SPECIAL TOPIC: PENTATEUCH SOURCE CRITICISM (J,E,D,P)

SPECIAL TOPIC: PENTATEUCH SOURCE CRITICISM (J.E.D.P.)

Modern Scholarship
1. There have obviously been some editorial additions to the Torah (seemingly, to make the ancient work more understandable to contemporary readers, which was a characteristic of Egyptian scribes where Moses was trained):
  1. Genesis 12:6; 13:7; 14:14; 21:34; 32:32; 36:31; 47:11
  2. Exodus 11:3; 16:36
  3. Numbers 12:3; 13:22; 15:22-23; 21:14-15; 32:33ff
  4. Deuteronomy 3:14; 27:3,8; 28:58; 29:21,29; 30:10,19; 31:24; 34:6
  5. Ancient scribes were highly trained and educated. Their techniques, however, differed from country to country:
    1. In Mesopotamia, they were careful not to change anything, and even checked their works for accuracy. Here is an ancient Sumerian scribal footnote: "the work is complete from beginning to end, has been copied, revised, compared, and verified sign by sign" from about 1400 B.C.
    2. In Egypt they freely revised ancient texts to update them for contemporary readers. The scribes at Qumran (i.e., Dead Sea Scrolls) also followed this approach.
2. Scholars of the 19th century theorized that the Torah is a composite document from many sources over an extended period of time (Graff-Wellhausen). This theory was based on:
  1. different names for God
  2. apparent doublets in the text
  3. the literary form of the accounts
  4. the theology of the accounts
3. Supposed sources and dates:
  1. J source (use of YHWH from southern Israel) ‒ 950 B.C.
  2. E source (use of Elohim from northern Israel) ‒ 850 B.C.
  3. JE combined ‒ 750 B.C.
  4. D source ("The Book of the Law," 2 Kgs. 22:8, discovered during Josiah's reform while remodeling the Temple was supposedly the book of Deuteronomy, written by an unknown priest of Josiah's time to support his reform.) ‒ 621 B.C.
  5. P source (priestly rewrite of OT, especially ritual and procedure) ‒ 400 B.C.
  6. There have obviously been editorial additions to the Torah. The Jews assert that it may have been
    1. The High Priest (or another of his family) at the time of the writing
    2. Jeremiah the Prophet
    3. Ezra the Scribe ‒ IV Esdras says he rewrote it because the originals were destroyed in the fall of Jerusalem in 586 B.C.
  7. However, the J. E. D. P. theory says more about our modern literary theories and categories than evidence from the Torah (cf. R. K. Harrison, Introduction to the Old Testament, pp. 495-541 and Tyndale's Commentaries, "Leviticus" pp. 15-25).
  8. Characteristics of Hebrew Literature
    1. Doublets, like Genesis 1 and 2, are common in Hebrew. Usually a general description is given, followed by a specific account (i.e. the Ten Commandments and the Holiness Code). This may have been a way to accent truths or help oral memory.
    2. The ancient rabbis said the two most common names for God have theological significance:
      (1) YHWH ‒ the Covenant name for deity as He relates to Israel as Savior and Redeemer (cf. Ps. 19:7-14; 103; SPECIAL TOPIC: NAMES FOR DEITY, D,).
      (2) Elohim ‒ deity as Creator, Provider, and Sustainer of all life on earth (cf. Ps. 19:1-6; 104; see SPECIAL TOPIC: NAMES FOR DEITY, C.).
      (3) Other Ancient Near Eastern texts use several names to describe their high god (cf.Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties by Gleason L. Archer, p. 68).
    3. It is common in non-biblical near eastern literature for a variety of styles and vocabulary to occur in unified literary works (cf. Introduction to the Old Testament, R. K. Harrison, pp. 522-526).
The evidence from ancient near eastern literature implies that Moses used written cuneiform documents or Mesopotamian style (patriarchal) oral traditions to write Genesis. This in no way means to imply a lessening of inspiration but is an attempt to explain the literary phenomenon of the book of Genesis (cf. P. J. Wiseman's New Discoveries in Babylonia about Genesis). Beginning in Genesis 37, a marked Egyptian influence of style, form and vocabulary seems to indicate Moses used either literary productions or oral traditions from the Israelites' days in both Egypt and Mesopotamia. Moses' formal education was entirely Egyptian! The exact literary formation of the Pentateuch is uncertain. I believe that Moses is the compiler and author of the vast majority of the Pentateuch, though he may have used scribes and/or written and oral (patriarchal) traditions. His writings have been updated by later scribes. The historicity and trustworthiness of these first few books of the OT have been illustrated by modern archaeology.
There is an emerging theory that there were scribes (in different parts of Israel) working on different parts of the Pentateuch at the same time under the direction of Samuel (cf. 1 Sam. 10:25). This theory was first proposed by E. Robertson's The Old Testament Problem.
A new theory for some of the supposed editorial additions has been suggested by R. H. Polzin, "Deuteronomy" in The Literary Guide to the Bible. It posits the added comments are from a narrator, not an editor. He suggests that this narrator's comments can be seen in Deut. 1:1-5; 2:10-12, 20-23; 3:9, 11, 13b-14; 4:4-5:1a; 10:6-7, 9; 27:1a, 9a, 11; 28:69; 29:1; 31:1, 7a, 9-10a, 14a, 14c-16a, 22-23a, 24-25, 30; 32:44-45, 48; 33:1; 34:1-4a, 5-12. Polzin asserts that this supposed narrator is claiming an authority as reliable as Moses, which sets the stage for the "Deuteronomic history" of Joshua ‒ Kings. This theory would explain the similarities between the Pentateuch and the Former Prophets.
For those of us who believe in the inspiration and protection of divine revelation assert the Spirit's guidance in the OT related to these editorial additions. They do not affect major doctrines or call into question the historicity of the surrounding texts. It must be admitted by moderns that we simply do not know:
1. the time
2. the author(s)
3. the method of compilation,
  of the OT in its earliest stages. We presuppositionally accept the Masoretic Hebrew Text (MT) as preserving the words of God! See John H. Walton and D. Brent Sandy, The Lost World of Scripture (2013).