DOCSLIB.ORG

The Documentary Hypothesis

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Documentary Hypothesis The Documentary Hypothesis ARTICLE SERIES QADESH LA YAHWEH PRESS COPYRIGHT © 2020 he idea that the Pentateuch was not com- and with stylistic differences, that it was Tposed by Moses but was the work of sever- impossible for Moses to have been the only al later authors is called “The Documentary author. He reasoned, as a result, that Catholic Theory,” more accurately, “Hypothesis.” Its tradition was a more secure basis for faith than origination actually began with the Elohist’s Scriptures! Though officially denied by the view that terms such as eloahim and el were Church, his sentiments nonetheless reflected alternate names for Yahweh. Jews of the Mid- the true underlying prejudice of most members dle Ages had raised these generic terms and of the Judaeo-Christian and Muslim faiths, a titles to the rank of personal names in a bizarre fact demonstrated by their actions rather than attempt to conceal the sacred name and to use their words. these words as substitutes. As a result, men The debate was now raging, but unfortu- began to read the books of Moses as if there nately, only false alternatives were presented— were multiple names for the almighty. the various sides knowing little about which In the 12th century C.E., a Jewish scholar they spoke. Leclerc, a protestant, replied to from Spain, named Abraham ibn Ezra, first Simon that he had gone too far but conceded proposed multiple authorship of the Pentateuch that portions of the Pentateuch were written by (Tractatus Theologico-Politicus, chaps. VII- scribes later than Moses. Then came the French X). Abraham, faced with specific passages that physician, Jean Astruc, who published a work pointed to a later editor’s hand, concluded that in 1753 entitled Conjectures About the Origi- Moses did not write all of the five books attrib- nal Memoranda It Appears Which Moses Used uted to him. His views set in motion a host of to Compose the Book of Genesis. Astruc other critics who questioned Moses’ author- claimed that the deity was known by two dif- ship. These critics included Jews and even ferent names, Yahve [Yahweh] and Elohim Christians like Martin Luther. Christian [eloahim] and that these two different names humanists and philosophers like Masius (died were the products of two different traditions. 1573) and Thomas Hobbes (1651) added fuel He suggested that the repetitions, contradic- to the fire. Isaac de la Peyrere (1655) then sug- tions, and chronological problems that scholars gested that Moses had not even written the five had come to “believe” actually arose as the books, but rather several other men had. result of the interweaving of these two different As the result of Abraham ibn Ezra and some ancient sources. These sources were more of those who followed him, the developing ancient than Moses, he noted, but Moses Documentary Hypothesis gained momentum brought them together. under the Dutch Jewish philosopher Benedict After Astruc, there arose men of more con- Spinoza (Tractatus Theologico-Politicus, chap. siderable skill, like the German scholars Johann VII to X). With a backdrop of religious misin- Gottfried Eichhorn (Einleitung, 1780–1783) terpretation, a lack of understanding of the and K. D. Ilgen (Die Urkunden des parable nature of Scriptures, and limited Jerusalemischen Tempelarchivs in ihrer Urges- knowledge of Hebrew, Spinoza concluded that tat, 1798). Then came Alexander Geddes all of the Old Testament, from Genesis to (Introduction to the Pentateuch and Joshua, Nehemiah, was composed by the scribe Ezra in 1792), who proposed a fragmentary theory for the 5th century B.C.E. the origin of the Pentateuch. He held that it was Spinoza was followed by Richard Simon, a developed during the Solomonic era from many French priest who wished to emphasize the separate fragments dating back to the time of importance of the Church over Scriptures. Moses and before. These men were followed by Simon argued that Scriptures were so laden a work published in 1806–1807 by W. M. L. De with inconsistency in order and chronology, Wette, entitled Beiträge zur Einleitung in das 2 THE DOCUMENTARY HYPOTHESIS Alte Testament, 1807, who reasoned yet another From such work, the Tanach scholars came source should be added to the Yahweh and to accept the hypothesis that the Pentateuch eloahim traditions, which he called the was the result of the blending together of J Deuteronomic code. Between 1807 and 1853, (Yahweh), E (eloahim), D (Deuteronomy), and the “fragmentary hypothesis” and the “supple- P (Priestly Code) documents. The belief that mentary hypothesis” were fully developed. there were four major documents that lay In 1853 Hermann Hupfield (Die Quellen der behind the five books of Moses is now almost Genesis und die Art ihrer Zusammensetzung) set universally accepted by biblical scholars. But forth the argument that there were, in fact, two one must keep in mind that the thrust of the separate Elohim sources. Hupfield’s work drew work of these men has been to attack the cred- a great deal of attention from the Tanach (Old ibility of Scriptures. This assault comes from Testament) scholars. Hupfield was followed in both religious and secular scholarship. 