_{Handout 61}

Why Did Critical Scholars Conclude that the Pentateuch Came from Multiple Sources?

[Source Criticism / The “Documentary Hypothesis”]

For concise summaries of each of the four alleged sources, see Handbook of Biblical Criticism, 3rd ed., R. N. Soulen (2003).

For a color-coded edition of the OT which reflects the four alleged sources, see The Polychrome Bible, ed. Paul Haupt, 1898; it has recently been reprinted by in paperback (Trade Paper, 2011).

A. Recap:

In previous handouts, we mentioned that the Enlightenment (≈ mid 1600’s–1800) had significant effects on western civilization. One major outgrowth of the Enlightenment was a philosophy called “rationalism.” The main idea of rationalism was: only what we can derive from science or from reason/logic can be accepted as true. Scholars and intellectuals who accepted rationalism are called “rationalists.” In particular, rationalists rejected the idea of miracles, because miracles could not be proven scientifically, and would constitute a violation of natural law–which, according to them, was impossible.

Many biblical scholars began to read the Bible through the lens of rationalism. This had a significant effect on how they viewed and studied the Bible. As mentioned earlier, two major specific effects were:

• The miracles recorded in the Bible were rejected as impossible.
• The idea of genuinely predictive prophecy was also rejected, because that would also be a miracle.

Bible scholars who accepted rationalism, and who continued to study the Bible, came to be called “critical scholars.” Their approach is called the critical approach, or “historical criticism.”

B. Critical Scholars Began to Reject Moses as the Author of the Pentateuch

Critical scholars noted that in Lev 26 and Deut 28, Moses seems to predict the exile and the return from exile.

But the exile (586–516 BC) happened nearly 1,000 years after the lifetime of Moses (≈ 1500–1400 BC). For critical scholars, there was no way that Moses could have known such information. So for them, it was self-evident that those passages were written after the return from exile, by someone else, not Moses.

From that conclusion, and for other reasons, by the early 1800’s many Bible scholars had come to conclude that the Pentateuch was not written by Moses, but was instead compiled from multiple original sources.

The field of critical studies which looked for these sources has come to be called “source criticism.”

C. Quick Preview – Critical Scholarship’s Eventual Conclusion: the Pentateuch Had Four Main Authors / Four Main “Sources” / “J-E-D-P”

Once critical scholars had rejected the idea that Moses was the author of the Pentateuch, they went in search of the actual author(s). Since they had no information regarding the names of the alleged actual human authors, they referred instead to the “sources” from which the Pentateuch was derived. Again, this field of critical studies has come to be called “source criticism.”

The view that the Pentateuch is compiled from multiple sources is also called the "documentary hypothesis," because it was a hypothesis about the origins of the Pentateuch that involved multiple sources, multiple documents.

Many critical scholars made many proposals along the way. Over time, there came to be fairly wide agreement on the idea that there were four main sources from which the Pentateuch was compiled. The sources, in alphabetical order, came to be labelled as follows:

"D"

Mainly the book of Deuteronomy. This source stressed covenant loyalty to God.

"E"

A source that predominantly used the Hebrew word "Elohim" (usually translated "God"; e.g., Genesis 1) to refer to God. Mostly in Genesis & Exodus. Has an elevated, transcendent view of God. The God who creates the universe by his spoken word in Genesis 1 is Elohim.

"J"

A source that predominantly used "the Lord" (Yahweh, in German: Jahweh) to refer to God. Mostly in Genesis & Exodus. Has a relatively "down-to-earth" view of God. For example, Jahweh is the God of Genesis 2 who walks in the garden and talks to Adam & Eve.

"P"

The "Priestly" document, mainly the book of Leviticus (with all those holiness & sacrificial regulations for Israel and esp. for the priests). This source stresses obeying the law in detail, esp. obeying all of the ceremonial & sacrificial laws.

As always, there was debate among critical scholars over the dates of origin and the sequence of the four sources. But by 1869, Abraham Kuenen persuaded many of his colleagues that the likely order of the composition of the sources was: J, E, D, and finally P, known as “JEDP.” Still, many other critical scholars were not persuaded. But about a decade later, Julius Wellhausen provided an argument for those four sources, in that order, that the critical scholarly world found persuasive. Thus “JEDP” became the common critical label for the four hypothetical sources of the Pentateuch.

Wellhausen's main work was: Prolegomena to the History of Israel (originally 1878; trans. by J. S. Block & A. Menzies; New York: Meridian Books, 1957). We will address Wellhausen's views in the next handout.

D. Definitions:

Source Criticism

Is the general field of critical studies which seeks to identify the underlying sources to any given book of the Bible, but esp., to the Pentateuch.

The Documentary Hypothesis

Refers to the suggestion (hypothesis) that the Pentateuch was not written by one main author, but was put together and edited from multiple different sources / "documents.'

Redactor

Critical scholars use the term "redactor" to refer to the persons who actually combined the original sources together. The redactors did not just add a new source to the end of the existing ones, but actively and deliberately edited them and spliced them together, to bring about the desired final effect. ["Rédacteur" is French for "editor."]

