Moses Wrote the Pentateuch
WHAT IS THE DOCUMENTARY HYPOTHESIS?
The Documentary Hypothesis (AKA: JEDP theory) posits that Moses didn’t write any of the Pentateuch. Rather, the Pentateuch is composed of four separate documents, named J, E, D, and P. J and E are named as such because the authors of those alleged sources respectively used Yahweh (J = Jehovah) and Elohim (or other El names) for God. That is, these authors didn’t use the other names. When the names are found combined in these respective sources (e.g., Yahweh-Elohim), that is the work of the editor who put the two sources together. Same for where the names are not consistent.
THE DOCUMENTARY HYPOTHESIS IS ROOTED IN DESTRUCTIVE BIBLICAL CRITICISM
The Documentary Hypothesis is rooted in a theological movement called Destructive Bible Criticism. This movement was invented by critics outside the Orthodox Church, such as Francis Bacon, Thomas Hobbes, and the Jewish pantheist Benedict Spinoza. Destructive Biblical Criticism suffers from an anti-supernatural bias, and in the case of Benedict Spinoza a total rejection of miracles. (He also denied the resurrection of Christ). Since anti-supernaturalism was the philosophical assumption of the critics, they were forced to reject the Mosaicity of the Pentateuch. It is vital that the reader understand the philosophical presuppositions of DBC. It was not the result of factual finds but of philosophical fallacies. The Documentary Hypothesis originated with Jean Astruc, but was primarily promoted by Karl Graf, Abraham Kuenen, and Julius Wellhausen (hence the term “Graf-Wellhausen” theory).
Some of the first opposition against the Documentary Hypothesis came from Franz Delitzsch (1844-1913), William Henry Green (1825-1900), James Orr (1844-1913), A.H. Sayce (1845-1933), Wilhelm Moller, Eduard Naville, Robert Dick Willson, and others. The Documentary Hypothesis was also challenged by Isaac M. Kikawada, Arthur Quinn, Gleason Archer and others (see Harrison, Introduction to the Old Testament, pp. 239-41). The Documentary Hypothesis has been rebuffed by experts in Old Testament, Assyriology, Orientalism, Archaeology and Law. It has also been rejected by Jewish scholars.
EVOLUTIONARY INFLUENCES
At the time the Documentary Hypothesis was developed, anti-supernatural liberal scholars assumed that religion evolved from primitive animism to sophisticated monotheism. We now know this to be false.
W. Schmidt proposed that monotheism is older than polytheism. He sees animism, polytheism and henotheism as later corruption. (Origin and Growth; Primitive Revelation).
The leading Bible archaeologist of America William F. Albright (a former liberal) commented: "There can no longer be any doubt that Fr. Schmidt has successfully disproved the simple evolutionary progression...fetishism--polytheism---monotheism, or Tyler's animism--polytheism--monotheism....The simple fact is that religious phenomena are so complex in origin and so fluid in nature that over-simplification is more misleading in the field of religion than perhaps anywhere else." (From the Stone Age to Christianity, p. 171).
At the time the Documentary Hypothesis was developed, Darwinian Evolution was also assumed to be true. Bible critics believed that the biblical narratives evolved along evolutionary lines. It was also assumed that the Israel of Moses’ day could not have possessed a code containing the complicated civil and social laws that are reflected in the Pentateuch. Accordingly, Moses' law necessarily must have arisen at a later date.
ARCHAEOLOGICAL REFUTATION
The discoveries from archaeology have refuted the assumption of the critic. Several ancient law codes centuries before the time of Moses have been discovered:
Sumerian systems of Ur-Nammu (ca. 2050 B.C.)
Lipit-Ishtar (ca. 1850 B.C.)
The Akkadian Laws of Eshnunna (ca. 1950 B.C.)
The Code of Hammurabi (ca. 1792-50 B.C.).
(see Jackson, Wayne. 1999. The Code of Hammurabi. Christian Courier, March).
Liberal Bible critics also assumed that writing had not existed at the time of Moses. Archaeology has refuted this assumption. (Jackson, Wayne. 1982. Biblical Studies in the Light of Archaeology. Montgomery, AL: Apologetics Press, pp. 30-32).
