Documentary hypothesis

The documentary hypothesis is a theory proposed by many historians and academics in the field of linguistics and source criticism that the Five Books of Moses (the Torah) are in fact a combination of documents from different sources rather than authored by one individual. Although the hypothesis is widely accepted, it has a substantial number of critics—especially conservative Bible scholars such as Kenneth Kitchen and Gleason Archer, but also among critical scholars such as R. N. Whybray.

The theory

Background to the theory

The main areas considered by these critics when supporting the Documentary Hypothesis are:

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

• The variations in the divine names in Genesis;
• The secondary variations in diction and style;
• The parallel or duplicate accounts (doublets);
• The continuity of the various sources;
• The political assumptions implicit in the text;
• The interests of the author.

Doublets and triplets are stories that are repeated with different points of view. Famous doublets include Genesis's creation accounts; the stories of the covenant between God and Abraham; the naming of Isaac; the two stories in which Abraham claims to a king that his wife is really his sister; and the two stories of the revelation to Jacob at Bet-El. A famed triplet is the three different versions of how the town of Be'ersheba got its name.

Related Topics:
Genesis - Abraham - Bet-El - Be'ersheba

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

There are many portions of the Torah which seem to imply more than one author. Some examples include:

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

• The creation story in Genesis first describes a somewhat 'evolutionary' process, with first the planet created, then the lower forms of life, then animals, and finally man and woman being created together. It then begins the story again, but this time man is created first, then animals to assuage man's loneliness, and when this failed, Adam's wife Eve was created.
• The flood story in Genesis appears to claim that 2 of all kinds of animal went on the ark, but also that 7 of certain kinds went on, and that the flood lasted a year, but also lasted only 40 days.
• Numbers 25 describes the rebellion at Peor, and refers to daughters of Moabite; the next sentence says that one woman was a Midianite.
• The Ten Commandments appear in Exodus 20, but in a slightly different wording in Deuteronomy 5. A second, almost completely different set of Ten Commandments appears in Exodus 34.
• In some locations God is friendly, and capable of errors and regret, and walks the earth talking to humans, but in others God is unmerciful and distant (although just).
• A number of places or individuals have multiple names. For instance, the name of the mountain that Moses climbed to receive the commandments is given in some places as Horeb and in others as Sinai, Moses' father-in-law is known by at least three names in the Hebrew original (?????, ???????, and ????????), etc.

There are classical rabbinical interpretations accounting for all of these differences, but many are rather strained and are not in perfect harmony with the actual text.

Related Topics:
Classical - Rabbinical

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The modern theory

The theory proposes that the Torah was composed from four earlier source texts, which were combined by a redactor (referred to as R)

Related Topics:
Torah - Redactor (referred to as '''R''')

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

• J - the Jahwist. J describes a human-like God called Yahweh and has its main interest reflecting Judah and the Aaronid priesthood. J has an extremely eloquent style. J uses an earlier form of the Hebrew language than P.
• E - the Elohist. E describes a human-like God initially called El (which is sometimes Elohim according to the rules of Hebrew grammar), and called Yahweh after the burning bush, and has its main interest reflecting biblical Israel and the Shiloh priesthood. E has a moderately eloquent style. E uses an earlier form of the Hebrew language than P.
• P - the Priestly source. P describes a distant and unmerciful (but just) God sometimes referred to as Elohim and El Shaddai. P partly duplicates J and E, but altering details to suit P's opinion, and also consists of most of Leviticus. P has its main interest in an Aaronid priesthood and King Hezekiah. P has a low level of literary style, and has an interest in lists and dates.
• D - the Deuteronomist. D consists entirely of most of Deuteronomy. D probably also wrote the Deteronomistic history (Joshua, Judges, 1 & 2 Samuel, 1 & 2 Kings). D has its interest reflecting the Shiloh priesthood and King Josiah. D uses a form of Hebrew similar to P, but in a different literary style.