1866 by K. H. Graf, who developed the sugges- Many of the proponents of this multi- tions of the scholars E. Reuss, J. George, and W. authorship view are priests and rabbis, whose Vatke and held that the document labled E1 purpose is to extol the virtues of “the Church” (called P for Priestly Code), rather than being and their own respective religious “traditions” the earliest of the documents, was, in fact, the over the value of Scriptures. In their mind-set, most recent. A. Kuenen (The Religion of Israel, what they perceive as “contradictions” in 1869-1870) assured the triumph of the J, E, D, Scriptures serve to justify their reliance on and P order for these assumed separate docu- “Church,” i.e. “Christian,” Moslem, or “Jew- ments. These conclusions set the stage for the ish” traditions. Human derived religious phi- primary mover of the modern Documentary losophy and interpretation is then perceived as Hypothesis, Julius Wellhausen. a more secure basis for their faith. Though Wellhausen restated the Documentary claiming a “belief” in Scriptures, their actions Hypothesis with great skill and persuasiveness show that their true intent is to justify their own and supported the J, E, D, P sequence as an evo- respective religious interpretations and tradi- lutionary pro cess (Die Komposition des Hexa- tions as well as their own personal views. teuchs, 1878; Prolegomena zur Geschichte It was as a result of this attack on the cred- Israels, 1878). According to Wellhausen, ibility of the books of Moses that the modern Israel’s concept of God evolved from the ani- Elohist school and their Documentary Hypoth- mism and polytheism of the patriarchal days esis gained popularity. Both the secular and into the henotheism in the time of Moses, and religious Elohists had found a vested interest in from there to the ethical monotheism of the discrediting the Pentateuch. The secular schol- prophets of the 8th century B.C.E. His evolu- ars pointed to their findings as justification for tionary views in Biblical literature were often not giving any credence to Scriptures. At the likened to those of his contemporary Charles same time, the religious Elohists use it to attack Darwin. He was undoubtedly influenced by the the Scriptural doctrine that there is only one evolutionary movement, which was gaining personal name for our heavenly father. popularity among scholars of that time. From For a response to the Documentary Hypoth- Wellhausen stems the numerous modern inter- esis, see our Topic entitled Variations in the pretations advocated today. Pentateuch. Available at, www.yahweh.org..
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Cotton Mather's Relationship to Science
    Georgia State University ScholarWorks @ Georgia State University English Theses Department of English 4-16-2008 Cotton Mather's Relationship to Science James Daniel Hudson Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.gsu.edu/english_theses Part of the English Language and Literature Commons Recommended Citation Hudson, James Daniel, "Cotton Mather's Relationship to Science." Thesis, Georgia State University, 2008. https://scholarworks.gsu.edu/english_theses/33 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Department of English at ScholarWorks @ Georgia State University. It has been accepted for inclusion in English Theses by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks @ Georgia State University. For more information, please contact [email protected]. COTTON MATHER’S RELATIONSHIP TO SCIENCE by JAMES DANIEL HUDSON Under the Direction of Dr. Reiner Smolinski ABSTRACT The subject of this project is Cotton Mather’s relationship to science. As a minister, Mather’s desire to harmonize science with religion is an excellent medium for understanding the effects of the early Enlightenment upon traditional views of Scripture. Through “Biblia Americana” and The Christian Philosopher, I evaluate Mather’s effort to relate Newtonian science to the six creative days as recorded in Genesis 1. Chapter One evaluates Mather’s support for the scientific theories of Isaac Newton and his reception to natural philosophers who advocate Newton’s theories. Chapter Two highlights Mather’s treatment of the dominant cosmogonies preceding Isaac Newton. The Conclusion returns the reader to Mather’s principal occupation as a minister and the limits of science as informed by his theological mind. Through an exploration of Cotton Mather’s views on science, a more comprehensive understanding of this significant early American and the ideological assumptions shaping his place in American history is realized.