In the 19th century it was believed that writing did not develop until after the time of Moses. However, we now know that writing developed in 3150 B.C --more than a millennium and a half before Moses. (see Haley's Bible Handbook, 25th edition, p. 72).
In his book, "History Begins At Sumer," America's foremost Sumerologist Dr. Noah Kramer has shown with detail that civilization, complete with schools, writing, etc., was an established fixture in the Mesopotamian world more than a thousand years before Moses was born.
The critics assumed that because certain divine names (e.g. "Jehovah", "Elohim") are used in various portions of the Pentateuch, these "patterns" therefore imply various sources. But we are now in possession of ancient documents which use alternate names as a form of sylistic relief. The Old Testament scholar Dr. Kenneth Kitchen of the School of Archaeology and Oriental Studies at the University of Liverpool, discusses this in his work, "Ancient Orient and Old Testament."
Dr. Kitchen writes: “major variations in style” are “universal in ancient texts whose literary unity is beyond all doubt” (p. 125).
He also further declares: “even the most ardent advocate of the documentary theory must admit that we have as yet no single scrap of external, objective, i.e., tangible, evidence for either the existence or history of ‘J’, ‘E’, or any other alleged source-documents” (p. 23).
"The traditional view held by most Bible scholars is that Moses wrote the bulk of the Pentateuch after Israel's exodus from Egypt and during their 40 years of wondering in the desert." (Halley's Bible Handbook, 25th edition, p. 136).
The late date many critics assign to Deuteronomy (7th century B.C.) has been thoroughly discredited by the excellent scholarship of Meredith Kline in "The Treaty of the Great King." He showed that Deuteronomy followed the typical suzerainty treaty of the Hittites in the second millennium B.C.--the very time in which tradition informs us Moses wrote Deuteronomy. Dr. Kline was an Old Testament scholar and had a Ph.D in Assyriology and Egyptology. (Also see Archer, Survey of Old Testament Introduction, pp. 253-262).
The new discovery of the Mount Ebal Curse Tablet also gives evidence favorable to the traditional view. This tablet was discovered in 2022, and of the top ten discoveries of 2022, it got first place on one list and second place on another list. This is a curse tablet which supports the statements of Moses in Deuteronomy 11 and 27, where he instructed the people to go to Mount Gerizim and Mount Ebal, and to place half the tribes on Mount Gerizim and half on Mount Ebal, to pronounce blessings from Mount Gerizim and curses from Mount Ebal. Further, Joshua 8:30 states that Joshua built an alter on Mount Ebal to the Lord. The names of God "El" and "Yahweh" are both on this tablet. According to the professional Bible archaeologist Dr. Scott Stripling, this tablet refutes the Documentary Hypothesis, since two of God's names are on the same tablet. Dr. Stripling says that he has received countless emails from scholars who have changed their minds about the Documentary Hypothesis due to the discovery of this tablet. (See his interview with Alisa Childers).
LIBERALS ADMIT THAT THE DOCUMENTARY HYPOTHESIS IS WITHOUT MERIT
Umberto Cassuto of the University of Jerusalem confesses that the main arguments for his theory are "without substance." He writes that the system is an edifice "founded on air." He states that it is "null and void." (see Cassuto, The Documentary Hypothesis, pp. 5, 100, 101).
Moses Segal, emeritus professor of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem writes:
“[W]e must reject the Documentary Theory as an explanation of the composition of the Pentateuch. The theory is complicated, artificial, and anomalous. It is based on unproved assumptions. It uses unreliable criteria for the separation of the text into component documents” (Ottem, Herman J. 1965. Baal or God. New Haven, MO: Leader Publishing, p. 179).
There is no support for the Documentary Hypothesis, and there is much evidence against it. I believe modern proponents of the Documentary Hypothesis are relying on pre-archaeological, old and outdated scholarship.