The theory postulates that various collections of remembered traditions were written down both in biblical Israel (producing E) and in Judah (producing J) shortly after their separation. These collections are alleged to have been written by rival priesthoods, E being written by the priests of Shiloh (who were in Israel), J having been written by the Aaronid priests (who were in Judah). The priests of Shiloh (who were Levite as were the Aaronids) had been removed from power by the king of Israel, who instead set up an alternate religion, and as such it is thought that E also reflects this by describing stories appearing to condemn the change (such as referring to a Golden Calf - the symbol of the new version of the religion).

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The theory then goes on to state that after the fall of Israel to the Assyrians, the refugees from Israel brought E to Judah, and in the interests of assimilating them into the general population an unknown scribe combined the text with J to produce JE. JE is thought to have been produced, in preference to keeping the texts separate, in order to combine the refugees rather than have them form a separate subversive nation within Judah. As such, it is thought that the creator of JE thought it necessary to retain as much as possible of both J and E, in order to avoid readers and listeners complaining that a text was missing or different, and thus create a schism.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

It is thought, in the theory, that due to the centralising religious reform instituted by King Hezekiah, the Aaronid priests created a text (P) which rewrote JE in a light favourable to them and the changes. In addition to performing this change, a few intolerable stories (such as that of the golden calf) were removed, and a few stories were added. Within the text, the author also added a body of laws (constituting most of Leviticus) supported by the Aaronids.

Related Topics:
Hezekiah - Golden calf

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

A few generations later, the Shiloh priesthood are thought to have written a law code more favourable to them, and conspired with King Josiah to have it be "found" in the Temple, so that he could base reforms on it (the reforms of Hezekiah having been previously undone by his descendants). A scribe connected to the Shiloh group subsequently created a text (Dtr1) describing the span of time intervening between Moses and Josiah's rule, embedding the law code at the start in the framework of Moses' dying words.

Related Topics:
Shiloh - Josiah

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Dtr1 presented Josiah as a parallel to Moses, an ideal king, whose reforms would be the saving of Judah. Unfortunately Josiah was killed in battle with the Egyptian army, and subsequent kings undid his reforms, and shortly afterward Babylon destroyed Judah, burnt the Temple, and killed the royal family. The scribe who created Dtr1 made minor additions (Dtr2) to the text to reflect the additional history, and iron out the flaws in their original presentation of Josiah and the permanence of Judah (by implying that the destruction was as a result of the undoing of Josiah's reforms). The subsequent text is known as D.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

When Persia conquered Babylon, the Persian king sent back the exiled elite of Judah, empowering Ezra to dictate the religion. JE and P contained rival histories and rival religious views, and P and D contained rival law codes. Both sets had to be kept to avoid alienating each group in the new creation of the nation, and thus avoid creating a power struggle or a nation within a nation, but the differences needed to be ironed out so that people were certain what the law code and history was. Someone joined the texts together, making only minor additions and changes, creating the Torah, and Ezra read it out. Anyone who disagreed had the Persian king to answer to.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Secondary hypothesis

The secondary hypothesis of the documentary hypothesis is that there were two schools of writers who created the biblical text of the Old Testament, the Priests of Shiloh, and the Aaronid priesthood.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The texts associated with the Priests of Shiloh are:

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

• E (the Elohist source of the Torah)
• the Deuteronomical law code (of the D source)
• the Deuteronomical history from Joshua to Josiah (of the D source for Deuteronomy, and also Joshua, Judges, 1 & 2 Samuel, 1 & 2 Kings)
• the Book of Jeremiah

The texts associated with the Aaronid priests are:

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

• J (the Jahwist source of the Torah)
• P (the Aaronid re-writing of JE)
• The book of generations (used by R in the Torah)
• The book of journeys (used by R in the Torah)
• the Aaronid law code (Leviticus)
• the Aaronid history from Joshua to Josiah (1 & 2 Chronicles)
• the Book of Ezekiel