    [Show full text]
  • Catholic Or Catholic? Biblical Scholarship at the Center
    JBL 125, no. 1 (2006): 5–22 Catholic or catholic? Biblical Scholarship at the Center carolyn osiek [email protected] Brite Divinity School, Texas Christian University, Fort Worth, TX 76129 Sometime in the first decade of the second century, Ignatius, bishop of Antioch in Syria, was condemned to death ad bestias, that is, by wild animals in the amphitheater. He was sent under guard with other prisoners to Rome for the games there, probably in the Flavian Amphitheater, what today we call the Colos- seum. As his party made its way up the western coast of Asia Minor, he wrote to a string of Christian communities there after he had received visits from their envoys. When writing to the Christians of Smyrna, he remarks that the Eucharist should be celebrated only by the bishop or someone he delegates, for “wherever the bishop appears, let the whole community be gathered, just as wherever Jesus Christ is, there is hJ kaqolikhv ejkklhsiva (Smyrn. 8.2). A generation later, in the same city, old bishop Polycarp was about to be martyred in the amphitheater. But the narrator of his martyrdom reports that when the police came to arrest him in a country house where he had taken refuge, since it was dinnertime, he ordered food and drink to be set out for them, while he went aside and prayed aloud for two hours. In his prayer, he remembered everyone he had ever encountered and hJ kaqolikhv ejkklhsiva throughout the world. The narrator finished the report of Polycarp’s martyrdom by concluding that now Polycarp is enjoying the glory of God and Jesus Christ, shepherd of hJ kaqolikhv ejkklhsiva throughout the world (Mart.
    [Show full text]
  • How to Live with Messiness: Joshua Berman on Biblical Criticism
    How to Live with Messiness: Joshua Berman on Biblical Criticism 18forty.org/reader/how-to-live-with-messiness-joshua-berman-on-biblical-criticism August 6 | Weekend Reader By: Yehuda Fogel How can an Orthodox rabbi be a scholar of Biblical criticism? Can Biblical scholars determine the ‘true Bible’? Enter Professor Joshua Berman. Prolific author and scholar Rabbi Dr. Berman is no apologetic. He engages with Biblical criticism with honesty and erudition, and is a passionate critic of the excesses of scholarship. In this week’s Weekend Reader, we will consider one key critique of his thought: The ability to live with messiness. The Bible is a complicated work, and learning to live in humility with its complications can elevate all that study it. We will look at a case study in messiness — the topic of Biblical reformulations — in the hope of better understanding the Bible’s complexity. Learning to Live with the Messiness In the wake of the 2008 financial crisis, economists were in a state of disarray. Much like the state of pollsters after the 2016 election, economists were stunned by their failure to anticipate such a major event occurring. New York Times and economist Paul Krugman suggested in his 2009 piece “How Did Economists Get It So Wrong?” that economists have been mislead by the “desire for an all-encompassing, intellectually elegant approach that also gave economists a chance to show off their mathematical prowess.” Seeking the grand narrative of economics has led economists to mistake truth for beauty, and redemption of economics can come only by learning to accept the less beautiful parts of economic realities, and “learn[ing] to live with the messiness.” Rabbi Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • The Documentary Hypothesis
    Journal of the Adventist Theological Society, 12/1 (2001): 22Ð30. Article copyright © 2001 by Greg A. King. The Documentary Hypothesis Greg A. King Pacific Union College How did the Pentateuch or Torah come to be written?1 What process was in- volved in its composition?2 That is, did the author simply receive visions and write out word for word exactly what he or she3 had heard and seen in vision? Did he make use of written sources? Did he incorporate oral traditions? Who was the principal author anyway? Do these questions really matter? If so, why? While many average church members consider Moses the author of the first five books of the Bible, most biblical scholars of the last century have maintained that questions related to the composition of the Pentateuch are best answered by referring to the documentary hypothesis. This is the popular label for the theory of pentateuchal authorship and composition that has dominated most liberal biblical scholarship for the past century. In fact, 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.4 This in spite of the fact that recently penetrating critiques from both 1The term Pentateuch refers to the first five books of the Bible and is a transliteration of a Greek term meaning Òfive scrolls.Ó The term Torah, though it has other meanings also, is sometimes used to denote the same five books and is a transliteration of a Hebrew word meaning Òinstruction.Ó See the discussion of these terms in Barry Bandstra, Reading the Old Testament (Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, 1995), 24.