THE WITNESS OF CHURCH FATHERS & ANCIENT JEWISH AUTHORITIES
The Church Fathers Ambrose, Basil, Gregory of Nyssa, Ephraim the Syrian and John Chrysostom believed that Moses wrote Genesis. (For quotes and sources see "Genesis, Creation and Early Man," by Fr. Seraphim Rose). Most early Church Fathers accepted Mosaic authorship. However, Ireneaus, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, and Tertullian all had questions about Moses' relationship to the current canonical form of Genesis (cf. D. 2. on page 3). Historically, the Mosaicity of the Pentateuch is part of the tradition of the Orthodox Church. The Church Fathers have an advantage over liberal critics, since they were members of the Orthodox Church (the criterion of truth), were holy and given special illumination.
A priestmonk of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia told me that the Fathers attribute the Pentateuch to Moses. He also said that he believes it is wrong for bishops to reject or questions this, even if there is evidence to justify his point. He also notified me: "You are correct that the Fathers accepted the authorship of Moses of the Torah and you are right to maintain this position."
Church Fathers believed that Moses wrote the Pentateuch. This is the teaching and tradition of the Orthodox Church. Canon 19 of the Council of Trullo (692) instructs Christians not to interpret Scripture contrary to the interpretation of the Fathers, and not to contradict their tradition. It states:
"It behooves those who preside over the churches, every day but especially on Lord's days, to teach all the clergy and people words of piety and of right religion, gathering out of holy Scripture meditations and determinations of the truth, and not going beyond the limits now fixed, nor varying from the tradition of the God-bearing fathers. And if any controversy in regard to Scripture shall have been raised, let them not interpret it otherwise than as the lights and doctors of the church in their writings have expounded it, and in those let them glory rather than in composing things out of their own heads, lest through their lack of skill they may have departed from what was fitting."...
Orthodox St. John of Kronstadt writes:
"When you doubt in the truth of any person or event described in Holy Scripture, then remember that “all Scripture is given by inspiration of God,” as the Apostle says and is therefore true, and does not contain any imaginary persons, fables, and tales, although it includes parables, which everyone can see are not true narratives, but are written in figurative language. The whole of the word of God is single, entire, indivisible truth; and if you admit that any narrative, sentence, or word is untrue, then you sin against the truth of the whole of Holy Scripture and its primordial truth, which is God Himself. “I am the truth,” said the Lord; “Thy word is truth,” said Jesus Christ to God the Father. Thus, consider the whole of the Holy Scripture as truth; everything that is said in it has either taken place or takes place." (My Life in Christ, p. 70).
The Mosaicity of the Pentateuch is the traditional view of Judaism, Christianity and Islam. Jewish sages believed that God dictated the Pentateuch to Moses letter by letter. (see Warkulwiz, The Doctrines of Genesis 1-11, p. 26).
Philo, Josephus, and the Mishnaic and Talmudic authorities accepted without question the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch. (Philo, Vita Mosis, III, 39; Josephus, AJ, IV, 8, 48; Mishnah, Pirqe Ab. I, 1; Talmud, Bab. Bath. 14b).
In 1906 the Roman Catholic Pontifical Biblical Commission affirmed the Mosaic authorship of Genesis. (see Warkulwiz, The Doctrines of Genesis 1-11).
THE TEACHING OF CHRIST AND HOLY SCRIPTURE
Christ had a high view of Scripture. He recognized it's divine authority (Matt.4:4, 7,10), imperishability (Matt.5:17-18), inspiration (Matt. 22:43), unbreakability (John 10:35), status as the Word of God (John 10:34-35), supremacy (Matt.15:3, 6), inerrancy (Matt. 22:29; John 17:17), historical reliability (Matt. 24:37-38; Matt.12:40), and scientific accuracy (Matt.19:4-5). Further, he accepted the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch. One cannot embrace the Accommodation Theory, which states that Christ accommodated to an error of his time by accepting the Mosaicity of the Pentateuch, without also attacking his moral impeccability and consequently his deity. I have more words about the Accommodation Theory below.
Only if one denies ancient historical reports, butchers the Word of God, and engages in a lot of editing and deleting from Scripture can he maintain the view that Moses did not write the Pentateuch. Such a person is an unconverted modernist and without the Spirit. St. Paul teaches that all, not part, ALL Scripture is God-breathed. (2Tim. 3:16). Rejecting the following texts implies a rejection of St. Paul's teaching on Scriptural inspiration. This cannot be done by anyone who is Christian.