J E D P

Is a specific form of the documentary hypothesis. It is the one which has become most widely accepted among critical scholars to explain the origins of the Pentateuch. [To Note: Although JEDP is the most widely accepted view, many critical scholars do not think JEDP is the best explanation for the Pentateuch as we have it.]

E. Why did critical scholars come to think that the Pentateuch was not the work of one main author, and certainly not the work of Moses?

As critical scholars examined the Pentateuch closely (through the lens of rationalism), they began to perceive problems with the traditional view of the Pentateuch = the idea that the Pentateuch was the work of one main author, Moses, dating back to ± 1400 BC. Among the problems they perceived were:

• The Pentateuch → does not(!) actually make good sense as it stands. In particular, they argued, it does not fit into any category of literature. Consider:

  • Is it a narrative account of Israel’s history? If it is, it is very imbalanced: it has hundreds of laws, and it focuses way too much on one person (Moses).

  • Is it a law code? It has enough laws to be a law code, but known law codes from the ANE have one or two pages of historical summary at the beginning. The Pentateuch, in contrast, has 50 chapters(!) of Genesis, and then also the accounts of the plagues against Egypt, before getting to the laws. And it repeats itself unnecessarily (Deuteronomy).

  • Is it a biography of Moses? Then why does it have the entire book of Genesis as an oversized prologue, plus, again, all those hundreds of laws?

  So critical scholars argued that the Pentateuch, as it has come down to us, does not make sense.

• The historical books Joshua, Judges, Samuel & Kings (JJ-SS-KK) → show very little knowledge of or concern for the Mosaic Law, which seems very strange if the law came before those books and was supposed to be! their foundation. // (In contrast, Ezra-Nehemiah & Chronicles do show familiarity with the law, and show great concern to obey it.)

• Similarly, the early prophets (esp. Amos, Hosea & Isaiah) → do not seem to know about the alleged covenant made at Sinai, and, if anything, they argue against a “legalistic” approach to God, such as the law allegedly entails. [See for example: Hosea 6:6; Amos 5:21–24; Isaiah 1:10–17.]

• And Deuteronomy → with all of its emphasis on the covenant, does not seem to worry about the Levitical commands of the law (sacrifices, holiness, festivals, etc.). Deuteronomy repeats many of the laws from Exodus, but next-to-nothing(!) from Leviticus. Why?

• For critical scholars, the above three observations did not fit with the view that Moses wrote the Pentateuch around 1400 BC. They reasoned that the Levitical parts of the law must have been written after JJ-SS-KK, and likewise after the early prophets. As a result they concluded that the “real history” of Israel → had to have happened in a substantially different order than the way the Pentateuch and the Old Testament present it. [The first major scholar to openly conclude this was Wilhelm M. L. de Wette, ≈ 1800, m.h.t.d.]. Critical scholars would go on to conclude the earliest sources of the Pentateuch were written after the division of the kingdom; the latest were written after the exile.

For reasons such as these, critical scholars concluded that the Pentateuch was not a well-coordinated work, written by Moses, but that it was a compilation from multiple sources, written much later.

F. How did critical scholars begin to identify those sources?

These are some of the features by which critical scholars began to identify the hypothetical sources.

• “Doublets” They observed that many sentences in the Pentateuch contain repetition; for example:

  • Exod 19:3b: This is what you are to say to the house of Jacob ↔ and what you are to tell to the people of Israel.
  • Exod 40:34: Then the cloud covered the Tent of Meeting, ↔ and the glory of the Lord filled the tabernacle.

  They called these brief elements of repetition “doublets.”

• They also pointed to apparent duplicate accounts, such as: Abraham travels to Gerar in the Negev and has complications with his wife and Abimelech, “She is my sister” (Gen 20).

  Isaac likewise travels to Gerar in the Negev and also has complications with his wife and Abimelech, and again, says, “She is my sister” (Gen 26).

  The doublets and duplicate accounts caused critical scholars to think that the Pentateuch had been pieced together from different accounts which sometimes recorded the same event. Yet instead of smoothing out the different accounts and consolidating them, the editors / compliers chose to keep both accounts, and to stitch them together, producing a Pentateuch with much overlap and many doublets.

• They focused on the fact that different terms were used for the name of God (sometimes “Yahweh”, sometimes “Elohim”). They used these as a preliminary starting point to separate out documents.

• Eventually, they identified other factors which distinguished the apparent sources, such as:

  • vocabulary: “J” uses Yahweh, Sinai & Canaanite; “E” uses God, Horeb, & Amorite.
  • style: “J” has short dialogue, action; “E” has more lengthy speeches, a more refined style.
  • theology / portrayal of God: in “E”, God is transcendent, even distant, he speaks via dreams; in “J” Yahweh is close at hand, talks to people; “D” emphasizes the idea of covenant, whereas “P” emphasizes laws–lots of them–and obedience to those laws.

For all these reasons, critical scholars concluded that the Pentateuch had been compiled from different sources. In the next handout, we will look at the specific formulation of JEDP that finally won the day among critical scholars, the formulation & explanation set forth by Julius Wellhausen.