    [Show full text]
  • Exploring the Old Testament: Pentateuch Vol 1: the Pentateuch Pdf, Epub, Ebook
    EXPLORING THE OLD TESTAMENT: PENTATEUCH VOL 1: THE PENTATEUCH PDF, EPUB, EBOOK Gordon Wenham | 224 pages | 22 Aug 2003 | SPCK Publishing | 9780281054299 | English | London, United Kingdom Exploring the Old Testament: Pentateuch Vol 1: The Pentateuch PDF Book In response Jean Astruc , applying to the Pentateuch source criticism methods common in the analysis of classical secular texts, believed he could detect four different manuscript traditions, which he claimed Moses himself had redacted p. By the end of the 19th century the scholarly consensus was that the Pentateuch was the work of many authors writing from BCE the time of David to BCE the time of Ezra and redacted c. Gnostic Islamic Quranic. Some feel that the accuracy diminishes the further backwards one proceeds from this date. To navigate these biblical books, a battery of tables, diagrams, and maps engage the reader. The American Albright school asserted that the biblical narrative of conquest would be affirmed by archaeological record; and indeed for much of the 20th century archaeology appeared to support the biblical narrative, including excavations at Beitin identified as Bethel , Tel ed-Duweir, identified as Lachish , Hazor, and Jericho. Many scholars believe that the "Deuteronomistic History" preserved elements of ancient texts and oral tradition, including geo-political and socio-economic realities and certain information about historical figures and events. Jesus Monotheism. A Comparison with Graeco Roman Biography. According to some scholars, including Baden, the third major block of source material in the Torah can be divided into two different, equally coherent schools, named for the word that each uses for God: Yahweh and Elohim.
    [Show full text]
  • Christian Theology Were Advanced by the French Millenarian, Isaac La Peyrère, in the Middle of the Seventeenth Century
    CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION Some of the most revolutionary ideas in biblical criticism and in Judeo- Christian theology were advanced by the French Millenarian, Isaac La Peyrère, in the middle of the seventeenth century. His questioning of the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch, of the authenticity of the present text of Scripture, and of the accuracy of Scripture with regard to its ac­ count of the history of mankind had tremendous effects on his contem­ poraries as well as thinkers of later times. He was regarded as perhaps the greatest heretic of the age, even worse than Spinoza, who took over some of his most challenging ideas. He was refuted over and over again by leading Jewish, Catholic, and Protestant theologians. Nonetheless some of his ideas gradually became a basic part of biblical scholarship, greatly influenced the development of anthropology, and affected Millenarian political history. However, the man who could contend that the Bible was not ac­ curate, that there were men before Adam, and that the Bible was only the account of Jewish history; who could shock the philosophical- theological world of his time, is hardly known today. He is remembered, if at all, as a footnote to the biblical criticism of Spinoza, Richard Simon and Jean Astruc, and as a footnote in the history of anthropology. He has been reduced to a small paragraph in encyclopedias which present him as the formulator of the pre-Adamite theory. Only in the last few years has there been a revival of interest in La Peyrère and his revolu­ tionary ideas. In the present volume I shall present an intellectual biography of the man, and place him in the history of the religious ideas of his predecessors, and trace his influence from the mid seventeenth century onward.