Moses is said to have written for the people (Exodus 17:14; 24:4, 7; 34:27, 28; Numbers 33:2; Deuteronomy 31:9, 22, 24-26).
God is said to have spoken through Moses to the people (Deuteronomy 5:4-5, 22; 6:1; 10:1).
2 Chronicles tell us “the book of the Law of the Lord had been given through Moses.” (2Chron. 34:14).
Moses is said to have spoken the words of the Pentateuch to the people (Deuteronomy 1:1, 3; 5:1; 27:1; 29:2; 31:1, 30; 32:44; 33:1).
Old Testament authors attribute it to Moses (Joshua 8:31; 2 Kings 14:6; Ezra 6:18; Nehemiah 8:1; 13:1-2; 2 Chronicles 25:4; 34:12; 35:12; Daniel 9:11; Malachi 4:4).
When Moses wrote, his words were place alongside the ark of the covenant. (see Deut. 31:24-26). Joshua's writing was also immediately accepted and preserved along with Moses' law. (Josh. 24:26).
Jesus himself attributes quotes from the Pentateuch to Moses (Matthew 8:4; 19:8; Mark 1:44; 7:10; 10:5; 12:26; Luke 5:14; 16:31; 20:37; 24:27, 44; John 5:46-47; 7:19, 23).
It is exceedingly impious and blasphemous to contradict the teaching of Christ.
Other New Testament authors attribute quotes from the Pentateuch to Moses (Luke 2:22; Acts 3:22; 13:39; 15:1, 15-21; 26:22; 28:23; Romans 10:5, 19; 1 Corinthians 9:9; 2Corinthians 3:15; Hebrews 10:28; Revelation 15:3).
What is the critic going to do with all these passages? Christ rebuked the religious leaders of his day for exalting their teaching above the Word of God. (Matt. 15:3-6).
WHAT ABOUT THEOLOGOUMENON?
Theologoumenon (theological opinion) is not an option here, since the Mosaicity of the Pentateuch is the teaching of Christ, the teaching of Scripture, and part of the tradition of the Orthodox Church (it was held by Church Fathers). Someone mentioned to me that Moses could not have written all of Deuteronomy since his death and burial are spoken of. Scholars believe that the portion about Moses' death may have been edited in by Joshua. It's also possible that Moses' received the information about his future death through revelation by God. But an Orthodox Christian cannot deny the substantial Mosaicity of the Pentateuch and still be considered Orthodox. Some things are not subject to private opinion, and this is one of them.
THE DOCUMENTARY HYPOTHESIS IS A FALSE TEACHING
The Documentary Hypothesis is a false teaching which did not originate with the Orthodox Church. I want to encourage Orthodox churches not to tolerate this teaching. We see in the book of Revelation that the churches of Pergamum and Thyatira tolerated false teachers, to the chagrin of our Lord.
CRITICS ARE ANATHEMATIZED
Since the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch was held by Christ, is Scriptural and part of the tradition of the Orthodox Church, those who reject this tradition are anathematized.
The sixth session of the 7th ecumenical council:
"Those who, moved by Divine zeal, always concur with the Fathers and the traditional ordinances of the Church flee from all who hold contrary opinions, as though from enemies."
From the Synodicon of the Holy Spirit:
"To all things innovated and enacted contrary to the Church tradition, teaching, and institution of the holy and ever-memorable fathers, or to anything henceforth so enacted, ANATHEMA."
Eighth proceeding of the Seventh Ecumenical Synod:
“If anyone breaks any ecclesiastical tradition, written or unwritten, let him be anathema.”
St. Vincent of Lérins accurately reflects Orthodoxy with these words: "for Christians to declare something which they did not previously accept has never been permitted, is never permitted, and never will be permitted,—but to anathematize those who proclaim something outside of that which was accepted once and for ever, has always been a duty, is always a duty, and always will be a duty."
MORE ON THE ACCOMMODATION THEORY
Johann Salomo Semler, the father of German rationalism was the first to advocate the accomodation theory.
