Pentateuch is exactly the same as it came from his pen. It is clear that there are some post-Mosaic elements in the text. Not only the account of Moses death in Deut.34, but also other statements reflect post-Mosaic editorial activity.(Gen. 13:6b; Gen. 36:31). A high view of inspiration does not preclude editorial work by someone other than the original author.I also do not mean that every word was original with Moses. It is not onlypossible but likely that Moses made use of written sources (see Num. 21:14), even as Luke would later do in constructing his gospel (see Luke 1:1Ð4). It also seems probable that Moses made use of oral tradition in composing the Pentateuch. It bears emphasizing that originality is not a prerequisite for inspiration. All truth belongs to God, and He has the right to inspire His prophet to make use of it, even if it is derived from another source, whether oral or written.
In conclusion, in light of the weaknesses inherent in the documentary hypothesis,this is certainly not the time for Bible-believing Christians to be flocking to its banner. Rather, it is an auspicious time for them to affirm a more traditional view, …”
Greg A. King. The Documentary Hypothesis, Journal of the Adventist Theological Society, 12/1 (2001): 22-30.
Adventist Perspective on the DH
Paul Giem (Loma Linda) on The Documentary Hypothesis of the Pentateuch 01-01-2011
It is encouraging to note that competent scholars are now rejecting the documentary theory which has dominated the field of Old Testament studies for over a century. R. Rendtorff sees "clearly signs of the great unanimity in the abandonment" of the documentary theory.
Liberal critics have contributed in their own ways to the understanding of the language and of the socio-historical settings in which God revealed Himself to His own people. Unfortunately, their evolutionary world-view and anti-supernatural assumptions have greatly depreciated the authority and function of the Bible in Christianity. The biblical accounts of Creation, the Fall, the Flood, the Incarnation, the Resurrection, and miracles are dismissed as myths and legends. Samuele Bacchiocchi, Biblical Errancy And Inerrancy, Endtime Issues No. 101, 24 July 2003
Higher Criticism is bankrupt. P 97-98Gerhard F. Hasel, Biblical Interpretation TodayBiblical Research Institute General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, 1985
E. Edward Zinke, Historical Criticism, Biblical Research Institute General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, 1981
The Criterias used by the Documentary Hypothesis can be explained:
“Rather than implying different sources the variation in the divine names indicates different aspects of the same God. He is both transcendent and imminent, powerful and personal.
The apparently different sequence of events between Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 poses no problem, because Genesis 2 neverclaims to be an account of the whole of creation week.”
Gudmundur Olafsson “Genesis 2—A Special ‘Creation’? An Introductory Study of an Old Problem” in TO UNDERSTAND THE SCRIPTURES: Essays in Honor Of William H. Shea, p.6
Elohim Yhwh
“The work of higher criticism, in dissecting, conjecturing, reconstructing, is destroying faith in the Bible as a divine revelation. It is robbing God's word of power to control, uplift, and inspire human lives.” Ellen G. White, The Acts of the Apostles, 474.
Books
Cassuto