    [Show full text]
  • Catholicism and Science
    Catholicism and Science PETER M. J. HESS AND PAUL L. ALLEN Greenwood Guides to Science and Religion Richard Olson, Series Editor Greenwood Press r Westport, Connecticut London Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Hess, Peter M. J. Catholicism and science / Peter M. J. Hess and Paul L. Allen. p. cm. — (Greenwood guides to science and religion) Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978–0–313–33190–9 (alk. paper) 1. Religion and science—History. 2. Catholic Church—Doctrines—History. I. Allen, Paul L. II. Title. BX1795.S35H47 2008 261.5 5088282—dc22 2007039200 British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data is available. Copyright C 2008 by Peter M. J. Hess and Paul L. Allen All rights reserved. No portion of this book may be reproduced, by any process or technique, without the express written consent of the publisher. Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 2007039200 ISBN: 978–0–313–33190–9 First published in 2008 Greenwood Press, 88 Post Road West, Westport, CT 06881 An imprint of Greenwood Publishing Group, Inc. www.greenwood.com Printed in the United States of America The paper used in this book complies with the Permanent Paper Standard issued by the National Information Standards Organization (Z39.48–1984). 10987654321 Contents Series Foreword ix Preface xvii Acknowledgments xix Chronology of Events xxi Chapter 1. Introduction to Science in the Catholic Tradition 1 Introduction: “Catholicism” and “Science” 1 The Heritage of the Early Church 3 Natural Knowledge in the Patristic Era 6 Science in the Early Middle Ages: Preserving Fragments 12 The High Middle Ages: The Rediscovery of Aristotle and Scholastic Natural Philosophy 15 Later Scholasticism: Exploring New Avenues 21 Conclusion: From Late Scholasticism into Early Modernity 23 Chapter 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Reading Menstruation and Vaginal Bleeding
    Notes Introduction: ‘Those Sweet and Benign Humours That Nature Sends Monthly’: Reading Menstruation and Vaginal Bleeding 1. Helen King, Hippocrates’ Woman: Reading the Female Body in Ancient Greece (London: Routledge, 1998), p. 71. 2. Peter Laslett Family Life and Illicit Love in Earlier Generations: Essays in Historical Sociology (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1977), p. 217. 3. Roy Porter, Flesh in the Age of Reason: The Modern Foundations of Body and Soul (London: W.W. Norton, 2003), pp. 44–5. 4. Herbert Silvette, Doctor on the Stage: Medicine and Medical Men in Seventeenth- Century England (Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press, 1967), p. 2. 5. Tim Hitchcock and Robert Shoemaker, Tales from the Hanging Court (London: Hodder Arnold, 2007), p. xvi. 6. Garthine Walker, Crime, Gender and Social Order in Early Modern England (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003), p. 3. 7. Elizabeth Furdell, Publishing and Medicine in Early Modern England (London: University of Rochester Press, 2002), pp. 45–6. 8. See Elaine Hobby, ‘Introduction’ in Thomas Raynalde, The Birth of Mankind: Otherwise Named, The Woman’s Book, ed. by Elaine Hobby (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2009), pp. xv–xxxiv (p. xix). 9. Dror Wahrman, ‘Change and the Corporeal in Seventeenth- and Eighteenth-Century Gender History: Or, Can Cultural History Be Rigorous?’ Gender & History, 20.3 (2008), 584–602 (p. 585). 10. Tim Hitchcock, English Sexualities, 1700–1800 (Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1997), p. 25. 11. Jennifer Evans, ‘ “Gentle Purges Corrected with Hot Spices, Whether They Work of Not, Do Vehemently Provoke Venery”: Menstrual Provocation and Procreation in Early Modern England’, Social History of Medicine, 25.1 (2012), 2–19.
    [Show full text]
  • Coleridge, Collaboration, and the Higher Criticism
    Coleridge, Collaboration, and the Higher Criticism Susan Murley A thesis submitted in confomity with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Graduate Department of English University of Toronto O Copyright by Susan Lym Murley, 1999 National Library Bibliothèque nationale l*l of Canada du Canada Acquisitions and Acquisitions et Bibliographie Services services bibliographiques 395 Wellington Street 395, rue Wellington Ottawa ON KI A ON4 Ottawa ON KIA ON4 Canada Canada Your fi& Voire reference Our file Notre ret8rence The author has granted a non- L'auteur a accordé une licence non exclusive licence allowing the exclusive permettant à la National Librq of Canada to Bibliothèque nationale du Canada de reproduce, loan, distribute or sel1 reproduire, prêter, distribuer ou copies of this thesis in microfom, vendre des copies de cette thèse sous paper or electronic formats. la forme de microfiche/film, de reproduction sur papier ou sur format électronique. The author retains ownership of the L'auteur conserve la propriété du copyright in this thesis. Neither the droit d'auteur qui protège cette thèse. thesis nor substantial extracts fiom it Ni la thèse ni des extraits substantiels may be printed or otherwise de celle-ci ne doivent être imprimés reproduced without the author's ou autrement reproduits sans son permission. autorisation. Susan Murley, Department of English, University of Toronto Coleridge. Collaboration. and the Higher Criticism, P1i.D.. 1999 Abstract Coleridge constructed his later prose \vorl<s tbigh an unusual -'tut-and-paste- method that has generated criticism and controversy ever since these texts were published. Criticism of Coleridge's texts, both verse and prose, has puuled over his largely unacknowledged borrowings 60m other authors.