Christ could not err or accommodate to error because of the Hypostatic Union. As the divine Son in human flesh, Jesus received knowledge from God. So attributing error to Jesus is also attributing error to God the Father.
Jesus called himself the light of the world (John 8:12). He came into the world to bring the true knowledge to mankind (John 12:46). He called himself the truth (John 14:6). He gave as the purpose of his coming the giving testimony to the truth (John 18:37). He permitted himself to be called teacher (John 13:13). He is full of grace and truth (John 1:14). Full of wisdom (Luke 2:40). In him all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge are hidden (Col. 2:3). He knew about things that occurred far away (John 1:48; 4:50). He sees through the hearts of men (John 1:47; 2:24 et seq (and following); 4:16 et seq (and following); 6:71.
Jesus said that he does always the things that please the Father. (John 8:29). Jesus said that the prince of this world comes and has nothing in him (John 14:30). The Apostles also attested to Jesus' complete impeccability (Cf. John 3:5). "And in him there is no sin." 1 Peter 2:22 says, "Who did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth." St. Paul states in 2 Cor. 5:21: "Him who knew no sin He hath made sin for us." Hebrews 4:15 states: "Tempted in all things like as we are, without sin." Hebrews 7:26 declares, "For such an high priest became us, who is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and made higher than the heavens;"
The position that Christ's human knowledge is defective or wrong is irreconcilable with the above passages.
Any person who thinks that Christ erred about the authorship of the Pentateuch or accommodated to an error of his time, is not a real Christian, because he contradicts Christ's moral impeccability and deity.
AUXILIARY NOTES
The anti-supernatural Bible critics assumed that since the Pentateuch has different names for God, there must have been different authors. As noted above, this is a spurious assumption. Further, the Ouran uses different names for God. Allah is used in suras 4,9, 24, 33, but Rab is used in suras 18, 23, 25, although Muhammad was the author.
One of the most important repudiations of the Graf-Wellhausen theory was made by C.H. Gordon in an article in "Christianity Today" (IV, No. 4 (1959), pp. 131ff). Gordon was a veteran Near Eastern Archaeologist and a brilliant linguistic scholar.
Modern linguistics supports the authorship of Moses for Genesis. The Technion Institute of Israel conducted a computer analysis of the Hebrew in Genesis. The project leader, Yehuda Radday concluded: "It is most probable that the Book of Genesis was written by one person." (see Newsweek, September 28, 1981, p. 59).
Dr. William F. Albright (a former liberal) was called the "Dean of American Bible archaeologists," and "the Dean of 20th century archaeologists," and was a noted biblical scholar and linguist, and received his doctorate in Semitic languages at Johns Hopkins University, and later became a fellow at the American School of Oriental Research in Jerusalem. This is what he said about the JEDP Theory:
"Authority of Scripture" is a valid theological principle, whereas the "School of Wellhausen" is only one of many ideological systems built on arbitrary philosophical postulates and baseless historical presuppositions." (Quoted in Geisler, Systematic Theology, Vol. 1, p. 453).
He also said:
"The contents of the Pentateuch are, in general, very much older than the date at which they were finally edited; new discoveries continue to confirm the historical or the literary antiquity of detail after detail in it. [Thus] even when it is necessary to assume later additions to the original nucleus of Mosaic tradition, these additions reflect the normal growth of ancient institutions and practices, or the effort made by later scribes to save as much as possible of extant traditions about Moses. [Accordingly,] it is...sheer hypercriticism to deny the substantially Mosaic character of the Pentateuch." (ibid).
Recommended Books Against the Documentary Hypothesis
Kline, Treaty of the Great King;
Mendenhall, The Tenth Generation;
Archer, A Survey of Old Testament Introduction;
Archer, Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties;
McDowell, The New Evidence That Demands A Verdict (chapter 14 and following);
Geisler, Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics (pp.586--588 and 769--771);
Warkulwiz, The Doctrines of Genesis 1-11 (pp. 23-30);
Harrison, Old Testament Survey (p. 19 and following).
(Note: Harrison responds and references numerous German books against the Documentary Hypothesis which the German reader might find useful).