    [Show full text]
  • On the Development of Historical Criticism
    Midwestern Journal of Theology 13.1 (2014): 130-46 On the Development of Historical Criticism RUSSELL L. MEEK Associate Editor, Journal for the Evangelical Study of the Old Testament PhD Student (OT) at MBTS and Research Assistant to the President [email protected] INTRODUCTION The history of the development of historical criticism is important for evangelical scholars to know and understand for a number of reasons, not the least of which is that evangelical scholarship over the past two hundred years has spent no small amount of ink defending concepts such as the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch and the divine inspiration of the Bible against historical criticism. Furthermore, the historical-grammatical method that grew from the Reformation ideal of sola Scriptura was birthed with the same goals of historical criticism-to understand the biblical text in its original context apart from the shackles of dogmatic exegesis that had often kept the Bible chained to somewhat fanciful interpretations since the days of the church fathers and into the Middle Ages. Each method of exegesis­ historical-critical and historical-grammatical-grew from same ground. By understanding the development of the one we may come to understand the development and importance of the other. Finally, historical criticism is not going away. It has by now morphed into MEEK: Historical Criticism 131 several different manifestations, 1 but the basic, foundational presuppositions of critical exegesis of the Bible remain the same, making it imperative for evangelical scholars to return to its genesis that we might understand and critically engage its current expressions. This project will outline the growth and development of the historical critical method as it relates to Pentateuchal criticism beginning with the work of Baruch Spinoza and continuing to Julius Wellhausen's Documentary Hypothesis.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to the Old Testament January 24, 2015
    First Assignment Guy Paquin RGB1005H online: Introduction to the Old Testament January 24, 2015 Question 1) Explain briefly the documentary hypothesis that accounts for the divergent materials in the pentateuchal narratives. Lawrence Boadt in Reading the New Testament: An Introduction 1 describes how biblical scholars developed the “documentary hypothesis” in order to explain the many inconsistencies and repetitions in the first five books of the Bible or the “Pentateuch”. There are, for example, two different versions of creation in the first three chapters of Genesis. The “documentary hypothesis” or “source criticism” explains the existence of repetitions by arguing that the final version of the Pentateuch is based on a number of different written sources. The Bible and tradition attribute the authorship of the Pentateuch to Moses. The Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch was first questioned in the seventeenth century when scholars started to apply the “scientific reasoning” to the Biblical text. Theologian Richard Simon and philosopher Baruch Spinoza noted that the material in the Pentateuch was full of repetitions and contradictions and lacked the style of a single author. Jean Astruc, a medical professor writing in the next century, was the first to provide a rationale for the repetitions. He suggested that Moses combined two different written texts. The two sources could be identified based on stylistic differences but mainly on the different terms used to refer to God. One source used the Hebrew word “Elohim” and the other source used the word term “Yahweh” or “Yahweh Elohim”. Source ctiticism explained, for example, the presence of two creation stories: the creation story in Genesis 1 uses the name “Elohim”; the creation story in Genesis 2-3 uses the name “Yahweh Elohim”.
    [Show full text]
  • A Challenge for the Historical-Critical Tradition
    Journal of Hebrew Scriptures Volume 16, Article 12 DOI:10.5508/jhs.2016.v16.a12 Empirical Models of Textual Growth: A Challenge for the Historical-Critical Tradition JOSHUA BERMAN Articles in JHS are being indexed in the ATLA Religion Database, RAMBI, and BiBIL. Their abstracts appear in Religious and Theological Abstracts. The journal is archived by Library and Archives Canada and is accessible for consultation and research at the Electronic Collection site maintained by Library and Archives Canada. ISSN 1203–1542 http://www.jhsonline.org and http://purl.org/jhs EMPIRICAL MODELS OF TEXTUAL GROWTH: A CHALLENGE FOR THE HISTORICAL CRITICAL TRADITION* JOSHUA BERMAN BAR-ILAN UNIVERSITY The last decade has witnessed a development in the practice of the historical critical paradigm in biblical studies. For the better part of two-hundred years, the textual growth of the Hebrew scriptures was predicated on the examination of internal clues, such as dis- continuities and irregularities within the texts themselves. Scholars saw these literary phenomena as signs of diachronic growth and adduced hypotheses to explain how the text came to the final state in which it is received today. But more recently scholars have begun looking toward empirical models of textual growth to recon- struct the development of the Hebrew scriptures.1 Rather than focusing exclusively on irregularities within the received text, these scholars have sought out empirical examples of documented textual growth from the epigraphic record of the ancient Near East. They have done so to probe how scribes amended and edited texts in the creation of new versions and in the creation of entirely new works.
    [Show full text]